First off, Mods if this is not in the right section or shouldn't be here at all, I apologize I just can't think off any good place to put it. Also sorry for no spolier tags to make it easier to read I am relatively new at posting.
Since the Battle Report has been posted and since blizzard annouced changes for the warhound a while ago, and because there is a lot of critisim about the warhound already I feel like one good thread should try to encompass the subject.
I myself play Terran on ladder so it may be slightly biased.
The main critisims I have found in TL threads are the following
1. It's ugly 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like 4. No AA
So going right on down the list
1. Yes the warhound may not be the most asthetically appealing unit, but honestly does the supposed bad looks even matter. I don't think so, SC2 is a strategy game after all not a game about turning our units into runyway models, but the skin is not that hard to change(I think, I'm no developer) and has no real impact on the balance of the game overall.
2. The warhound may seem A-click like with the autocast on the haywire missles. What can be done about this to make it better?
We can do a few things. Here are my suggestion and reason.
First no autocast, simplest and most straight foward way of making it less A-click forcing Terrans to click to use the spell, and most likely make seperate control groups with either biomech or mech so the terran doesn't overstim or unsiege by mistake. At the very least this casues more management of control groups.
Second thing would be scrap haywire missle and add-in another ability that would do comprable damage or be equally useful. My suggestion would be a defensive ability, but that is becasue I think mech does a lot of damage so adding more damage might be too good. The defensive ability would have to be relatively weak though becasue mech is quite a strong composition. I would suggest (as other have before) some sort of vision blocker or limiter than can be cleared pretty fast since warhounds may be massed. This could give siege tanks a better chance to rearragne themselves into better position.
3. Doesn't feel mech like is something that has been posted in the battle report quite a bit. Why do they say this?
Main reason seems to be it moves to fast, feels like a maurader. If we change the haywire missle to a defensive vision ability and slow the move speed of the warhound a bit this may make it better for position play as opposed to agressive play.
Even if the warhound keep haywire missle ability slower speed and maybe making it a bit less durable so that it must be positioned in tank range or with battle hellions to prevent it dying super fast would help it feel more like mech.
4. Lack of AA for mech without vikings are thors has been stated a bit.
First, is it a problem? Many seem to say yes, though if AA is given it needs to make sure the thor isn't obsolete and doesn't become a goliath. I am skeptical though and will express this after suggestion for AA.
My personal solution, if we are to even give the warhound AA, is to give it machine guns for AA that aren't too much better than viking ground attack (probably worse for balance), and in return make any abilities researchable to balance it out a bit, or scrap abilities all together. Some people have suggested a goliath remake, but it is quite obvious blizzard won't do this, nor should they. It is a new game and they should make new units to keep it fresh. I believe that machine gun AA solves this a bit, making the warhound the equivalent of a reverse goliath, making its ground attack better than its air, so that if mass air play was used by an opposing army it would require thors and vikings for much better AA but if an opposing army only did light air harrasment it would allow for warhounds to deal with it.
The other suggestion I would have for it would be single target missle, like a turret missle but worse. This may be too much like the goliath which blizzard would be trying to avoid so this might be a bad idea, but I figured it is worth seeing what input I can get on any AA for the warhound if any should be used at all.
So without splash damage, this means that balled up air units such as mutas, could be more effective against the warhound than the thor, still giving reasons to make thors.
The last big concern with giving AA is biomech styles. If warhounds with AA were paired with marines, it might make the terran army too effective at dealing with air. My reasoning for this is because, unlike BW terran in SC2 has pretty good AA option out of starport. The viking is an effective unit at killing air, unlike the wraith which was harder to mass and easier to kill due to shorter range and its weak ground attack, thus less effective. So giving the warhound AA might be overpowered. What use would mutas be against terran if turrets, marines, warhounds, and thors can deal with them effectively. It would seem to me that it would give terran too many good option versus mutas. Also it might make the new stargate units less viable due to more AA option from terran.
These are my personal suggestions feel free to critsize them and offer your own, my only goal with this thread is to stimulate better discusion on the unit than the one or two sentence posts lurking around other threads.
EDITS: Quite a bit of talk about the warhound being nothing but a factory marauder, my own opinions aside, please be specific about why it is one, and how it does or does not contribute to a mech position play. Simply stating it is a factory marauder gets us nowhere. Thanks!
Alright so some of you guys are simply stating aomething without claims to back it up. Please argue your points, it shows thought and can give good reason to change a unit.
So another thing I am seeing a number of people critsize is that the warhound is striclty an anti-mechanical unit, because it excels so well at killing mechanical veruses other types units. From what other people in the forum have stated it is a bad design to make something designed to counter a protoss or terran army, because although other options are good, this would be better. While I agree that it ought to be changed, it should not be changed to extra versus armored, because it would completely fill the maruader's role, both being tanky units that can do a good amount of damage in specific roles. So how should it be changed such that it is still useful versus the zerg race or bio terran, without breaking balance. My suggestion would be to increase overall dps and then have it not do extra to anything (so that it is stronger versus marines, roaches, hydras, etc. but not as strong against stalkers, tanks.) This may make it more mech like in TvT since it would be harder to break siege lines with the warhound than the current one. Also this may make the warhound less powerful TvP forcing more positional play with tanks instead of just running in and shooting.
Another option is to make its ability anti-bio so that it isn't so powerful against the mechanical P army and more powerful against the bio Z and T armies. Overall this would make the warhound weaker in some situations, but still useful in the ones it wasn't ment to be used such as a TvT mech versus bio.
I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
I'm really concerned it's going to ruin TvT. I remember reading Browder or someone else say that they weren't a fan of siege tank lines in TvT but I'm pretty sure TvT is near universally considered the best and most skillful mirror matchup and siege tanks being super strong in fixed positions is a big part of that.
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?
I don't think it should have autocast on the missiles, and the appearance is quite ugly. The biggest problem i have with it is that i think it will make the marauder kind of pointless. I mean, there will still be reasons to make the marauder (stim, healing by medivacs, lower cost) but overal i think the Warhound kind of replaces its role.
If we're talking about giving warhounds a different ability, what about a smoke bomb that deploys a small, temporary LoS blocker? Granted, each 'hound can only cover 1 hex at a time, but that might make for an interesting space-control mechanic. Just a thought.
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
Focus firing is so micro intensive.
Edit : This is sarcasm btw, but you never know on Internet ^^
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?
I would prefer to make the other races micro more than make Terran micro less.
As it is, making specifically a click units is boring. Why not have some more powerful tanks, and then make a micro unit.
Its not like we will see bio/tank/warhound with bio splitting etc etc and all the other micro alongside these 1a units.
These are high HP, high dps 1A infantry. Its different.
On August 15 2012 01:53 Kmatt wrote: If we're talking about giving warhounds a different ability, what about a smoke bomb that deploys a small, temporary LoS blocker? Granted, each 'hound can only cover 1 hex at a time, but that might make for an interesting space-control mechanic. Just a thought.
What if it also gave a very small vision radius? Then you'd be able to use it to spot for siege tanks instead of Scanning. See, now that would be cool. Maybe they could make the Warhound more of a fast raider unit that scouts and spots for Tanks rather than some Thor analogue that just kills armored stuff.
On August 15 2012 01:53 Kmatt wrote: If we're talking about giving warhounds a different ability, what about a smoke bomb that deploys a small, temporary LoS blocker? Granted, each 'hound can only cover 1 hex at a time, but that might make for an interesting space-control mechanic. Just a thought.
This is kinda what I was thinking, but it must be easy to clear out though becasue it appears that if terran goes pure mech it would be easy to mass and casue too much LoS blocking, though I like th idea of some vision blocking in general becasue it ought to allow terran to try to get better positioning with a mech army
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?
Because Terran is the most well-designed race right now. We need to make the other races have more scaling micro units like Terran, not make Terran have less. Besides, going mech isn't micro heavy. It's not like Terran playesr are going to be making Hellions and Warhounds and Siege Tanks along with their micro heavy bio composition. There's no way to get that kind of production.
I need to see and use the unit before I can make a decision on it. There are a number of factors that we have no idea about:
- Can it be dropped effectively during combat? Can a small group of them be used to flank units like colossi, using their front loaded damage to take them down quick?
- How do they control? Do they feel like stalkers, immortals or roaches? Can they kite melee units or units with shorter range?
As for looks, I like my mechs ugly and dumb looking. The unit looks like something out of mech warrior, which is awesome in many ways. I am not willing to jump on to the warhound-hate-wagon yet. Much like people I have never meet and books I have not read, I wait until I interact with the Warhound before passing judgment.
Unit Art Design - Horrible, even non-designers know it sucks Unit Animation - Horrible feels like a person/animal and not mechanical Size - Feels too big Unit Design - a boring paradigm that should at least replace the marauder (EG marauder doesn't exist anymore).
Browder's philosophy seems to be buffing mech by doing everything EXCEPT making siege tanks strong again. Additionally, Hellions are still slow and weak so pure mech builds are barely viable because Mech has no fast unit. Probably what contributed in part to Jinro's retirement, because he wanted mech to be fun and viable and it really isn't.
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.
David Kim is ruining Starcraft. It's hard enough just with Browder, his ideas for influencing 'balance' through unit design are horrible.
Having an A-Move unit in a race thats mostly micro intensive is a good thing imo. The warhound in tvp takes the place of the thor in tvt and tvz and it does well (minus the strike cannon of course but is well replaced by the haywire ability).
Overall: I like the warhound. Its fast, completely removes the need to build marines and marauders in tvp with their dps combined with battle hellions and vikings for AA.
Seeing that you're a terran player like myself, I figured you would welcome this unit in with open arms. You must not play much ladder or play very competitive people then because as much as I like stutter stepping, I dislike having to be the one worried about losing my army due too a misclick or being raped by aoe damage. TvP is my best matchup by far, but it still requires a certain amount of apm that some players dont have which is why they complain that it is imbalanced (which its not).
Another thing to add in. The fact that its attacks take so much time inbetween shots compared too marines and marauders, the only time they will be used is in mech simply because if they are used in bio, they will be hard countered by chargelots and immortals (if you think that the warhound will be to a-clicky, try smurfing as toss and play a tvp while only making chargelots and immortals. thats as a-click as you can get.)
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
^^ I will be doing this myself. i would hate haywire to be auto-casted on zealots personally because it would be wasted. Sure it would do damage but, it wont be as effective as it would vs a stalker, immortal, or collosus.
I, too, like to make ludicrous sweeping statements about units not even in beta yet. Wait, no I don't.
I think we all have some changes we'd like to see -- that's what the beta will be for. Getting hysterical over a pre-everything Battle Report is ridiculous. Take deep breaths. Think about how much WoL changed from beta to release. We'll all be ok. *big hugs*
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
Sorry if mentioned, at work and no time to read all comments.
What if the Heywire missiles were the AA, and cast like the Thors barrage (just the immobility part)?
Their mobility would be hampered, they would have to focus fire, positioning would be key for bigger engagements, and micro would come into play for a larger air fleet of smaller units, so it wouldn't overlap with Thors vs Mutas because if you target one muta with all warhounds it's a waste of damage.
On August 15 2012 01:49 YourAdHere wrote: I remember reading Browder or someone else say that they weren't a fan of siege tank lines in TvT but I'm pretty sure TvT is near universally considered the best and most skillful mirror matchup and siege tanks being super strong in fixed positions is a big part of that.
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?
Haha.. good one. Waiting for people to walk into tank fire is extremely skillful and micro intensive.
Why the hell doesn't it shoot upward? It's ability should at least shoot up and auto-target air, that would give some kiting micro potential, and still would be a-click friendly, as it auto targets air.
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
Colossus are a GREAT reason too!
Now that Terran can deal with SLots (new Hellion), instead of stutter stepping back the entire map, Colossus now must be micro'd back and forth even more for fear of getting focus fired so quickly by the Warhound. Stalkers, I believe can easily cleaned up with some Tanks.
I think that warhounds and hellions and thors need to be nerfed. Tanks needs to be buffed. Tanks are the core of "mech" but blizzard does not seems to realize it.
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
Second of all, you can turn the autocast off and micro them yourselves if you want. Plus its still going to be somewhat micro intensive to keep them behind your battle hellions in a TvP.
Furthermore, most of the bitching is simply about what david kim said, I doubt that most of these people that are complaining have even tried to use the unit in the HOTS custom map...
I'm looking forward to using it! Edit: It is kinda ugly though...
On August 15 2012 01:49 YourAdHere wrote: I remember reading Browder or someone else say that they weren't a fan of siege tank lines in TvT but I'm pretty sure TvT is near universally considered the best and most skillful mirror matchup and siege tanks being super strong in fixed positions is a big part of that.
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?
Haha.. good one. Waiting for people to walk into tank fire is extremely skillful and micro intensive.
Oh man... baiting tank shots, dropping on top of them, setting up flanks, and on the other side, finding the perfect position and moving at the right time knowing that if you fail you lose - mech brings out the best in the game.
On August 15 2012 01:57 Sbrubbles wrote: Nah, I think the warhound is fine.
Arguments ?
none needed.
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
On August 15 2012 01:57 Sbrubbles wrote: Nah, I think the warhound is fine.
Arguments ?
none needed.
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed during combat
Without tank and window mine aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work after early mid game
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
On August 15 2012 01:57 Sbrubbles wrote: Nah, I think the warhound is fine.
Arguments ?
none needed.
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
QQing overload! I think focusing those missiles could be very interesting - or alternatively the protoss player might be able to bait them out before a battle (sacrificial immortal?) But lets just wait till we play it. Also what's wrong with the marauder? It rewards great micro/punishes bad micro (baneling soaking for instance) in a satisfying way.
people have to stop using the word "micro intensive", units are as micro intensive as you make them. if you dont micro ur units, chances are you'll lose them, goes for every unit in the game, regardless of which are easier to micro.
I think it should change, because besides of the points you mentioned in the op, it is also a unit that is useless in a matchup (vs Z, due to obvious lack of mech units). A unit that makes not the least sense in one of the matchups is not a good idea.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
On August 15 2012 02:35 ACrow wrote: I think it should change, because besides of the points you mentioned in the op, it is also a unit that is useless in a matchup (vs Z, due to obvious lack of mech units). A unit that makes not the least sense in one of the matchups is not a good idea.
It's ok if a unit isn't used in only one match-up. It's happened to BW as well. TvZ - bio, PvT - mech.
On August 15 2012 02:34 Tom Cruise wrote: people have to stop using the word "micro intensive", units are as micro intensive as you make them. if you dont micro ur units, chances are you'll lose them, goes for every unit in the game, regardless of which are easier to micro.
Take ling baneling vs ling baneling. If you micro them perfectly you'll have an immense advantage ; but you'll have to get your 600 APM rolling. Take marauder vs marauder (A quite accurate model for Warhound vs Warhound). If you micro perfectly it won't change much, and there's not much you can do (Focus fire woohoo) That's what micro intensive means.
On August 15 2012 02:35 ACrow wrote: I think it should change, because besides of the points you mentioned in the op, it is also a unit that is useless in a matchup (vs Z, due to obvious lack of mech units). A unit that makes not the least sense in one of the matchups is not a good idea.
It's ok if a unit isn't used in only one match-up. It's happened to BW as well. TvZ - bio, PvT - mech.
It's still a pretty big design flaw. It's unavoidable, and happened to BW - but you shouldn't actively push it, and making it that way is actively pushing it.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
1. It's ugly 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like 4. No AA
This
I said exactly this a couple months ago and nobody gave a shit.
What Blizzard should realize is that ALL big units are bad because they take so much space (and usually more supply) soo that you don't have space to micro anything. EVERYTHING on the ground that is bigger than a siege tank is bad for the competitive aspect of the game.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I play zerg and terran, and have played that map. The Warhound is a factory marauder.
You know the Haywire Missiles auto-target mechanical units? I feel sorry for Terran and Protoss mineral lines. Also how could they make a unit completely useless against the Zerg race? Warhounds have no purpose in TvZ, and they were originally supposed to replace Thors with superior speed and AA vs Mutas. Can't believe Blizz removed AA...
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
^^ I will be doing this myself. i would hate haywire to be auto-casted on zealots personally because it would be wasted. Sure it would do damage but, it wont be as effective as it would vs a stalker, immortal, or collosus.
Guys, I think the warhound haywire only targets mechanical units. It's super noob friendly.
Its kind of funny that Blizzard is just taking units from BW, and tweeking them a tad, while making millions off it. Anyways, I think they unit model is ugly, and would rather use a marauder that can be healed with my marines.
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?
We thought White-Ra's face was everywhere, it's rather apparent low leaguers are EVERYWHERE. Let me tell you why what you said was so extremely stupid, firstly the only high end micro intensive units for Terran would be the bio ball, Terran mech requires much more positioning and less Micro. (Goody is a key example before nerfs, he could 120 APM his army around the map and just win) so when you ask sarcastically if someone wants terran players to micro even more than they do, it's a loaded question because it actually will have no affect on the Terran player having to "micro even more than they already have to". Then you are setting a very stupid premise, you're saying make units easy because they're already hard... Great Blizzard, let's turn this game into CnC 3 so all of the really bad players can feel good about winning.
No wonder Blizzard isn't making this game better and that SC2 may as well get thrown in the dumpster with the release of these units because they fundamentally change the game into a rolling ball of death...
The warhound is super broken right now but I'm sure they'll fix it. Right now if you don't know how to play terran, just mass warhounds and you can't do bad. Seriously its that good.
On August 15 2012 02:45 VPVanek wrote: Its kind of funny that Blizzard is just taking units from BW, and tweeking them a tad, while making millions off it. Anyways, I think they unit model is ugly, and would rather use a marauder that can be healed with my marines.
Yeah, I'd be fine with BW reskins or new units - but selling the same concept with a different name is just lame.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I play zerg and terran, and have played that map. The Warhound is a factory marauder.
Exactly. I hate when people who don't have enough imagination to see how this units would play out speak their opinions (Because any person who is more or less an analytical mind knows that this unit concept is bad for competition). Also any unit having such favorable smart-firing that favors easy to use play is bad.
I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
I don't think it's too big at all. I think most units are too small, but I think it's size makes it act like an immortal. You don't want too many of them, cause it's too hard to get them all attacking at once (moreso even than an immortal because of haywire missiles) which means you'll still have pretty tank-heavy compositions and warhounds, while they're damage dealing units, will act as only support units, like the immortal.
Not too happy with the unit model, though. It's too tall and weird looking.
I also don't like how the warhound is totally useless vs zerg. It would be nice if you could, maybe, fit them with different special weapons so you could have like an anti-psionic missile or something else that would make them cost-effective against some zerg units.
I really hate battle hellions. It seems really weird that a unit could transform and change the amount of HP it has. The hellion's attack style was so cool before, but this is just kinda dumb.
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
Focus firing is so micro intensive.
Edit : This is sarcasm btw, but you never know on Internet ^^
I.... actually appreciate your edit. I was about to totally yell at you :D
On August 15 2012 02:50 Gfire wrote: I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
I don't think it's too big at all. I think most units are too small, but I think it's size makes it act like an immortal. You don't want too many of them, cause it's too hard to get them all attacking at once (moreso even than an immortal because of haywire missiles) which means you'll still have pretty tank-heavy compositions and warhounds, while they're damage dealing units, will act as only support units, like the immortal.
Not too happy with the unit model, though. It's too tall and weird looking.
I really hate battle hellions. It seems really weird that a unit could transform and change the amount of HP it has. The hellion's attack style was so cool before, but this is just kinda dumb.
Yes, but the warhound is a lot more useful than the immortal in bigger numbers because it can shoot air -.- And Terran needs more spell-caster.
On August 15 2012 01:57 Sbrubbles wrote: Nah, I think the warhound is fine.
Arguments ?
none needed.
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
On August 15 2012 02:50 Gfire wrote: I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
Yeah well - Focus firing isn't very micro intensive.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank's aoe dmg
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
Split quotes allow clarity. Did you play the HotS custom map ? This composition is extremely easy to use and quite strong (although this might be due to the numbers, which can and will change) And for that massive AoE damage of mines and tanks you are talking about - Blizzard says themselves they don't think mines will ever cause trouble to pro players, and tanks we already have and they aren't very effective in TvP.
- same supply as a stalker, with slight increase in cost (25/25 more expensive) - 220 health with 1 armor- probably the beefiest unit in the game per cost. - stalker dps vs armored: 9,72 warhound dps vs non-mechanical: 17,69 - range of 7 - missile ability adds an extra 5 dps vs mechanical, which doesn't seem much, but it is burst damage, meaning that for example 14 warhounds can burst down a thor before the thor even fires once. - IT IS EVEN ALMOST AS FAST AS A STALKER. like 3% slower.
ok i get it stalker has blink and can fire at air, but this is too much. the warhound will be literally the most powerful, most cost effective and most supply effective unit in the game vs everything, not only mechanical. i'd like to test how many stalkers it can deal with but to me it seems like one warhound can beat like 3-4 stalkers in 1vs1 combat and that is just not right.... it will be the automatic go-to unit vs everything but air if it doesn't get nerfed to hell.
It's a boring a-move unit. As a Terran, I LIKE that our units are micro-intensive. It's part of the racial character and has been since brood war.
Its role overlaps with Thors and Marauders. What is it supposed to do, exactly? Kill stuff from range? Yeah, Terran pretty much has that covered already.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I play zerg and terran, and have played that map. The Warhound is a factory marauder.
Exactly. I hate when people who don't have enough imagination to see how this units would play out speak their opinions (Because any person who is more or less an analytical mind knows that this unit concept is bad for competition). Also any unit having such favorable smart-firing that favors easy to use play is bad.
You mean like the colossus? And where is your imagination? You can't even look at how it could possibly be viable, instead you just want to crap on it because it's a new terran unit that you dont want to play with or against. You can turn that smart firing off too if you want the micro...
I think we will already be too busy microing tanks to focus fire sentries, putting widow mines to flank, cloak banshees and target down immortals, putting down pdd, repair thors with scvs, etc etc... More things to micro? No thanks. Blizzard probably realized this and put beefy a-move units like warhound and battle hellions, so Terrans can have little more breathing room to micro everything else.
On August 15 2012 02:02 ArcticRaven wrote: [quote]
Arguments ?
none needed.
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
On August 15 2012 02:57 mrlie3 wrote: I think we will already be too busy microing tanks to focus fire sentries, putting widow mines to flank, cloak banshees and target down immortals, putting down pdd, repair thors with scvs, etc etc... More things to micro? No thanks. Blizzard probably realized this and put beefy a-move units like warhound and battle hellions, so Terrans can have little more breathing room to micro everything else.
plz plz blizzard let me suck and have a good rank...
On August 15 2012 02:54 transcendent one wrote: nope it's the dumbest unit concept ever.
it has got RIDICULOUS stats.
- same supply as a stalker, with slight increase in cost (25/25 more expensive) - 220 health with 1 armor- probably the beefiest unit in the game per cost. - stalker dps vs armored: 9,72 warhound dps vs non-mechanical: 17,69 - range of 7 - missile ability adds an extra 5 dps vs mechanical, which doesn't seem much, but it is burst damage, meaning that for example 14 warhounds can burst down a thor before the thor even fires once. - IT IS EVEN ALMOST AS FAST AS A STALKER. like 3% slower.
ok i get it stalker has blink and can fire at air, but this is too much. the warhound will be literally the most powerful, most cost effective and most supply effective unit in the game vs everything, not only mechanical. i'd like to test how many stalkers it can deal with but to me it seems like one warhound can beat like 3-4 stalkers in 1vs1 combat and that is just not right.... it will be the automatic go-to unit vs everything but air if it doesn't get nerfed to hell.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I play zerg and terran, and have played that map. The Warhound is a factory marauder.
Exactly. I hate when people who don't have enough imagination to see how this units would play out speak their opinions (Because any person who is more or less an analytical mind knows that this unit concept is bad for competition). Also any unit having such favorable smart-firing that favors easy to use play is bad.
You mean like the colossus? And where is your imagination? You can't even look at how it could possibly be viable, instead you just want to crap on it because it's a new terran unit that you dont want to play with or against. You can turn that smart firing off too if you want the micro...
On August 15 2012 02:50 Gfire wrote: I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
Yeah well - Focus firing isn't very micro intensive.
don't know what you're talking about, but focus firing is extremely micro intensive. In fact, it is so intensive that most people 1-a and micro position instead of focus firing in fear of screwing up.
How many pros out there can focus fire while at the same time macroing up back at home? Just about as many that can split in combat while adding more structures at bases. Every second spent in battle is wasted time not macroing up
heres a write up i did on most of the hots stuff warhound included
i think BW wouldnt have been so successfull if it didnt have such amazingly well designed units with such great depth in gameplay that all of its qualities when combined ended up creating
I believe you can design new units with a starcraft feel, that fit well in the starcraft gameplay concept essence, while still being cool and unique, but hots is not a good example of it.
________________
Early game recalls? get rid of it. bad design. starcraft is about risks in army movement. lategame with nydus/drops/sensor towers in mind, its okay on the mothership.
protoss harassment unit that shields the minerals? just pure stupidity. get rid of the oracle all its spells are so stupid
________________
the viper? all of its spells are so dumb. get rid of it. doesnt fit well in the starcraft entertainment persona. I understand zergs had darkswarm in BW but that was moreso of a needed design crutch because zerg was designed to be weaker than lategame terran without it. right now zerg doesnt need darkswarm because their units are stronger, and so that design crutch doesnt really need to exist. zergs dont need swarm, but they have almost a stronger plague in the form of fungal (fungals much easier to get than plague, and 2casts kills 30 marines in 7 seconds? yup. its amazing how overbalanced fungal is in strength, but zergs need it in the current meta to compete). my main concern is with the vipers abduct spell. its just stupid all around, i actually think its a little too weak and stupid of a concept. just doesnt fit well in the starcraft essence.
ultra burrow charge? wont make it past beta however this is just one of the random cool concepts they were thinking of that they probably just decided to throw in last minute like baneling burrow movement.
________________
nexus into a 13range planetary? get rid of it. bad design. toss already has cannons from the forge zerg has spores/spines from the evo chamber, terran has planetarys/turrets from the engi bay.
protoss does not need this. its just bad design all around. they already have cannons. i actually consider bunkers to be more of a unit, considering it needs units to operate, i consider bunkers to be an extension of barracks tech because plain marines lose to zealots/stalkers/sentry/speedlings, but can win and defend the terrans natural with the help of bunkers, but the terran cant be offensive with those marines easily because bunkers cannot move. marines needed to be made weaker than vanilla stalkers/speedlings because if they werent terran could rush and win every game. so bunkers allowed marines to be balanced as weaker units early game and bunkers made it so as long as the marines are in the terrans base, they are strong, but when the marines leave the bunkers they become weak. then lategame marines have upgrades/support and no longer need the bunkers.
in starcraft 1 bunkers didnt have such elegant design theory in their concept, blizzard just made bunkers because it seemed like a cool idea. however in WoL bunkers serve the above design element. they make it so marines are strong at home but weak when attacking the enemy. marines needed to be balanced as weaker than toss/zerg tier1 units early game for balances sake
as far as the nexus planetary, its bad design because toss already has cannons. Terran has planetarys which CAN be massed around the map to serve as terran cannons. 1 cannon never did anything when used to control space, normally a toss makes 4 cannons in an area to control space. well guess what, 4cannons+pylon is 150 more minerals than a planetary and the planetary is STRONGER. i think in the future terrans will start to realize they do have their own form of "zero supply static defense" to use around the map lategame the way tosses put cannons everywhere lategame, and thats planetarys. planetarys/turrets are the terrans cannons, and both come from engi bay/forge respectively and cost no supply
________________
warhounds? just stupid. tanks/hellions control ground, thors are a big power unit that punches the hell out of ground and can splash air. mech in broodwar was very strong against air with goliaths. i like the new approach in sc2 where mech is weaker against air (since its only air shooting unit is thors which arent too great at anti air) but being weak against air seems like what mech should be. mech has small anti air options in thors, and then tanks/hellions are all about controlling the ground. the warhound is pretty un-needed when you got tanks and hellions to balance against ground
the warhounds stats are actually almost the same as thors. hilariously, blizzard almost designed the warhound as nothing more than a thor with no energy bar. Thors if they had no energy bar (and no strike cannons) would be great units in tvp mech because they pack a huge punch and have 400 health. Thors only suck in tvp because feedback deals 200damage to them for 50 energy.
warhounds really are funny when you realize blizzard could have simply just removed thors energy bar (and strike cannons) and the thor would be exactly like the warhound except it shoots air and walks slower. wait warhound are probably stronger than thors because warhounds have these overbalanced missiles which are clearly overbalanced in the alpha version and would need to be heavily nerfed to make it out of beta. warhounds cannot be balanced to have missiles that counter all toss units not named the zealot, it will never make it out of beta at this rate ________________
widow mines are stupid. i felt mines in BW were sort of a crutch that needed to be balanced to exist to fix out some other overall bgalance problens, but SC2 does not need them
tempest is stupid. not even gonna bother explaining why.
________________
zergs swarm host, and battle hellions are two example of units that i feel are highly well balanced and fit in the "starcraft esports gameplay essence feeling". Protoss, zerg, and terran could stand to each GAIN two units that are balanced and fun in concept as these units, and carriers shouldnt be removed.
What can blizzard design and add? Well i understand designing units is hard and your tempted to make cool weird things. But sometimes bland things like battle hellions can be what is needed.
I feel that one reason WoL is doing so well is because it is SO CLOSE to BW in gameplay design (not in terms of pathing/UI, but in terms of race design and the units races have). Most matchups in sc2 "feel" almost 80% like the bw matchups. Many units are the same or with the same roles, but the boring design crutches like swarm/mines/OPstorms were able to be removed by placing buffs in other areas (such as zerg getting tier2 fungals which are like mega plagues, 2 casts killing 30 marines for 150 energy in 7 seconds)
HOTS looks like it might "feel" 50% like BW, or even less, which could lead to its failure. BW was highly successful for a reason, there were many other RTS's with better UI, more units per race, more gameplay elements, but BW ended up being popular because the units are designed to well and create such a great "feel"
I think Sc2 has MANY of the original "feels" that BW had, and thats why Sc2 kept alot of success. Many matchups in sc2 feel almost like the BW matchups, just changed slightly with design crutches being balanced out.
i seriously believe if HOTS units arent more in line with how sc2 units should "feel" like, chances are hots will fail horribly and most tournaments wont switch over to it.
hots is not garunteed to take over WoL's spotlight. if HOTS doesnt "feel" as amazing as wol feels to viewers, many viewers might prefer watching WoL tournaments.
On August 15 2012 01:49 YourAdHere wrote: I'm really concerned it's going to ruin TvT. I remember reading Browder or someone else say that they weren't a fan of siege tank lines in TvT but I'm pretty sure TvT is near universally considered the best and most skillful mirror matchup and siege tanks being super strong in fixed positions is a big part of that.
Also do fear this, atm you can play nearly anny combination as terran, there is nothing wich is significantly stronger then other combinations, my fear is that massing warhounds with adding aa if needed will be a to strong strategy, and thereby eliminating the variety of viable play styles terran currently has.
On August 15 2012 02:54 transcendent one wrote: nope it's the dumbest unit concept ever.
it has got RIDICULOUS stats.
- same supply as a stalker, with slight increase in cost (25/25 more expensive) - 220 health with 1 armor- probably the beefiest unit in the game per cost. - stalker dps vs armored: 9,72 warhound dps vs non-mechanical: 17,69 - range of 7 - missile ability adds an extra 5 dps vs mechanical, which doesn't seem much, but it is burst damage, meaning that for example 14 warhounds can burst down a thor before the thor even fires once. - IT IS EVEN ALMOST AS FAST AS A STALKER. like 3% slower.
ok i get it stalker has blink and can fire at air, but this is too much. the warhound will be literally the most powerful, most cost effective and most supply effective unit in the game vs everything, not only mechanical. i'd like to test how many stalkers it can deal with but to me it seems like one warhound can beat like 3-4 stalkers in 1vs1 combat and that is just not right.... it will be the automatic go-to unit vs everything but air if it doesn't get nerfed to hell.
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I play zerg and terran, and have played that map. The Warhound is a factory marauder.
Exactly. I hate when people who don't have enough imagination to see how this units would play out speak their opinions (Because any person who is more or less an analytical mind knows that this unit concept is bad for competition). Also any unit having such favorable smart-firing that favors easy to use play is bad.
You mean like the colossus? And where is your imagination? You can't even look at how it could possibly be viable, instead you just want to crap on it because it's a new terran unit that you dont want to play with or against. You can turn that smart firing off too if you want the micro...
I play terran and I agree with him.
yeah numbers will change but right now the only special thing about it is that is has ridiculous stats, if it gets nerfed, it will be a mech version of marauder, hence the concept being dumb.
right now it probably beats everything on the ground except siege tank in a max vs max army. with tweaked stats there will be no point to build it ever because marauders can stim and be healed for free...
The reason warhound is there is because it is a bandaid. There needs to be an all purpose unit that's extremely beefy with significant DPS to prop up all the extraordinary weaknesses of the other mech units.
The game has too many hard counters, and the result is extraordinarily powerful units to compensate.
I personally think its just funny how whenever something new is introduced, even if its not final, it gets shat on until it is completely removed. After it gets removed, then people want to complain about how that want something like it back in the game. The game is still in the alpha stage and im sure that the Warhound will get its far share of nerfs as all Terran units do.
The carrier for instance. Everyone shat on the carrier and most people still do. Blizzard removes that carrier from HotS, now everyone wants the carrier back... but no one uses it. Anytime anything new for terran is introduced, it is considered overpowered because it is usually (like all the other races units..) an attack move unit. Sure, Blizzard could remove the Warhound, but then what will you guys bitch about then? Lets say the Warhound gets removed but is replaced by a standard Goliath that acts similarly to the Goliath from BW, what will you get then? A ton of BW players shitting on it and non-BW players bitching about how SC2 is different from BW which means that it should not be re-introducing old units, but instead introducing newer units that do nearly the same thing.
off topic...
The Carrier (imo) should be used as a siege unit similar to a (herp derp) Siege Tank. The Tempest fits the EXACT same role, a ranged siege unit. You cant leave 3-4 Siege tanks out in the open to siege up an area can you (without protection)? You cant do that with the Carrier either can you? So why would you expect to be able to do it with the tempest? Brood Lords are considered siege units. Do you leave those out in the open alone? no, or you lose the game. it doesnt matter if you have 2 Brood Lords or 20, if they are left in the open with no type back up protection, they will die. Same story for collosus.
Now back on topic..
In TvP, even if the Warhound is not considered a "Mech" Unit (even though the description of it is clearly "Mechanical"), it is an excellent replacement to the useless Thor in TvP. You can make as many Thors as you want in TvP, but you will die to Templar and Chargelots. Thors have energy whereas the Warhound does not, so they will not lose half of their health to a single Feedback. You can get out 3-4 Warhounds on 1 base to hold off a cheesy Blink Stalker all in, but can you get out 3-4 thors? No. They take far too long to build and in small numbers will not do the job of handling blink stalkers, even if you mass repair them. If you get 3-4 warhounds, you will more than likely be able to also get out a Siege Tank or 2 to accompany them. Hell, you could probably get out a few marauders and do just as well to help the Warhounds hold off shit like that.
Some of you are complaining about the Warhound being ugly... I think the whole Zerg race is filled with ugly looking units but it seems that they are doing fine. Since when did Starcraft Players start caring about how a unit looks? It's just ignorant to try to add a units appearance into an argument over why it should be removed from a game.
Anyways, I think the Warhound is an excellent unit that will probably be nerfed to shit. It is unusable in TvZ and TvT imo (moreso TvZ). In TvT, it will just take supply away from marines and tanks. The only way Warhounds could be decent in TvT is if it is Mech vs Mech in which case it will be a mirrored Warhound, Viking, Tank staredown. TvP it would be great early game and late game. I personally would only get them in the mid game if I knew an all in was coming or if I knew that whoever I was playing decided to go for Robo Tech over Templar. Otherwise, I would just use MMM until the Late-Mid game to Late game which would then consist of alot of Ghosts and Battle Hellions along with possibly a few marauders and vikings.
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles, and everything else that your usual mech based army have to deal with. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Is the current mech style "micro-less"? sure, I suppose. But mech army requires different kind of skill from bio army, they are not directly comparable. And additional warhound and widow mine only adds more APM to the mech army, not less.
On August 15 2012 02:54 darkness wrote: Also from the battle report I watched, I'm leaning towards not buying hots. Its gameplay looks so... boring. I will give beta a chance though.
This. Swarm Host doesn't even work well as a siege unit, only the Brood Lord is the true siege unit. The Locusts made by the Swarm Host are just free units that still have to deal with pathing and walking everywhere. It's ONLY good angle is the free units.
Also the Viper is such a lol unit. Abducts EVERYWHERE. The improved Hydra and Ultra are what make the expansion good. It's a godsend for zerg. Zerg has to be made this op because just look at what terran is getting! Holy shit they got the best new stuff.
Terran looks a lot more op and fun for the person playing Terran. However if you're the opponent vs Terran never move out without detection because Widow Mines are cheap and will fuck everything up for you. Look away from your mineral line for 8 seconds? Bye mineral line. Also, Warhounds. Want to beat mech units? Make a few of these and a-move them to erase your enemies mech units off the map. Thors will only be used vs Zerg because Warhounds are useless in TvZ. TvT will become a nightmare, and will based on the winner being the lucky guy with Haywire Missiles off cooldown and killing all the enemy's Warhounds. It will be like those horrible Colossus wars, but for Terran. At least Terran won't be at a standstill anymore. Battle mode Hellions are an amazing godsend for terran, they just got Firebats back. And they only cost 100 minerals. Ridiculous.
Protoss is officially the "annoying" race now. Entomb. Tempest 22 range. Recall available at the start of the game. Harass harass harass. Ugh.
I wish they would give Tempests an ability or something just to make them not completely retarded and worse than the Carrier. Battlecruisers have TWO abilities in HotS. Yamato Cannon and Redline Reactor. I propose the Tempest be given an ability that turns its attack into an AOE attack. Cooldown based. Mothership Core is a godsend for Protoss, it will fix their early game problems. Oracle is pretty awesome, too bad its Invisibility ability is easily countered by... ANY AIR UNIT. Seriously it has such low hp that 1 volley from AA units will kill it as it can't move while channeling invis. Only useful if you rush it early game. Then Protoss becomes an untouchable beast... especially with Mship core's Purify and Energy Refill.
On August 15 2012 02:34 Tom Cruise wrote: people have to stop using the word "micro intensive", units are as micro intensive as you make them. if you dont micro ur units, chances are you'll lose them, goes for every unit in the game, regardless of which are easier to micro.
Take ling baneling vs ling baneling. If you micro them perfectly you'll have an immense advantage ; but you'll have to get your 600 APM rolling. Take marauder vs marauder (A quite accurate model for Warhound vs Warhound). If you micro perfectly it won't change much, and there's not much you can do (Focus fire woohoo) That's what micro intensive means.
On August 15 2012 02:35 ACrow wrote: I think it should change, because besides of the points you mentioned in the op, it is also a unit that is useless in a matchup (vs Z, due to obvious lack of mech units). A unit that makes not the least sense in one of the matchups is not a good idea.
It's ok if a unit isn't used in only one match-up. It's happened to BW as well. TvZ - bio, PvT - mech.
It's still a pretty big design flaw. It's unavoidable, and happened to BW - but you shouldn't actively push it, and making it that way is actively pushing it.
that was a horrible analogy, i'm sorry. if you micro marauder vs marauder perfectly you'll end up with 10 marauders at 6 hp left and 10 dead marauders.
LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
On August 15 2012 02:04 ArcticRaven wrote: [quote]
Sarcasm I hope.
why so?
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:04 Grapefruit wrote: With no AA there is literally no reason to build them, instead of tanks.
blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
On August 15 2012 02:06 iky43210 wrote: [quote] blinks stalkers and immortals are 2 good reasons
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup as warhound power (assuming mech becomes viable)
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
that's why he wrote if
huh? this will be my late input into this argument. I'm that if they do nerf the Warhound throughout the rest of alpha and beta stages, it will not be a dps nerf, it will be a cost nerf. As i've said before, the unit is not complete. I am 100% certain that the unit will cost more all around (minerals, gas, and supply).
On August 15 2012 02:08 ArcticRaven wrote: [quote]
'Cause you know, debating with arguments and reasoning, you know, all that stuff..... I still have a glimmer of hope.
[quote]
In that case, you won't want Tanks - you'll want Warhounds instead of them. And tankless mech isn't mech - it's just like Bio, but without micro, which isn't what I want as spectator or player.
?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
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.
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
mech v P battle are finished in even less than 10s, either article cannons blow everything or the map army instantly evaporate, so much damage from both sides.
to be honest ... when i started playing sc, the goliath was a unit i never ever wanted to build, because it was the ugliest unit i have ever seen. So the warhound fits this role pretty good. Mech is also very hard to control, so they couldn't have added a micro unit. I think the missiles are a neat mechanic though, kinda like Zealots. You can use them on autocast and they are great, but people can abuse this. Plan A warp prims + probe fly in drop probe trigger the missiles that the noob left on autocast (1 stalker blinking in does the same, though instant kill by tanks is still a problem in both cases). Plan B wait till the immortals are in range fire the missiles and destroy the shields without losing damage. Anti air ... viking, widow mine, thors and turrets with range and armor upgrade, thats plenty. (battle report terran had overmins deluxe). Microwise i like that option. Goliath was a move all the way too and some focus fire. And lol fast I want my vultures back ... hellions are soooo slow.
Its still funny that people think amech doesn't feel like mech.
What i find really annoying is that hellions still seem to come out of factories as battle hellions. Apart from that i like the new additions to mech. And despite what people say, that is exactly what mech was missing to be able to compete imo. And sure they can make a unit look cool for some people. But there are people out there who like how the Atlas mech looks, something i never ever will understand.
Looking forward to the beta, will be funny to see the tempest changes, when people start to abuse the range in combination with storm and canons. Will be more annoying then broodlord infestor imo.
On August 15 2012 02:11 iky43210 wrote: [quote] ?? silly argument
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
On August 15 2012 02:13 CaptainCrush wrote: [quote]
I dont know why everyone is jumping on this bandwagon... Two of the three races right now ARE predominantly a-move armies so this isnt really anything that's stupid or different.
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
haywire bypass immortal harden shield, because it is a spell.
You're not going to magically pop out ghost anytime soon, not until late game, when you go mech route.
I already said 60 APM to control haywire is nothing to scuff at. in between warhound far range atk and haywire spells, there is no reason whatsoever for that shit to be autocasted so it can hit some useless stalkers, battle hellions, or some other crap
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote: [quote]
Can you read the whole post please ? Warhounds and tanks aren't complementary. So you'll have Thor/Hellion/Warhound - a mechanical army that behaves just like Bio except it is microless. I'll redirect you to this :
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
On August 15 2012 02:19 ArcticRaven wrote:
But what we need then is more micro on the other races. If I want to watch or play a dumbed down game I can just choose LoL.
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote:
On August 15 2012 02:30 Bjoernzor wrote: The warhound is a marauder that comes out of the factory, go figue
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
haywire bypass immortal harden shield, because it is a spell.
You're not going to magically pop out ghost anytime soon, not until late game, when you go mech route.
Watch Hack play and come back. Ghosts destroy half of P units, it's just stupid to not use them.
I have no problems with the war hound requiring no micro. Anyone who plays terran will know the pains it takes to micro in TvP and how perfect the engagement has to go in a maxed out army situation. So I would like to THANK blizzard for giving a unit that is good anti mech and would request it to remain non microable. PPl suggesting that the war hound should be microable should consider that:
*Siege tanks require considerable microing AND timing. It takes a lot of TIME to siege/unsiege. You have to pick the right number of tanks to deplay at the right time when you move slowly forward in true terran turtle style. *Microing ur vikings for maximum affect (positioning AND kiting). Viking splits for avoiding storm/chain fungals. *Ghosts for EMP (In TvP and TvZ...I guess although no one uses them anymore in TvZ) *Battle helions to engage in the right mode ("kiting mode" and battle mode)
Is that not enough micro for 1 maxed out army engagement?? Ppl requestin more micro are sadistic bastards. Nuff said
One huge problem with it is that its designed (and will most probably be balanced around) doing bonus and having a skill vs Mechanical, so it is gonna be useless vs Zerg. Which in a kinda perveted way is a good thing, cause I don't want it to be in HotS at all, so if its bad enough to not be used thats actually a bonus.
You made alot of assumptions for something that isn't even on the beta. First off you don't know the composition and the meta games in the HOTS, but keep this in mind. Mech without tank is simply a bioball that is
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Secondly, mech describes composition where your majority of food is comes from the factory. It has nothing to do with tank or not.
Lastly, warhound is more apm intensive then people give credits. Having to spam haywire (depending on how many you got) every 6 seconds is not light on the apm counts. on top of tank focus fire, positioning, hellion controls etc
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
1) slower 2) less dps (zealots aren't mechanical) 3) cannot be healed.
Without tank and window mind aoe firepower, pure battlehellions and warhound is most likely not going to work.
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
[quote]
Right, but the rest of the terran units are still VERY micro intensive. They can (and probably should) still work on adding some micro into the other races even if they add the warhound to the terran army.
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
On August 15 2012 02:31 CaptainCrush wrote: [quote]
It has more life and more range...
It is not economical to run marauders into a tank line to try and break it. I really, really dont think that most of the complainers have tried using it yet.
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
haywire bypass immortal harden shield, because it is a spell.
You're not going to magically pop out ghost anytime soon, not until late game, when you go mech route.
Watch Hack play and come back. Ghosts destroy half of P units, it's just stupid to not use them.
I don't even know what the fuck you're talking about anymore. Since when was the last time mech was actually used against protoss in high level of game play? (beside some obscure all-in timing, which are also all figured out).
Realistically you can't and won't have the facilities to produce a strong mech force AND ghosts in early or mid game. HOTS won't change that, due to different tech and production facilities. Ghosts may/will be used in HOTS, but they won't appear until late mid game when you go mech route
On August 15 2012 02:33 ArcticRaven wrote: [quote]
Spamming every 6 seconds during fights ? That's not very hard. It's super easy in fact. As for the rest - I'll just redirect you to this : http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=360325 . What makes mech interesting is not that the units are mechanical. It is that it's a completely different way to play the game.
[quote]
Why not ? I haven't had the impression were even remotely good against zealots, and Blizz just gave Terran a great counter. Tankless mech is also faster as you do not have to leapfrog, and Warhounds can't be healed either.
[quote]
The more micro (for everyone) the better. This game doesn't need a second marauder or colossus.
[quote]
More life and more range doesn't make a unit play differently.
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
haywire bypass immortal harden shield, because it is a spell.
You're not going to magically pop out ghost anytime soon, not until late game, when you go mech route.
Watch Hack play and come back. Ghosts destroy half of P units, it's just stupid to not use them.
I don't even know what the fuck you're talking about anymore. Since when was the last time mech was actually used against protoss in high level of game play? (beside some obscure all-in timing, which are also all figured out).
Realistically you can't and won't have the facilities to produce a strong mech force AND ghosts in early or mid game. HOTS won't change that, due to different tech and production facilities. Ghosts may/will be used in HOTS, but they won't appear until late mid game when you go mech route
Hack vs Lure, Hack vs Creator the TSL4 qualifier that Creator won. You don't know what you're talking about that's all since you don't have the necessary resources to continue this discussion
On August 15 2012 03:06 LgNKami wrote:Everyone shat on the carrier and most people still do. Blizzard removes that carrier from HotS, now everyone wants the carrier back... but no one uses it.
In TvP, even if the Warhound is not considered a "Mech" Unit (even though the description of it is clearly "Mechanical"), it is an excellent replacement to the useless Thor in TvP. You can make as many Thors as you want in TvP, but you will die to Templar and Chargelots. Thors have energy whereas the Warhound does not, so they will not lose half of their health to a single Feedback. You can get out 3-4 Warhounds on 1 base to hold off a cheesy Blink Stalker all in, but can you get out 3-4 thors? No. They take far too long to build and in small numbers will not do the job of handling blink stalkers, even if you mass repair them. If you get 3-4 warhounds, you will more than likely be able to also get out a Siege Tank or 2 to accompany them. Hell, you could probably get out a few marauders and do just as well to help the Warhounds hold off shit like that.
So they're good because they are strong ? Nice design there.
Also for the carrier case - not the same people complained, and most of the people (me including) complained that it was weaked and never buffed in any way and that they took it out without ever trying to change it. No one "shat" on it.
On August 15 2012 02:50 Gfire wrote: I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
Yeah well - Focus firing isn't very micro intensive.
don't know what you're talking about, but focus firing is extremely micro intensive. In fact, it is so intensive that most people 1-a and micro position instead of focus firing in fear of screwing up.
At your level maybe. Hell, I focus fired when I was silver. It's not hard to do, and anyway, Haywire is auto cast, so it's a unit that doesn't even reward focus firing. Ridiculous.
that was a horrible analogy, i'm sorry. if you micro marauder vs marauder perfectly you'll end up with 10 marauders at 6 hp left and 10 dead marauders.
Not unless the opponent plays with both hands. And even then....
Its really a bothersome replying to split up quotes, but don't ever underestimate the micro it needs to fire haywire every 6 seconds. Mouseover selection and accuracy is definitely something not to be underestimated, especially when you have to do it for every single warhound you produced.
I gave you a reason why pure battlehellion/warhound won't work if you produce them purely. Because you are still not going to beat the late game firepower of the protoss units without having massive aoe dmg of your own. Not a god damn chance. your units is going to melt in the face of protoss late game without tank support
Why don't you go find a terran/protoss, and go see how awesome your battlehellion/warhound composition fair against late game protoss. Have fun
and there is nothing wrong with marauders. Did marauders make terran bio 1-a or made them not micro intensive? Last I check Terran is still an incredibly APM intensive race regardless of having marauders or not
Maybe up to gm it'd be considered as micro but for ppl who played bw it's just a huge joke... mouse accuracy is miles harder in ghosts/ht battles....
but you're still going to have ghosts/ht battles or tanks/ht battles. If you have 6 warhounds, that is 6 haywire per rounds, or equivalent of 60 APM to control haywires perfectly. I'd say that is quite taxing if you want to manually control them perfectly.
Considering the match up we're talking about in less than 10s the battle is finished anyway once you engage. you've to do it twice and you'd just use smart casting since 30 dmg isn't going to kill anything mechanical, which is like 5apm for a group of 10 warhound... There is really 0 need to control them individually
no battle is ever less than 10s. Unless you ram your army into siegelines
Immortal shield is 100, so that would require 3-4 haywire shots to deplete them so your tanks can actually do dmg. Or kill a few sentries / colossus. Haywire is nothing to scuff at.
and I don't get where you get 5apm from, but I see Blizzard envision warhound as the mech's answer to immortal and blink stalkers all-in. Tanks will still play a huge role on the matchup (assuming mech becomes viable)
nice fail on the maths, it'd take 10 missile to deplete an immortal shield, something so stupid when you've emp on the ghost... which already deals with the ht/sentries/archons, letting on target of choice, colossi who you'd want to one shot if you come close enough which requires 12warhounds, whom you're not going to use individually. It's just one button that you'd use every 6seconds for your warhound squad, hurray that's micro intensive XD
haywire bypass immortal harden shield, because it is a spell.
You're not going to magically pop out ghost anytime soon, not until late game, when you go mech route.
Watch Hack play and come back. Ghosts destroy half of P units, it's just stupid to not use them.
I don't even know what the fuck you're talking about anymore. Since when was the last time mech was actually used against protoss in high level of game play? (beside some obscure all-in timing, which are also all figured out).
Realistically you can't and won't have the facilities to produce a strong mech force AND ghosts in early or mid game. HOTS won't change that, due to different tech and production facilities. Ghosts may/will be used in HOTS, but they won't appear until late mid game when you go mech route
Hack vs Lure, Hack vs Creator the TSL4 qualifier that Creator won. You don't know what you're talking about that's all since you don't have the necessary resources to continue this discussion
necessary resources for what? not watching a QUALIFIER? come back when you have better arguments, instead of making a fool of yourself talking about making ghosts in early mech army
On August 15 2012 02:26 johnnywup wrote: it's just a marauder built out of a factory...has to go
Pretty much sums it up... Let's give a marauder a bigger suit more damage vs mech(Wait isn't all of protoss mech? No they still have Zealots! Oh good at least protoss will be able to do something vs this new "mech" ....Don't forget you've got battle hellions to deal with those annoying zealots >_>)
Of course everything could change since the game is still in Alpha but it looks like they are just saying here Terran you get to play with a 1A deathball now >_<
I can only hope that things will change by beta and the final release.
More protoss complaining... The warhound cannot shoot air, is not massive (you still have phoenix) and you get this new awesome airship that can shoot 22 range.
Even if you dont currently like the DPS or whatever on the tempest, it can change quite a bit before launch. I highly doubt that the warhound will ever get an air attack. It may change the way you play the matchup but even that goes towards what you guys want in a new and different game.
Seriously guys, try the HOTS custom map. I cannot stress enough how inaccurate most of these complaints are.
I have tried out the HOTS custom map and enjoyed messing around with the new units since I play Random this isn't simply "More Protoss Complaining" I'm just stating my thoughts from what I've seen with the custom map and the battle report that a "mech" death ball is very probably vs toss. I've faced it even with the help of tempest it is difficult to deal with. I've used this style against toss and laugh as they BM me for it
We'll see how things change come beta and relase I just hope they stick with the idea of working away from the Death Ball not creating a new one for terran...
necessary resources for what? not watching a QUALIFIER? come back when you have better arguments, instead of making a fool of yourself talking about making ghosts in early mech army
Well. You asked him for a relevant match and he gave you one.
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
you can use that argument for EVERYTHING. do you not understand that? for everything in hots.
all we can argue about is what we see now in the videos, and in those warhound is a huge ass fail.
lets look at (dps*health)/(cost*supply) to get an indication how powerful an unit is (its not even accurate, because armor and gas-mineral differences and build time are not considered, but those would change the the value to make the warhound better.
the value for some units:
warhound vs non mechanical: 8,64 vs mechanical 11,09 thor: 6.25 stalker: 4,43 roach: 5,8 immortal vs armored: 7,39 non stim marine: 7 stimmed marine: 10,5 stimmed marauder vs armored: 10
so its almost the same effectiveness wise as stimmed marines and marauders, while it doesn't need medivacs, it has longer range, is much tankier, and it is more effective than stimmed mm vs anything not roach or ultra. they also have much higher base speed than marines or marauders. they can also be stack healed with scvs. they are also very good vs area of effect attacks, the biggest weakness of mm. they also scale better than marines with damage upgrades, and additionally stimmed marines are less effective vs 1 or more base armored units than warhound vs non mechanical.. and they have instant ability (depending on the range of the missile spell).
so the basic idea is: an unit with retardedly good stats.
necessary resources for what? not watching a QUALIFIER? come back when you have better arguments, instead of making a fool of yourself talking about making ghosts in early mech army
Well. You asked him for a relevant match and he gave you one.
those matches even make me feel that mech could be used as a greedy opening (it straight up dies to some timings as Hack does it) if you're able to deal properly with the P midgame. But it seems way harder to play in order to just say fuck off to zealot warpins :D
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
all we can argue about is what we see now in the videos, and in those warhound is a huge ass fail.
There's no need for stats to see that adding a second marauder is stupid.
I'm a big fan of it. Ever since the Goliath went the way of the Dodo, mech hasn't had a general purpose, damage dealing unit in its mech line (you'd think Thor, but it's super expensive and slow, and definitely not designed to be anything more than a supporting unit). Between battle hellion, warhound, and widow mine, mech is finally gonna be a fleshed out tech level, rather than relegated to some support roles outside TvT.
Probably my favourite part is that Terran will finally by able to directly engage the Protoss on even grounds, regardless of the stage of the game. No more running around avoiding some big ball of doom while trying to do damage via guerrilla tactics (though the option to do so will still be there, which is cool). We now will have an option to actually tech up and fight tech vs. tech head-on.
On August 15 2012 03:12 transcendent one wrote: LgNkami you have no idea what you're talking about.
the Warhound looks extremely boring, and its stats are soooo much better than 2 marines (the same supply) that it's not even funny. it's the most effective unit as of now vs ground (not just mechanical, everything.). there would be no reason to build anything vs ground than warhounds and tanks, and since you don't have to micro warhounds i guess people wouldn't be using tanks. right now it is a marauder with ridiculous stats for the same supply.
if they nerf it, it will be an unit with normal stats, that is boring and looks bad.
THE UNIT IS NOT COMPLETE! do you not understand that? It is not complete.
all we can argue about is what we see now in the videos, and in those warhound is a huge ass fail.
There's no need for stats to see that adding a second marauder is stupid.
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
On August 15 2012 03:41 iamcaustic wrote: I'm a big fan of it. Ever since the Goliath went the way of the Dodo, mech hasn't had a general purpose, damage dealing unit in its mech line (you'd think Thor, but it's super expensive and slow, and definitely not designed to be anything more than a supporting unit). Between battle hellion, warhound, and widow mine, mech is finally gonna be a fleshed out tech level, rather than relegated to some support roles outside TvT.
Probably my favourite part is that Terran will finally by able to directly engage the Protoss on even grounds, regardless of the stage of the game. No more running around avoiding some big ball of doom while trying to do damage via guerrilla tactics (though the option to do so will still be there, which is cool). We now will have an option to actually tech up and fight tech vs. tech head-on.
Taeja and top T disagree. You can engage head on nowadays, if you're good enough. (which is the case of 0 ppl on those forums I think :D)
On August 15 2012 03:06 LgNKami wrote:Everyone shat on the carrier and most people still do. Blizzard removes that carrier from HotS, now everyone wants the carrier back... but no one uses it.
In TvP, even if the Warhound is not considered a "Mech" Unit (even though the description of it is clearly "Mechanical"), it is an excellent replacement to the useless Thor in TvP. You can make as many Thors as you want in TvP, but you will die to Templar and Chargelots. Thors have energy whereas the Warhound does not, so they will not lose half of their health to a single Feedback. You can get out 3-4 Warhounds on 1 base to hold off a cheesy Blink Stalker all in, but can you get out 3-4 thors? No. They take far too long to build and in small numbers will not do the job of handling blink stalkers, even if you mass repair them. If you get 3-4 warhounds, you will more than likely be able to also get out a Siege Tank or 2 to accompany them. Hell, you could probably get out a few marauders and do just as well to help the Warhounds hold off shit like that.
So they're good because they are strong ? Nice design there.
Also for the carrier case - not the same people complained, and most of the people (me including) complained that it was weaked and never buffed in any way and that they took it out without ever trying to change it. No one "shat" on it.
On August 15 2012 02:50 Gfire wrote: I don't know why people say the Warhound is an a-move unit. Even it's basic attack requires as much micro as a unit like an immortal, but you also have a greater variance in effectiveness you can achieve due to the haywire missiles. You'll need to control them carefully to make sure that you are in range of a mech unit at all times, and moreso to optimally focus fire units. It's essentially twice as complex as most regular units.
Yeah well - Focus firing isn't very micro intensive.
don't know what you're talking about, but focus firing is extremely micro intensive. In fact, it is so intensive that most people 1-a and micro position instead of focus firing in fear of screwing up.
At your level maybe. Hell, I focus fired when I was silver. It's not hard to do, and anyway, Haywire is auto cast, so it's a unit that doesn't even reward focus firing. Ridiculous.
that was a horrible analogy, i'm sorry. if you micro marauder vs marauder perfectly you'll end up with 10 marauders at 6 hp left and 10 dead marauders.
Not unless the opponent plays with both hands. And even then....
They're better in TvP over the Thor because they dont lose half of their health to a spell, they dont require a armory, they're faster, less clunky, aren't hard countered by mass immortals. Anything else? Sure, they're strong, but on their own they are pretty weak so you cant just mass them. If you're terran, just dont make them if you dont like them. If you're zerg, you shouldnt even consider talking about them considering the fact that they would be used vs you. If you're toss, better start using the stargate...
As far as auto-casting, you can disable it... Just like you can disable charge auto-cast...
On August 15 2012 03:41 iamcaustic wrote: I'm a big fan of it. Ever since the Goliath went the way of the Dodo, mech hasn't had a general purpose, damage dealing unit in its mech line (you'd think Thor, but it's super expensive and slow, and definitely not designed to be anything more than a supporting unit). Between battle hellion, warhound, and widow mine, mech is finally gonna be a fleshed out tech level, rather than relegated to some support roles outside TvT.
Probably my favourite part is that Terran will finally by able to directly engage the Protoss on even grounds, regardless of the stage of the game. No more running around avoiding some big ball of doom while trying to do damage via guerrilla tactics (though the option to do so will still be there, which is cool). We now will have an option to actually tech up and fight tech vs. tech head-on.
Taeja and top T disagree. You can engage head on nowadays, if you're good enough. (which is the case of 0 ppl on those forums I think :D)
You can engage head-on only after you've crippled the Protoss enough with guerrilla tactics that you have a significant supply advantage, or if you manage to get the Protoss to split up his army from all the multi-pronged harassment.
There are a lot of conditionals to that.
Edit: Also, even if we take your words at face-value, just how good does one have to be to be able to engage head-on if no one on these forums is good enough? We have pro-players, semi-pros, and a plethora of Masters-level players on these forums. Simply being in Masters puts one in the top 5% of players in their respective region. By default, what you're saying is impossible for at least 95% of the StarCraft community, and very likely more than that. That's kind of stupid.
Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
It hits harder and has more range. Such a great, innovative design.
On August 15 2012 03:41 iamcaustic wrote: I'm a big fan of it. Ever since the Goliath went the way of the Dodo, mech hasn't had a general purpose, damage dealing unit in its mech line (you'd think Thor, but it's super expensive and slow, and definitely not designed to be anything more than a supporting unit). Between battle hellion, warhound, and widow mine, mech is finally gonna be a fleshed out tech level, rather than relegated to some support roles outside TvT.
Probably my favourite part is that Terran will finally by able to directly engage the Protoss on even grounds, regardless of the stage of the game. No more running around avoiding some big ball of doom while trying to do damage via guerrilla tactics (though the option to do so will still be there, which is cool). We now will have an option to actually tech up and fight tech vs. tech head-on.
Taeja and top T disagree. You can engage head on nowadays, if you're good enough. (which is the case of 0 ppl on those forums I think :D)
You can engage head-on only after you've crippled the Protoss enough with guerrilla tactics that you have a significant supply advantage, or if you manage to get the Protoss to split up his army from all the multi-pronged harassment.
There are a lot of conditionals to that.
no. There is two conditionals which don't rely on the toss: Have the proper amount of ghost/vikings Have a golike micro. Those guys (especially Taeja) are able to destroy P in 200/200 fights trough good army control/positionning. Something we can only dream about.
On August 15 2012 03:49 ArcticRaven wrote: Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
On August 15 2012 02:58 ROOTT1 wrote: 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like
these 2 points contradict each other, no?
Not quite, so back in BW vultures required quite a bit of micro, kinda like hellions today, but imo more micro intensive then hellions. Goliaths also required some micro, i.e target firing air, keep positional alignments etc. because they weren't all that powerful on the ground verus ground (not bad by any means, but cost for cost tanks were better ground wise) So although we do not need this unit to be as micro intensive as a marine, we expect it to fit into position play and require strategy and more micro intensive than A-click
Also, having energy over cool down on warhounds isn't such a bad idea for any abilities it might have because HT will be useful versus mech, but not so over powered because HT are slow risk getting hit by tanks and would have to target feedback lots of warhounds
On August 15 2012 03:49 ArcticRaven wrote: Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
It hits harder and has more range. Such a great, innovative design.
Autocast on the right units correctly. lol. Without target firing? cute. Its not about impressing anyone, its about winning.
I feel you do not understand me. My point is, this unit is boring because it's another marauder and autocaset makes it worse because it doesn't even reward spell firing.
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?
There should be as few a-cick units in the game I feel.
With the ease of use of all of them, there needs to be a high ceiling.
No, I'm not a bw fanboy, I actually never played more than 2 games. I'm just saying that because of how easy the engine makes things for the player, give them room to make it difficult/more effective.
I'm really not looking forward to HotS... ridiculous unit ideas. The warhound is exactly the type of unit we told Blizzard we didn't want. I think before we begin looking to add new units, we should be looking to replace some units/remove some.
necessary resources for what? not watching a QUALIFIER? come back when you have better arguments, instead of making a fool of yourself talking about making ghosts in early mech army
Well. You asked him for a relevant match and he gave you one.
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Also I was top master. Focus firing after you hit more than 10 units is much harder than you are trying to suggest. Unless you like wasted projectile dps and miss macro back in base, you can micro all day long and be behind.
Go put one of those automaton computers design to focus fire vs your human version of focus fire, with the same amount of units. Then you can tell me how easy it is to focus fire after he abolishes your army with still over 1/2 of his remains
And add in things like banelings then you can tell me how fun and easy it is to focus fire
On August 15 2012 03:49 ArcticRaven wrote: Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
It hits harder and has more range. Such a great, innovative design.
1. It's a part of the factory tech, filling a hole in mech play as mech never had a beefy all-purpose unit like bio does. 2. It's an anti-mechanical specialist, while the marauder is an anti-armour specialist. This gives it a clear, differentiated role from the marauder (i.e. it's bad vs. all things Zerg, while marauder is great vs. things like banelings and roaches). 3. Haywire focus-fire doesn't happen with auto-cast.
Point #1 is the biggest thing. I'd classify the warhound more like the goliath, rather than the marauder.
Yes looks do matter! What the fuck is blizzard doing with the unti!?! Are they to stupid to see that it looks like C&C then Starcraft? They dont even care.
If I am totaly honest I think the Warhound is fine, this game isnt getting any harder anyway. OOOOOOOwwwww bio is hard! Well what if there is no more bio and we switch 100% to mech? Wherz da skill now ha!?!
Warhound is fine, they just really need to chenge the model.
[/QUOTE] I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever[/QUOTE]
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
On August 15 2012 03:49 ArcticRaven wrote: Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
It hits harder and has more range. Such a great, innovative design.
1. It's a part of the factory tech, filling a hole in mech play as mech never had a beefy all-purpose unit like bio does. 2. It's an anti-mechanical specialist, while the marauder is an anti-armour specialist. This gives it a clear, differentiated role from the marauder (i.e. it's bad vs. all things Zerg, while marauder is great vs. things like banelings and roaches). 3. Haywire focus-fire doesn't happen with auto-cast.
Point #1 is the biggest thing. I'd classify the warhound more like the goliath, rather than the marauder.
Yeah, it's a factory marauder that's useless versus zerg. Sorry, I forgot another point that makes the unit have an awful design. As for that focus firing thing, I haven't been clear and I apologize for that. Allow me to correct myself. My point is, this unit is boring because it's another marauder and autocaset makes it worse because it doesn't even reward spell firing.
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Broadcasted matches are relevant. And if you disagree, well I don't care. You asked for a match and he gave you one. Don't give arbitrary reasons, and don't say nothing will ever happen when the match it happened was given to you.
necessary resources for what? not watching a QUALIFIER? come back when you have better arguments, instead of making a fool of yourself talking about making ghosts in early mech army
Well. You asked him for a relevant match and he gave you one.
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
you're just being silly. A qualifier is as relevant as another online tournament, especially when both players are in the ro8 of the TSL4. You didn't watch the vods since Hack goes for an aggressive opening (7marine/3hellion/medivac) into huge macro mode with double CC/armory and add his ghosts just after getting is 5th factory, having ghosts in the midgame to deal with archons/chargelots/imo/hts. it wasn't mid late game at all considering he has the first ready around 120-130 food but it's easy to criticize without watching, good job on that.
On August 15 2012 04:02 Sircoolguy wrote:
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
Cloack isn't even needed until late game since the protoss is forced to attack you if he doesn't want to get poked by tanks while you leapfrog once you're in range of something. just emp the shit going at you and you can target templars with tanks or fried them with small hellion squads.
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
Thing is though, that early gas tends to go into siege tanks so you can.. you know, actually defend. Ghost/hellion early-mid game isn't exactly going to survive Protoss pushes.
Currently, when playing mech I feel I really miss a 'cannon fodder' unit, that would prevent enemy from just overruning my tanks. Hellions are too fragile for that role and do too little damage (even though they are used for that role in pure mech, they feel very underwhelimng). Those are more of a kite / harrass unit. This leads to bio being your main fodder. However if you go bio you also need to add medivacs, research stim & shield, have two sets of manufacturing structures and most of all roll another set of upgrades.Warhound should fill exactly the role of cannon fodder in mech play.
Warhound is not 'another marauder'. Warhounds will not have the marauders mobility, its great synergy with medivacs and the small utility in form of c.shells. Marauders on the other hand will not be as tanky as warhounds and as mentioned above require a totally different development of your base. Also marauders are anti-armored whereas warhounds are anti-mechanical. In TvP it potentially gives the warhound an edge (everything but zealot and templat-tech is mechanical). In TvT however it gives interesting options for interaction - marauders will likely rape warhounds. Even though Zerg does not have any mechanical units I do believe warhound will still be used here in place of current hellion.
If any unit feels redundand in comparison to warhound it is the new hellion. However, since new form is just more hp and different attack pattern, not the actual damage (at least in current iterration), battle hellions will still be a weak core unit.
On August 15 2012 04:02 Sircoolguy wrote: I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
I know ghost are important for late game in any army composition, but that's not what the context of the discussion is about. he's suggesting using ghosts to counter immortals/stalkers/whatever when going mech, but ghosts are not going to pop out anytime soon when you go mech based army.
Warhound's haywire is the best solution as mech for mid game stalkers all in or immortal busts
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
Thing is though, that early gas tends to go into siege tanks so you can.. you know, actually defend. Ghost/hellion early-mid game isn't exactly going to survive Protoss pushes.
I agree with you, ghost mech won't happen until a substantial army can be made out of mech units, which would be around mid game time. What I think would happen though would be a mass immortal/air base play out of P as a reaction. Then T could get a few ghost in the late game to counteract the shields on the immortals
I don't consider qualifiers as relevant. In addition, of which the videos he suggested, ghosts did not enter the scene till mid late game.
you're not going to have ghosts to answer immortals when you go mech. Not now, not ever
Well actually a couple ghost wouldn't be that hard to get into an army like mech. They don't even need any upgrades except for Mobious reactor and cloak to be useful at EMPing a P army. Certainly wouldn't see them early to early mid game but late game mech vs P having 3-5 ghosts would be very useful versus any immortal based army
Thing is though, that early gas tends to go into siege tanks so you can.. you know, actually defend. Ghost/hellion early-mid game isn't exactly going to survive Protoss pushes.
I agree with you, ghost mech won't happen until a substantial army can be made out of mech units, which would be around mid game time. What I think would happen though would be a mass immortal/air base play out of P as a reaction. Then T could get a few ghost in the late game to counteract the shields on the immortals
On August 15 2012 03:49 ArcticRaven wrote: Yeah, they're better because they're stronger is what you're saying. And for that autocasting thing - I don't see your point. Why should any pro impress us with his great micro of Haywire (lol) when he can just use autocast on the right units automatically ?
If you think the warhound is nothing more than a second marauder, I feel bad for you.
It hits harder and has more range. Such a great, innovative design.
1. It's a part of the factory tech, filling a hole in mech play as mech never had a beefy all-purpose unit like bio does. 2. It's an anti-mechanical specialist, while the marauder is an anti-armour specialist. This gives it a clear, differentiated role from the marauder (i.e. it's bad vs. all things Zerg, while marauder is great vs. things like banelings and roaches). 3. Haywire focus-fire doesn't happen with auto-cast.
Point #1 is the biggest thing. I'd classify the warhound more like the goliath, rather than the marauder.
Yeah, it's a factory marauder that's useless versus zerg. Sorry, I forgot another point that makes the unit have an awful design. As for that focus firing thing, I haven't been clear and I apologize for that. Allow me to correct myself. My point is, this unit is boring because it's another marauder and autocaset makes it worse because it doesn't even reward spell firing.
I recommend reading crow_mw's post, but on top of that, I'd like to mention that auto-cast doesn't remove the reward of manual spell firing. Auto-cast will just shoot things wherever and prevent any sort of focus-fire micro. If you don't think that's significant, then I really question your reasoning.
On August 15 2012 03:54 Sircoolguy wrote: Also, having energy over cool down on warhounds isn't such a bad idea for any abilities it might have because HT will be useful versus mech, but not so over powered because HT are slow risk getting hit by tanks and would have to target feedback lots of warhounds
You seriously want even MORE terran units to get destroyed by HT's? No thank you.
Can we please just wait for the beta? There are so many compositions that need to be tested before anyone can conclude anything.
Problem: Mech is too immobile and micro intensive. Solution: Give the warhound a 200/200 upgrade to carry siege tanks on its back while slowing movement speed.
In regards to the autocast ability, many people are equating it to charge in the sense that it can be turned on and off thus micro'd. I disagree though, with charge there is a good reason to toggle off, it can casue you to lose zealots if they charge in when you are retreating. On the side side haywire missle does damage to units, even if it is used at the wrong time, i.e. a few stalkers poke in or an immortal is dragging behind, it can still pick off units and hurt the other army whereas charge can hurt your own army if used at the wrong time. So while there is a good reason to turn off charge, there seems to be very little reason to turn off haywire missle unless he following is true: haywire missle automatically casue warhounds to fire the ability if rereating, thus making them stop position fire then leave. The only other reason I see to turn this ability off is target fire one major unit like the mothership, a BC, or maybe colosi, though the missle will still harm colosi directly or indirectly (by killing all supporting units) on autocast.
Well - these missiles are already casted on the right units. So manually firing doesn't change anything, except to snipe a few key units, which is very easy to do with the size a colossus or immortal has. This spell will be the easiest to use in all of sc2.
Also, for crow's post - He said himself what he wanted with mech was a cannon fodder. That's battle hellions, and I'm unsure why he doesn't like them in that role since more hp is all he asked.
The Warhound will not integrate mech, except as a remplacement for tanks, which he shares counters with. (except in TvZ, but it doesn't exist in TvZ anyway) And if it does that, Mech won't be an unique, position-rewarding style of play like it has been. I'll be just another deathball. And in that deathball, the warhound will fit exactly the role of the marauder, a strong unit that beats what exactly the marauder beats, except for marauders themselves - but then, against bio, the warhound is as useless as it is against zerg - it might as well not exist.
I feel like the warhound isnt even like freaking needed to play traditional mech like, the battle hellions kindve give mech that edge that it needed. They should be just extra AA imo.
On August 15 2012 04:26 Picklebread wrote: I feel like the warhound isnt even like freaking needed to play traditional mech like, the battle hellions kindve give mech that edge that it needed. They should be just extra AA imo.
Exactly. It overlaps with tanks a lot. It has nothing to do with mech.
We should wait for beta and give those units a try. Dustin Browder himself said that any unit which doesnt feel right can be removed during beta. Putting artistic taste aside this unit isnt that BAD. I mean it's normal unit like roach, immortal or hydralisk. I dont say they should go for easy to use units but terran as it is now is allready hard to control so maybe adding some easy units isnt that bad.
On August 15 2012 04:35 Tomasy wrote: We should wait for beta and give those units a try. Dustin Browder himself said that any unit which doesnt feel right can be removed during beta. Putting artistic taste aside this unit isnt that BAD. I mean it's normal unit like roach, immortal or hydralisk. I dont say they should go for easy to use units but terran as it is now is allready hard to control so maybe adding some easy units isnt that bad.
Yeah, and you believe that because Colossus/Marauders/Roaches/weak ass Hydras are still in?...I seriously hope not...
1. It's ugly 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like 4. No AA These are the very things that make up SCII mech (especially #3). IMO the warhound is actually the ugliest unit of the SC universe. It looks like a Transformer except stupid... and why is it so big if all it shoots is a little missile?
EDIT: "If units don't feel right they'll be removed in beta" -- Are you serious? Is that how you're going to balance your game, by removing things until it works? If something doesn't work then fix it; don't remove it and add something that might be better. Ex. the Carrier: Blizzard KNOWS from SC1 that this unit can work in Starcraft. They KNOW that it's likeable. It sort of works in SCII, it just needs a bit of changing, but instead of fixing it up they want to remove it and add a unit (Tempest) that is completely different from every other unit they've tried. What if the Tempest doesn't work, are you going to remove it?!?!?
On August 15 2012 04:35 Tomasy wrote: We should wait for beta and give those units a try. Dustin Browder himself said that any unit which doesnt feel right can be removed during beta. Putting artistic taste aside this unit isnt that BAD. I mean it's normal unit like roach, immortal or hydralisk. I dont say they should go for easy to use units but terran as it is now is allready hard to control so maybe adding some easy units isnt that bad.
Yeah well... We already have some bad, boring units in the game (Roaches singlehandedly ruin my love of ZvZ). That's another reason not to add more.
I most certainly hope its not going to be an a click unit. I play terran and one of the things i love most about playing as this race is because of the difficulty and micro capabilities the units have. If anything i want terran to be made even harder so that i can improve even more as a player.
From what ive seen it just looks like a smaller version of a thor.
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?
No, but Terran is the only race that makes this game fun. The other matchups are much too simple.
To be honest its hard to for me to talk too much about this until HOTS actually get released, because I feel like we still haven't seen the true potential of any of the units.
It's kinda like when SC2 was in beta: People thought that Marine/Marauder was gonna be the main unit composition vs Zerg, Mainly Marauders actually because they could ' tank' the Baneling hits and kill the Roaches which people thought was gonna be the core unit of the Zerg composition.
And what do we see today: Mostly Marine/Tank with lots of Marines, and Roaches are far from being a core unit vs Terran, Zergs are now (ab)using Infestors and Broodlords or Ultralisks vs Terran.
So I think we should just wait and see, also you guys have to realize that the Battle Reports are heavily scripted to show off the new units, and they probably are far from what we are gonna see when the game comes out.
The "Mothership Core FE" that Protoss used in the BR I can not imagine being very viable because it literarily can only defend one nexus at a time, so nothing prevents a Terran player from scouting it and massing Reapers to just go wreck havoc on the main and if the Protoss teleports the Mothership Core the Reapers can just go to the natural, also the Purify ability won't last forever so a Terran player could make like 10 Marines, park them outside of the Protoss base and just send in squads of 2 or 3 marines at a time, this would either force the Protoss to sacrifice Probes or waste energy on the Mothership Core, to defend for 10 sec. then Terran can send in the rest of his forces, etc, etc.
So my point is that what: we see of HOTS so far; are very far from what we are going to see when the game gets realeased so lets not worry too much about it.
tl;dr: Nothing is figured out yet, so wait with your worries.
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?
I would prefer to make the other races micro more than make Terran micro less.
As it is, making specifically a click units is boring. Why not have some more powerful tanks, and then make a micro unit.
Its not like we will see bio/tank/warhound with bio splitting etc etc and all the other micro alongside these 1a units.
These are high HP, high dps 1A infantry. Its different.
My idea as well. Stop nerfing everything including difficulty. BW had many most would think overpowered units but every race had something OP so it balanced in a very unique way. STOP taking things away and making the game easier its going to be stale before ya know it.
point "1" makes no sense. Blizzard employs people specifically to make cool looking things, failing as hard as they did with the Warhound is inexcusable.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by Blizzard's art department in general. The fact that they had placeholder units at MLG when all of SC2's models are very low detail.. that just doesn't make sense to me. And they can't even get unique icons for stuff in the recent battle report, but rather use icons meant for other things. When you compare that to how Valve are churning out new content for Dota2 at an insane pace, it just makes Blizzard look like a 3rd rate developer (which they would be without WOW money anyway)
They really need to bring positional play back into the game, right now it's just a move and win, and it seems like blizzard isn't going to do anything to change that, which is disappointing.
So much pointless hate and BW nostalgia. There is no escaping from warhound due to the simple problem of immortal. Terran mech will simply not work as long as hardened shields are resistant to tank shots - the only way to make it function is to use more special abilities that ignore/disable that special ability. For now the only question is whether haywire missiles will suffice - right now it looks like not-entirely. This would mean that you'll need ghosts for your mech and if your need to be building bio you can just as-well go full-out on it.
On August 15 2012 05:11 artosismermaid wrote: protoss has 1a immortals, archons and zealots, it is our turn
Warhound sucks compared to Immortals or Archons. Just because Warhound is usable pretty much only in TvP. Archons and Immortals can be used in every matchup.
1. It's ugly 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like 4. No AA
1. I say it's good looking, now what... 2. It will join the land based ranged attack units with no micro abilities like the Hellion, Hydralisk, Colossus and Immortal. All of the those units do require micro to be useful and I think the Warhound will as well. As a matter of fact the Warhound does have a spell casting ability that utilized correctly will increase the demise of your enemy if you are focusing its fire.
If you are going to use the Warhound vs siege tanks you'll have spread them out (requires micro), then attack and focusing anti-mech fire (micro). I would think that Warhounds will only be useful as a tank busting unit in open field battles in the higher echelon of play. As tanks will still decimate any unit that will go through a choke and will still be useful with supporting units.
3. I say it's does, now what... 4. While your at it, lets make the Hellion shoot units in the air too.
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?
the fuck is this shit.
If you're going mech, you're not going bio. So you have nothing to micro when you go mech. They should give zerg and protoss more micro-able units, you know. To make the game interesting!!???
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.
I agree that Terran could use more units that don't need babysitting, but that doesn't mean the units can't be more interesting. I like the concept of the battle hellion because it can act as a tank (which Terran needed) and can be a-moved, but it's interesting because it can transform into a hellion which is used in a completely different way.
Although the Warhound will probably require targeting micro to make sure it's hitting armored units, it still can be more interesting. For example the immortal is very similar where it can't hit air and is supposed to be anti-armor, but the immortal has hardened shields making it more interesting.
guess why they are giving some a click units to terra and some microintensive units to the other factions......yes you are right, because terra is at the moment way harder to micro then the other two races, so they want to even it out....good job by blizzard
and if they would delete every ugly looking unit fromt he game, they would have to delete the hole zerg race.....even their buildings look ugly....so, who the fuck gives a shit about how good a unit looks like....
On August 15 2012 05:27 PauseBreak wrote: Great conclusive argument points from the SC community.
1. Its iconic.
2. Its ugly.
No wonder Blizzard doesn't listen more to the community. =\
Read the fucking thread +the TvP beta reveal thread, good posts have been made as to why people don't like the Warhound, and indeed the entire design philosophy that Blizzard are pursuing.
Have played some low-masters games at Hots custom map, and can say, that TvP is extremily interesting without warhounds: mmm+viking+ghost+mines with a lot of control from both sides. Protoss feels kinda "everywhere and nowhere" at same time, quite cool to play and watch. TvZ is pure bio + hellions only, because of abduct on thors/tanks and extreme mobility of zerg overall with ability to strike from many places. And locusts are cool. Hellions are amazing too, marine-tank-hellion with BF I think can be standard comp. If warhound will be removed I'd be happy.
On August 15 2012 05:27 PauseBreak wrote: Great conclusive argument points from the SC community.
1. Its iconic.
2. Its ugly.
No wonder Blizzard doesn't listen more to the community. =\
I don't understand how either of those points aren't important. Also a lot of the responses (although slightly buried in jibberish) are constructive/suggestive.
I'm kind of upset that he included the part about it being ugly, because that is the only thing people are commenting on. Also if blizzard takes anything away from this, it's going to be that we don't like things that are ugly.
Just give me back the Blizzcon version of the Warhound with the anti-air missiles and maybe change the appearance (even making it swivel at the torso would be cool). That would satisfy me.
My least favorite thing about the Warhound is something I'm not seeing that much in this thread.
While there's certainly units in both BW and WoL that aren't used in every matchup, the Warhound is the first one I know of that is designed from the ground up to never be used against one race. To me, one of the things that's made SC special is 3 unique races all balanced with each other, when most other RTSs can't even pull that off with 2.
Blizzard showing a willingness to balance the matchups independently from each other scares me.
Sc2 has a lot of design fails this is one of them, It needs to be changed! I really like(d) watching WoL even though a lot of people, BW elitists said that it's not spectator friendly. I found enjoyment in it I hope it won't change with HotS but right now it looks like it will, if mech will be viable and these non-microable units take place.
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.
It is not only A-move, it is a Marauder built from the Factory, filling the exact same role, except it deals extra damage vs mechanical instead of armored, so it won't be good against Roaches and Ultralisks. Or Zerg in general.
On August 15 2012 05:26 sVnteen wrote: oh god guys.... pls wait for the beta before you complain PLS
And if it still sucks then what? "we should have said something before it got there" or "wait for patch changes" or "give it time" or "wait for the next expansion"
Blizzard showed the game so we can see it and form an opinion.
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.
It is not only A-move, it is a Marauder built from the Factory, filling the exact same role, except it deals extra damage vs mechanical instead of armored, so it won't be good against Roaches and Ultralisks. Or Zerg in general.
It is terrible.
they obviously wanted to give terran a mech option vs protoss because they can already mech vs zerg, that being said mines/warhound seem way too cost efficient. they have to do reduce the dps of warhounds and mines shouldnt be able to target workers/air units
p.s: i only watched 5mins of the battle report, didnt see the terran make any mines but im assuming they still have it
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.
It is not only A-move, it is a Marauder built from the Factory, filling the exact same role, except it deals extra damage vs mechanical instead of armored, so it won't be good against Roaches and Ultralisks. Or Zerg in general.
It is terrible.
they obviously wanted to give terran a mech option vs protoss because they can already mech vs zerg, that being said mines/warhound seem way too cost efficient. they have to do reduce the dps of warhounds and mines shouldnt be able to target workers/air units
p.s: i only watched 5mins of the battle report, didnt see the terran make any mines but im assuming they still have it
So instead of the solution being something to counter Zealots, which is the problem, they decided to introduce the Warhound too, to "break tank lines." Because apparently having lines of tanks in strategic positions is less fun that A-moving two balls together (which Terran can already do in TvT with Bio).
How bout this instead of the Warhound and Battle Hellion. Remove the Thor (or keep it) and put in the Goliath II or whatever, make it armored and give it something like 160 hp with 2 armor, and do 25 damage per second vs light and 10 damage per second vs everything else, while giving it a powerful anti-air attack with an upgrade to make it do splash damage. And then we've fixed the problems with Terran Mech with a single unit, instead of introducing all these new problems with 2 units. And you can actually use the Goliath II vs Zerg to counter Mutalisks. You'd probably have to remove the light tag from Hydras though.
On August 15 2012 05:27 PauseBreak wrote: Great conclusive argument points from the SC community.
1. Its iconic.
2. Its ugly.
No wonder Blizzard doesn't listen more to the community. =\
You are oh so wrong dude. Brood War veterans mostly give insightful info and Blizzard or DBrowder they don't listen to community they just blindly defend what they've created. Everytime I read some good article I feel like a part of me is dying (SC2 sense). They took out so many skillful things, like moving shot. The unit are clumping which is not pleasing to the eye and affects gameplay also it's not looking natural (very easy to solve this, a guy showed it on a replay). etc. etc. Yesterday I've read a great conclusive article about mech and it really made sense. No bullshit, no whine, just analyse. Some rotten apples spoil a good bunch. Damn dem blizzarders they did no progress at all. I lost faith in my no1 company after Diablo 3 and I'm afraid they might fuck HotS up. I' ll play it for sure, but it also might be a short experience as I don't give a sh.... about campaign. In the long run I don't think SC2 will be very successful with what we got. The player base is thinning every season. Dota 2 has more functions in beta than the game that's out for 2 years and I think it will eat it as an esports. LoL is already better in terms of viewership. Blizzard is stuck in their cave and it seems they have no plans to move out soon. Maybe this whole Bobby Kotick theory is true. EDIT: SC2 is overrated and overhyped.
I agree the visual design of the warhound is ugly. And as a counter argument to the OP, the look of the unit does matter. A hydralisk just wouldn't be a hydralisk if it doesn't look as organic and menacing for example. Units have to look cool as well as possessing a unique flavour to the play style, the visual appeal in front of the gameplay does matter.
On August 15 2012 05:39 SrJoSeZ wrote: Warhound = Totally ugly, feels like a bio unit. The designer(s) need to learn more about Aesthetics. Totally bad design! Is not a interesting unit.
Predator (Terran campaing unit) could be more interesting :D
How it it different from a Goliath? Both of them walk, both of them shoot stuff. Or is it mech because it was in BW and its ok then. How about the vulture? Sure the vulture is longer, but they both shoot stuff. The vulture puts down mines too, but it does shoot.
I love the ever shifting definition of "mech" and what is good and bad in SC2.
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.
It is not only A-move, it is a Marauder built from the Factory, filling the exact same role, except it deals extra damage vs mechanical instead of armored, so it won't be good against Roaches and Ultralisks. Or Zerg in general.
It is terrible.
they obviously wanted to give terran a mech option vs protoss because they can already mech vs zerg, that being said mines/warhound seem way too cost efficient. they have to do reduce the dps of warhounds and mines shouldnt be able to target workers/air units
p.s: i only watched 5mins of the battle report, didnt see the terran make any mines but im assuming they still have it
Naturally there will likely be a lot of balance tweaking in the beta and beyond. It's just nice to let Terran have mech options vs. Protoss.
After seeing terran, i think the blizzard designers are big fans of transfromers. Tbh i don't get the point of the warhound, i thought it was so suppossed to be an antiair unit, like the goliath in bw. But making a mech version marauder why will you get tanks, just for the range? After seeing all the new units, i don't think any of this units really fits in the game. I hope hots will be a big fail. sry
Honestly, I liked the original plans for it better when it replaced the Thor. I can't believe it's back for HotS. It's wonky and terrible, and Blizzard has said that they don't like it. Yet, for some reason, the are bringing it back with no changes.
Also, I don't see how a Protoss is going to stop a battle-hellion/warhound army. It will roll everything that isn't stargate, and sky toss is ass against Terran.
On August 15 2012 06:32 WeRRa wrote: After seeing terran, i think the blizzard designers are big fans of transfromers. Tbh i don't get the point of the warhound, i thought it was so suppossed to be an antiair unit, like the goliath in bw. But making a mech version marauder why will you get tanks, just for the range? After seeing all the new units, i don't think any of this units really fits in the game. I hope hots will be a big fail. sry
Why would you hope it's a failure? Why would you not hope that your perceptions are actually incorrect and that HotS will be awesome?
On August 15 2012 05:27 PauseBreak wrote: Great conclusive argument points from the SC community.
1. Its iconic.
2. Its ugly.
No wonder Blizzard doesn't listen more to the community. =\
Oh noes people saying there opinions on a community forum on a thread that specifically asks for that communities opinions on the thing that the opinions were given for? YOUR ALL IDIOTS BLIZZARD HATES YOU
With these stats, it is safe to say that the warhound would be able to kite marines unless they stimmed. Even then, with such long range and so much damage per volly, it is doubtful that would be a good idea.
You like/don't like a unit that may be implemented into the game... so what? I don't get the idea behind this thread, what are you trying to accomplish?
On August 15 2012 06:32 WeRRa wrote: After seeing terran, i think the blizzard designers are big fans of transfromers. Tbh i don't get the point of the warhound, i thought it was so suppossed to be an antiair unit, like the goliath in bw. But making a mech version marauder why will you get tanks, just for the range? After seeing all the new units, i don't think any of this units really fits in the game. I hope hots will be a big fail. sry
Why would you hope it's a failure? Why would you not hope that your perceptions are actually incorrect and that HotS will be awesome?
I don't get people sometimes.
Because then maybe the Blizzard developers will actually learn. We're at the point where we can't hope for unexpected success anymore. Blizzard has made a long string of terrible design decisions (between both WoL and D3) and they need a fucking wake-up call or this game is going to be dead.
I think the Warhound is fine if it stays as fast as it is right now. Just balance out the DPS and you'll have a unit fun to micro simply because it's fast.
It doesn't feel mech-y? I don't care at all, I don't like mech ;D
On August 15 2012 06:48 Asmodeusx wrote: Look at that, a thread full of game designers.
You like/don't like a unit that may be implemented into the game... so what? I don't get the idea behind this thread, what are you trying to accomplish?
Oh, they have ideas. Vague idea like:
- Make it a mech unit!(WTF does that mean)
- Make it require micro!(I always though micro was based on the match up between two units and their numbers, not the unit itself)
- Make it pretty!(have you seen anyone in the terran race, looks they are not going for)
So yeah, Blizzard should do that, whatever that is.
They should remove the Warhound and replace it by the 'Mountain King'.
That would be almost exactly the same unit as in WC3, so it would take easily 50 supply of units to kill. The only difference would be that 'Storm Bolt' would get a new animation, a 50 second long cinematic, as spells in FFX tend to have.
During this, the game is paused for both players, while they watch the awe-inspiring Storm Bolt hit its target. Cooldown should stay the same, so once a Terran has a factory, we'd spend most of the time watching the 50 second Storm Bolt animation.
I feel like I'm one of the only people who absolutely love the warhound and its design. I'm actually switching to terran because the warhound, along with battle hellion and widow mine, make it seem like terran will be tons of fun to play. Mech is the future.
I would prefer warhound be slightly weaker somehow, and have the tank buffed, to avoid the mech composition from being warhound dominated.
otherwise, the warhound is pretty interesting despite so many people saying it's just a marauder
the supply and cost is interesting, giving it uses in TvZ even though zerg has no mechanical units thors will still see use in TvP as they will still have some specific situations they are useful for
warhound in TvT... not sure at all. What's with the breaking siege ling line thing? You want it to be mass warhounds vs mass warhounds? what?
But yes please change the look of the warhound. When I was looking at it with the rest of the mech army in the battle report, it wasn't so bad I guess. But it doesn't look cool at all! How come protoss units can look cool but not terran? Haha... please use a better model <_> (probably too late though...)
With almost everyone saying the Warhound is ugly, there is no way Blizzard doesn't change the model. Not even considering the balance or easiness of the unit, we should at the very least get something that looks cool.
i'm a bit afraid when terran comes with this warhound/battle hellion composition against protoss and there is nearly nothing that can kill it? stalkers and immorts get killed by warhounds and zealots are being mowed away by those hellions. I'm just thinking that 'hmmm if the warhound doesn't have AA would it be a direct counter to it is voids? I'm not saying it's op but just that protoss might get problems dealing this composition. Well we just have to wait until beta comes and see!
On August 15 2012 07:30 TC_Beynbio wrote: i'm a bit afraid when terran comes with this warhound/battle hellion composition against protoss and there is nearly nothing that can kill it? stalkers and immorts get killed by warhounds and zealots are being mowed away by those hellions. I'm just thinking that 'hmmm if the warhound doesn't have AA would it be a direct counter to it is voids? I'm not saying it's op but just that protoss might get problems dealing this composition. Well we just have to wait until beta comes and see!
If you choose stargate, it seems they want you to be able to use tempests. I think at first it will be hard to figure out how to use the tempests to deal with them though, since they do so low DPS. Of course they can get vikings against that, but then you can tech to HT to storm them and/or use blink stalkers to help out. With the long range of the tempest, it will be useful for preventing vikings from poking in too easily and poking out. If they engage, they can get stormed, then they have to run while being hit by the tempests 1-2 more times. Same with when they want to engage. This will cause some space for blink stalkers to attack the vikings too. Also you could use void rays. Again, this forces vikings. Ultimately though, this would force tanks to be added, to help deal with the stalkers by giving his vikings cover from the stalkers.
With robo tech, you can use zealots, sentries for FF (unless they can easily target haywire at you?), colossi to deal splash.
With templar tech, you can use HT archon zealot sentry. Storm for aoe to deal with hellions so your zealots don't get all sniped before the battle, and storm for during the battle.
But yes, hellion warhound does seem to strong, especially considering you don't even need tanks with that (it's a mobile mech composition!!!)
Hopefully you can still have different styles of mech as there are with bio... aggressive and defensive. But I think hellion/warhound may be too good. This is another reason why I feel the warhound should be nerfed a bit and have the tank be buffed.
they are way over doing it with the mech units in HOTS mech in tvp wasn't that bad before if you took the bue flame helion dmg nerf and tank seige mode dmg nerf back it would prob be playable. those are slight changes that would totally change mech tvp. seems like by adding battle helions, spider mines, and the warhound they are really over compensating. i dont really see how the warhound fits in the game. instead of taking small steps to fix something they see as broken, they are taking a bunch of huge uncessary steps.
....they decided to introduce the Warhound too, to "break tank lines." Because apparently having lines of tanks in strategic positions is less fun that A-moving two balls together
Blizzard is approaching this whole "Micro-intensiveness" problem of terran from the completely wrong angle. Giving all 3 races a-move possibilities utterly kills the game from the competitive standpoint. Who would want to see two pros a-move their armies into one another? Sure, they're going to be slightly bigger than your armies due to superior macro, but when there's no micro to be found it becomes utterly uninteresting.
Imagine if every non-mirror matchup in HotS was PvZ. That's what this expansion is shaping up to be.
The warhound's going to be a great unit to play with. Unlike marines which die in 2 fungals, the warhound will be able to take more punishment before going down and has better range to take down infestors. They can be an alternative to marines to pair with siege tanks. It's fast which means splitting and kiting will be efficacious and exciting to watch. It'd be neat if the Warhound could be given a jump jet abillity, but then it would overlap with the Reaper.
the warhound is absolutely awful in TvT when both players go mech, in the sense that it's basically a warhound vs warhound game. They got to change that somehow.
On August 15 2012 06:32 WeRRa wrote: After seeing terran, i think the blizzard designers are big fans of transfromers. Tbh i don't get the point of the warhound, i thought it was so suppossed to be an antiair unit, like the goliath in bw. But making a mech version marauder why will you get tanks, just for the range? After seeing all the new units, i don't think any of this units really fits in the game. I hope hots will be a big fail. sry
Why would you hope it's a failure? Why would you not hope that your perceptions are actually incorrect and that HotS will be awesome?
I don't get people sometimes.
Because then maybe the Blizzard developers will actually learn. We're at the point where we can't hope for unexpected success anymore. Blizzard has made a long string of terrible design decisions (between both WoL and D3) and they need a fucking wake-up call or this game is going to be dead.
Learn what? The only reason they'd need to learn something is if it's a failure. Otherwise, it's a success and there is nothing to learn; only things to keep improving.
To explain in more detail: to want Blizzard to learn something in the context you're using, it'd first require a failure. HotS is not yet released, which means the verdict on whether or not it'll be a failure is still out. In this case, you're hoping for a failure to force Blizzard to learn something in order to avoid future failure. It's cyclic logic and destructive for both parties for you to think in this way. More than that, though, it just doesn't make sense to want Blizzard to fail, unless you're some weird hater that really doesn't like them or has some personal vendetta or something.
Being critical to help avoid failure in the first place is one thing. Actively desiring that failure to occur is completely opposite. If you're actually worried about the game dying, seeing it fail is probably the last thing you should be hoping for.
On August 15 2012 07:54 Psychobabas wrote: the warhound is absolutely awful in TvT when both players go mech, in the sense that it's basically a warhound vs warhound game. They got to change that somehow.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't people noted that marauders beat warhounds? If that's the case, then we'd have warhounds > siege lines > marauders > warhounds, no? In other words, warhound wouldn't be at the top of the food chain like roaches are in ZvZ.
I'm also not sure how you're using declaratives like "is" when the game isn't even in beta yet.
I don't understand the complaints about the battle hellion/ warhound comp or the warhound being OP. The Toss dealt with it pretty cost efficiently with the Tempests. He just threw the game away when he moved into the beefier Terran army. If you have air control you have to use that advantage and not throw away units.
On August 15 2012 09:16 scaban84 wrote: I don't understand the complaints about the battle hellion/ warhound comp or the warhound being OP. The Toss dealt with it pretty cost efficiently with the Tempests. He just threw the game away when he moved into the beefier Terran army. If you have air control you have to use that advantage and not throw away units.
Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit.
I don't get the hate for a-move units. In BW I played Protoss and my plan was to make a lot of Dragoons and a-move them. When I played other races I a-moved their stuff too. Having units that a casual player like me could a-move didn't stop pro players from getting a lot of micro out of other units or even making the units I a-moved better by microing them.
To answer the thread title: Until further information is obtained(like beta playing), I believe the warhound is fine as a concept, it's looks are fine, it doesn't feel like mech but nothing but mech feels like mech, and it's good.
To elaborate:
Although the warhound appears to be an A-move unit(Especially with it's auto cast ability), it's ability to kite unstimmed marines(and presumably zealots while threatening stalkers, my opinion that the looks of the unit are nearly irrelevant, and the lack of empirical testing(the only kind we really have in Sc2) make it so the warhound is fine.
On August 15 2012 09:16 scaban84 wrote: I don't understand the complaints about the battle hellion/ warhound comp or the warhound being OP. The Toss dealt with it pretty cost efficiently with the Tempests. He just threw the game away when he moved into the beefier Terran army. If you have air control you have to use that advantage and not throw away units.
Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit.
You remind of political ads on in america right now. With micro, tempests will be able to outlast a stalker in battle by quite a bit and be able to pressure positions, something stalkers do not have. They have potential, they are not "shit unit" because at +3 they do less dps than a +0 stalker. Although that statement sounds good enough to say the tempest is worthless, it really doesn't take into account the utility it brings(which is funny because if you talk about the stalkers DPS in comparison to other things it seems like a shit unit too, but the metagame proved us wrong).
On August 15 2012 09:16 scaban84 wrote: I don't understand the complaints about the battle hellion/ warhound comp or the warhound being OP. The Toss dealt with it pretty cost efficiently with the Tempests. He just threw the game away when he moved into the beefier Terran army. If you have air control you have to use that advantage and not throw away units.
Efficiently? Do you see how long it takes tempests to kill tanks? By the time they kill one three more are on the field, At +3 weapons they do LESS dps than +0 stalkers. Trash unit.
Way to exagerate. With 2 Tempest, you'll be killing a siege tank every 15 seconds, which with either force a retreat, or an attack. It's a perfect unit for pushing/forcing an engagement on your terms, and will be a great harassment unit as well.
It's just a less interesting version of the marauder. The marauder, at least, can stim, is faster, is cheap enough to risk losing in a drop, and kills buildings fast enough to make said drops exciting.
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?
Because at a pro level, players are already able to micro units without sacrificing macro. Therefore, this would make for a higher skill ceiling for the whole game.
Warhound is just a visually boring unit. Its like the new mass marauder but not black so therefore not cool. They could of easily given back the old thor attack power and just made strike cannon animation a bit faster or made the range longer. Or made a new variant of the thor/goliath that doesnt look like ass.
I completely find the unit ugly, silly and well for lack of a better word 'dumb' It's basically the kind of unit I'd expect in Command and Conquer or Supreme Commander - sorry Dustin but that's how it appears. The auto targetting of mech units makes it feel completely designed for newbies or mid skilled players as a solution they never needed.
Long story short, I dislike pretty much EVERYTHING about that unit. It just doesn't even look or feel like something you'd expect from the Starcraft / Terran universe as part of the single player lore. Just such a "hey guys check out this unit my kid designed" feel to it. :/
There are some problems with siege tanks in sc2, it was one of the key components for all matchups in BW. the only time it is not viable now is PvT. Something should be done to make it viable, warhound just looks like an easy mode unit to me, is cool and all, but looks noobish
I really am not sure why people seem to be in favour of a-move units. Terran is much more fun to watch and play purely because of the micro style. Unfortunately the way the warhound seems to work is that it'll just autotarget mech units and then completely roflstomp them. This really seems silly to me...
It's a really poorly designed units and if it goes through I genuinely think we'll see battle hellion warhound (viking) compositions a moving their way to insane victory which cant surely be what anyone wants?
Physically the unit just looks like a total joke, but that's completely an opinion and I suppose people can have differing ones but I highly doubt anyone will really like the look of it...
This is just not the way I want to see Starcraft II going. I really would want the Warhound to be scrapped...I thought the whole idea of HOTS units was to break up the deathball, not add hilariously ridiculous units that destroy all mechanical units in one fell sweep?
In general the mech "deathball" isn't nearly as bad as say a Protoss deathball because it relies highly on positioning, patience, leapfrogging and strategy, but this warhound, if you've played the custom maps, seems to be completely replacing tanks in the compositions in favour of battlehellion warhound as it accomplishes similar dps and has very high mobility. Mech doesn't even almost need this unit, I really do think the battle hellion might have been enough to help mech become viable in the TvP matchup.
It still also doesn't solve the initial "problem" of mutalisks against mech. I'm not sure who was having this problem but there seems to have been a design hiccup somewhere when they didn't get AA...
I disagree with points 1, 2, and 3, as well as think that they're irrelevant.
That said, I agree that it's a problem that they don't have anti-air. Not that in itself, but rather it's virtually no different from a marauder which is an anti-armored ground-to-ground unit.
Giving warhound anti-air capabilities wouldn't be a good idea though in my opinion because it just makes for a massable a-move unit that can deal with anything which is quite lame.
On August 15 2012 10:17 MassacrisM wrote: I really hate it. Another very poorly designed unit that looks like so little effort and thought was put in.
I swear if Blizzard lets this one go through, they're gonna hate themselves like they are doing now with the Colossi.
The colossus might be a cheap, simple unit - it goes up cliffs AND has long range - but doesn't attack air - but it DOES look cool and it does seem like something the Protoss might have - it fits in the lore and it's kinda sweet as a unit from a purely cool factor.
I won't deny the 'skills' the unit has seem a little odd, compared to how BW was balanced but it's not as bad as people say.
The Warhound however is completely out of Warzone 2100, C&C and Supreme Commander, it's just....yeah
how the fuck u guys QQ balance for the game hasn't beta yet ? C'mon it was just Battle report where blizzard show off the new units not the real meta game
It's dumb, A-movey, and I already have marauders that I don't like. What do I need a bigger one made of metal for?
Blizzard really missed the mark here. Terran didn't need more A-move units to make it easier to play. The difficulty of Terran is what makes it an attractive challenge to play, and interesting to watch. We should've seen the other races lose some of their dumb units and become harder to play rather than retain their low skill ceilings and dull styles. HotS was a chance for Blizzard to fix their mistakes, but they chose the easy road and dumbed down Terran instead.
I have two suggestions for the Warhound that might make it more interesting and more balanced also.
1. Remove the auto-cast on the Haywire Missle, make it manual cast only.
This change will eliminate a lot of the "a-click" stigma this unit has attached to it, by forcing the player using them to manually target mechanical units with the Haywire Missle, simply a-moving them will be a waste of their potential.
2. Change Haywire Missle from a cooldown ability to an energy ability similar to Graviton Beam. This gives Terran and Protoss players an additional counter to the unit in the form of Feedback and EMP. I think this dynamic would be a lot of fun to watch.
On August 15 2012 11:05 Vindicare605 wrote: I have two suggestions for the Warhound that might make it more interesting and more balanced also.
1. Remove the auto-cast on the Haywire Missle, make it manual cast only.
This change will eliminate a lot of the "a-click" stigma this unit has attached to it, by forcing the player using them to manually target mechanical units with the Haywire Missle, simply a-moving them will be a waste of their potential.
2. Change Haywire Missle from a cooldown ability to an energy ability similar to Graviton Beam. This gives Terran and Protoss players an additional counter to the unit in the form of Feedback and EMP. I think this dynamic would be a lot of fun to watch.
if you made it an energy based spell, you could just mass up the energy on your warhounds and then spam out shots to win battles at will. While its cooldown based you have to rely on good engagements and timing rather than the fact you can just spam it. Defo think that auto cast should go tho, during a battle most terran micro revolves around focus firing and kiting, not too much spell casting. I think that micro element is missing from the terran micro arsenal, as most ghost spells are used before the battle and then to clean up at the end. So there is no real mid battle spell casting currently.
Do people not realize that haywire missiles being autocast is just a work around to allow a 6 second CD weapon attack? Haywire missiles are designed to be used on CD, like a weapon. They are not supposed to be a spell that eats a resource, like HSM or yamato. Blizzards wants it to be a long cooldown attack, ala the tempest attack. But they implemented the haywires as an autocast spell rather than giving the Warhounds a second, longer cooldown ground attack that only hits mechanical. It is ridiculous to call for the removal of the autocast once you realize haywires are supposed to be a complementary anti ground attack.
On August 15 2012 11:28 Lactomar wrote: Do people not realize that haywire missiles being autocast is just a work around to allow a 6 second CD weapon attack? Haywire missiles are designed to be used on CD, like a weapon. They are not supposed to be a spell that eats a resource, like HSM or yamato. Blizzards wants it to be a long cooldown attack, ala the tempest attack. But they implemented the haywires as an autocast spell rather than giving the Warhounds a second, longer cooldown ground attack that only hits mechanical. It is ridiculous to call for the removal of the autocast once you realize haywires are supposed to be a complementary anti ground attack.
I think everyone knows that is the intended design. The problem is that it's not a good design.
The battle report showcasing warhounds was pretty bad, but I'm reserving judgement until beta as to whether this unit is good or bad or needs to be removed. I may be in the minority here, but I like the idea of a general purpose/backbone mech unit, although I think it could be a little too large and bulky at the moment.
Mech honestly did not need an anti-mech walker which is basically a marauder on roids. It's a bad design and won't make battles more interesting.
Widow mines were a great decision. Battle hellions are pretty good too, but the warhound is just silly.
Now, if it had a self-cast defensive matrix instead of an anti-mech cannon, (just an example), it would be way more interesting because it would give mech the ability to do a hardpoint bust on enemy spread tank lines, and would provide a good all-around shield unit (as opposed to the hellion which is pretty much just anti-light, doesn't have the armor needed to really do a great job tanking after the lings/chargelots are dealt with), and would make mech more viable. But this... this is just uninteresting.
it's like an anorexic gumby scv that you dont have to control at all. seriously. control click a warhound and a move it into the army and it does everything to its full potential.
this is what i can gather from the battle report and from the MLG stuff
On August 15 2012 10:17 MassacrisM wrote: I really hate it. Another very poorly designed unit that looks like so little effort and thought was put in.
I swear if Blizzard lets this one go through, they're gonna hate themselves like they are doing now with the Colossi.
The colossus might be a cheap, simple unit - it goes up cliffs AND has long range - but doesn't attack air - but it DOES look cool and it does seem like something the Protoss might have - it fits in the lore and it's kinda sweet as a unit from a purely cool factor.
I won't deny the 'skills' the unit has seem a little odd, compared to how BW was balanced but it's not as bad as people say.
The Warhound however is completely out of Warzone 2100, C&C and Supreme Commander, it's just....yeah
Sure, the feel of the unit can fit the Protoss, but the problem is the balance design. The entire Protoss race is designed around this unit; you simply cannot get past the early game without going down this specific tech path at some point (which is far different from saying that "oh every T has to get Marines!"). The Colossus is also poorl designed because there is no micro potential and it promotes (requires) deathball styles.
how the fuck u guys QQ balance for the game hasn't beta yet ? C'mon it was just Battle report where blizzard show off the new units not the real meta game
People are complaining about the fundamental design aspects of the unit, not the metagame.
On August 15 2012 10:17 MassacrisM wrote: I really hate it. Another very poorly designed unit that looks like so little effort and thought was put in.
I swear if Blizzard lets this one go through, they're gonna hate themselves like they are doing now with the Colossi.
The colossus might be a cheap, simple unit - it goes up cliffs AND has long range - but doesn't attack air - but it DOES look cool and it does seem like something the Protoss might have - it fits in the lore and it's kinda sweet as a unit from a purely cool factor.
I won't deny the 'skills' the unit has seem a little odd, compared to how BW was balanced but it's not as bad as people say.
The Warhound however is completely out of Warzone 2100, C&C and Supreme Commander, it's just....yeah
Sure, the feel of the unit can fit the Protoss, but the problem is the balance design. The entire Protoss race is designed around this unit; you simply cannot get past the early game without going down this specific tech path at some point (which is far different from saying that "oh every T has to get Marines!"). The Colossus is also poorl designed because there is no micro potential and it promotes (requires) deathball styles.
There definitely is micro potential, it's just less obvious. Watch any high level PvP that gets to late game and you'll see what I mean. Hell, one of the coolest things to watch is warp prism/colossus micro.
On August 15 2012 10:17 MassacrisM wrote: I really hate it. Another very poorly designed unit that looks like so little effort and thought was put in.
I swear if Blizzard lets this one go through, they're gonna hate themselves like they are doing now with the Colossi.
The colossus might be a cheap, simple unit - it goes up cliffs AND has long range - but doesn't attack air - but it DOES look cool and it does seem like something the Protoss might have - it fits in the lore and it's kinda sweet as a unit from a purely cool factor.
I won't deny the 'skills' the unit has seem a little odd, compared to how BW was balanced but it's not as bad as people say.
The Warhound however is completely out of Warzone 2100, C&C and Supreme Commander, it's just....yeah
Sure, the feel of the unit can fit the Protoss, but the problem is the balance design. The entire Protoss race is designed around this unit; you simply cannot get past the early game without going down this specific tech path at some point (which is far different from saying that "oh every T has to get Marines!"). The Colossus is also poorl designed because there is no micro potential and it promotes (requires) deathball styles.
There definitely is micro potential, it's just less obvious. Watch any high level PvP that gets to late game and you'll see what I mean. Hell, one of the coolest things to watch is warp prism/colossus micro.
On August 15 2012 11:32 Wrathsc2 wrote: the beta isnt even out yet TT
But, at least if were vocal with out opinions Blizzard will have more time resolving the issues, or at least look into them. That's the whole point of giving us battle reports.
"wait until the beta" is not a good idea. Beta's aren't for testing units and decided if they should be removed. That's something that CAN happen, but the ideal is to remove them before the game has progressed this far into testing. Beta testing is to remove bugs. At this point, features in the game are supposed to stay the same. Because of the way sc2 has to be balanced, this obviously isn't possible, but they will be very reluctant to remove whole units during beta testing. I like it though, I think it looks badass. I really think terran should be the deathball army if anything. At least terran can be caught off guard because the siege tanks have to be sieged. At that point it can be a game of tactics and strategy. Whereas if Zerg gets that ultimate BL army there's really not much to can do without some sort of unusual advantage. Same thing for Protoss really. Warhound and hellion are designed to kill protoss deathballs. Tempest is designed to kill terran deathballs. Seems cool to me.
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?
Because at a pro level, players are already able to micro units without sacrificing macro. Therefore, this would make for a higher skill ceiling for the whole game.
Not true. Any action you do sacrifices something else. Anyone less than the top level is not doing well, and this is evident in tournament results. Giving terran players more micro does NOT make the skill ceiling higher for the entire game, but only for terran. However, this "skill" is not exactly directly related to how well they do. Anyone who performs less than the top level (can't micro good enough) does poorly, but they can't just buff terran or else the top players who CAN micro really well will juts stomp (as seen in the past, and even uncommonly in the current day).
On August 15 2012 11:32 Wrathsc2 wrote: the beta isnt even out yet TT
But, at least if were vocal with out opinions Blizzard will have more time resolving the issues, or at least look into them. That's the whole point of giving us battle reports.
i get being vocal about the looks. But a lot of people are saying its just an A-move unit and that its 1 dimensional. Everyone said this about the marauder. but look at the unit now. Its awesome when tanking bane damage. Doing drop micro to kill colossi, target firing tanks while marines handle hellions and so on. The unit may look one dimensional, but honestly the marauder is fucking awesome to watch in the hands of a good player. What i am saying is, give it a chance.
On August 15 2012 10:17 MassacrisM wrote: I really hate it. Another very poorly designed unit that looks like so little effort and thought was put in.
I swear if Blizzard lets this one go through, they're gonna hate themselves like they are doing now with the Colossi.
The colossus might be a cheap, simple unit - it goes up cliffs AND has long range - but doesn't attack air - but it DOES look cool and it does seem like something the Protoss might have - it fits in the lore and it's kinda sweet as a unit from a purely cool factor.
I won't deny the 'skills' the unit has seem a little odd, compared to how BW was balanced but it's not as bad as people say.
The Warhound however is completely out of Warzone 2100, C&C and Supreme Commander, it's just....yeah
Sure, the feel of the unit can fit the Protoss, but the problem is the balance design. The entire Protoss race is designed around this unit; you simply cannot get past the early game without going down this specific tech path at some point (which is far different from saying that "oh every T has to get Marines!"). The Colossus is also poorl designed because there is no micro potential and it promotes (requires) deathball styles.
There definitely is micro potential, it's just less obvious. Watch any high level PvP that gets to late game and you'll see what I mean. Hell, one of the coolest things to watch is warp prism/colossus micro.
I really hope you're being sarcastic.
No I'm really not. Every unit in the game has micro potential, by sheer virtue of a controlled unit being flat out better than an uncontrolled unit. Late game Colossus wars are completely about positioning and army control, a large portion of that is about pulling back and pushing forwards with your colossi, along with target firing the correct units.
Its attack looks weak, it's like shooting small needles. It looks ESPECIALLY Weak when it is kiting because you can't even see the animation of the "recoil" from the firing anymore.
they need to make it sound and look more powerful. Just like the siege tank, whenever you hear the siege tank fire, you feel uneasy whe breaking the siege lines.
The balance/mech style problem: I think warhound will allows a mech-ing terran opening up timing attacks for the mech style. As well as able to secure expansions earlier. But I don't think timing attack suits mech style
Good points: it allows terran to have a strong late game army. mech deathball in WoL is one of the strongest deathball in the whole game, but only viable in TvT and TvZ simply because toss has a much easier time to deal with it. So with this, mech can be used in all matchup which I like a lot.
Warhound also allows terran to expand earlier, rather than relying on siege tank and banshee to buy time for a third. Not sure how it will affect the balance but mech will be different to what we used to see.
On August 15 2012 11:32 Wrathsc2 wrote: the beta isnt even out yet TT
But, at least if were vocal with out opinions Blizzard will have more time resolving the issues, or at least look into them. That's the whole point of giving us battle reports.
i get being vocal about the looks. But a lot of people are saying its just an A-move unit and that its 1 dimensional. Everyone said this about the marauder. but look at the unit now. Its awesome when tanking bane damage. Doing drop micro to kill colossi, target firing tanks while marines handle hellions and so on. The unit may look one dimensional, but honestly the marauder is fucking awesome to watch in the hands of a good player. What i am saying is, give it a chance.
When people were complaining about the Marauder back in the early days, they were right. It is still a boring, generic unit that eliminates the micro potential of its targets and is entirely too powerful and effective for its cost and position in the tech tree. Yea, it has a little micro potential because it can be stupidly fast with Stim, but most of the things you mentioned can be given to just about any unit; things like being able to be dropped to harass, being able to target fire, focus firing, and proper positioning don't really consitute micro potential because every unit has this by the mere fact that it's a unit that moves. When you think of micro potential, you think of Siege Tanks (positional micro beyond the norm), Hellions (constant micro battles against Zerglings), Marines (splitting vs. splash or instant death), BW Mutas/Vultures/Wraiths/Raver + Shuttle, etc. These units have the potential to be manipulated beyond the norms of simply being a unit. When a unit such as the Roach, Marauder, Immortal, Colossus, Broodlord, Warhound, Battle Hellion, Tempest, etc. don't really have any micro capability beyond what is expected out of any unit, that is when you say that it doesn't have micro potential. This isn't even necessarily a bad thing; obviously not every single unit is going to have crazy micro potential, but when units that form the core/most important part of armies is this boring (Marauders, Roaches, Colossi), it's a problem because these are the units that we see every game.
As much as I hate the unit, we need this to replace the function of the marine and the thor as cannon fodder/damage dealers.
It's a giant piece of shit in the middle of the battlefield that's impossible not to kill first, while the actual damage dealers will survive much longer. Can't live with it, can't live without it, so it has to stay. Tanks live long enough to justify their cost, marines will be able to use them as a barrier to kite around, thors will live so much longer...Terran just needs 1 unit that can be A-moved for the sake of allowing all the other units to do their respective jobs.
On August 15 2012 13:01 imBLIND wrote: As much as I hate the unit, we need this to replace the function of the marine and the thor as cannon fodder/damage dealers.
It's a giant piece of shit in the middle of the battlefield that's impossible not to kill first, while the actual damage dealers will survive much longer. Can't live with it, can't live without it, so it has to stay. Tanks live long enough to justify their cost, marines will be able to use them as a barrier to kite around, thors will live so much longer...Terran just needs 1 unit that can be A-moved for the sake of allowing all the other units to do their respective jobs.
The missile animation looks pretty cool, but that's the only thing about it that does. It's a boring unit, in both aesthetics and gameplay. Apparently this is what they were going for (giving Terran more A-move for balance), but that doesn't make it any less disappointing.
Some decent mech AA would be really welcome. Weaker DPS vs ground than a stimmed marine, weaker DPS vs air than a viking. Provides a versatile mech unit in all the matchups. Instead terran gets a mechnical marauder to fill a role the siege tank should already be performing.
There's so much bad about the unit but instead of writing an essay on the matter, i'd rather just add my dissent to most other people's.
On August 15 2012 13:57 Absentia wrote: Some decent mech AA would be really welcome. Weaker DPS vs ground than a stimmed marine, weaker DPS vs air than a viking. Provides a versatile mech unit in all the matchups. Instead terran gets a mechnical marauder to fill a role the siege tank should already be performing.
There's so much bad about the unit but instead of writing an essay on the matter, i'd rather just add my dissent to most other people's.
The viking is intended to fill that role. Them having a separate upgrade path is a valid complaint about that, but it is a reactor-produced powerful anti-air unit with really good range, so it's not like terran doesn't have good anti-air. Terran doesn't really need more anti-air.
The role of the warhound is supposed to be a tank-line busting unit against a weak spot, so that mech vs. mech doesn't stalemate. I don't think it's necessary, but if blizzard wants to do that, I think the best way to do that would be to make it a defensively focused unit rather than a powerful damage dealer. Give them a self-cast defensive matrix instead of the missile cannon.
The argument that its an A move unit still makes no sense to me. You can still target fire with it, you can still kite with, you can still spread them out to avoid splash. Nothing makes it more A move than most units in the game.
On August 15 2012 11:05 Vindicare605 wrote: I have two suggestions for the Warhound that might make it more interesting and more balanced also.
1. Remove the auto-cast on the Haywire Missle, make it manual cast only.
This change will eliminate a lot of the "a-click" stigma this unit has attached to it, by forcing the player using them to manually target mechanical units with the Haywire Missle, simply a-moving them will be a waste of their potential.
2. Change Haywire Missle from a cooldown ability to an energy ability similar to Graviton Beam. This gives Terran and Protoss players an additional counter to the unit in the form of Feedback and EMP. I think this dynamic would be a lot of fun to watch.
Terrible idea to give any mech unit an energy bar. They already screwed mech once like that with the thor's energy bar.
On August 15 2012 13:57 Absentia wrote: Some decent mech AA would be really welcome. Weaker DPS vs ground than a stimmed marine, weaker DPS vs air than a viking. Provides a versatile mech unit in all the matchups. Instead terran gets a mechnical marauder to fill a role the siege tank should already be performing.
There's so much bad about the unit but instead of writing an essay on the matter, i'd rather just add my dissent to most other people's.
The viking is intended to fill that role. Them having a separate upgrade path is a valid complaint about that, but it is a reactor-produced powerful anti-air unit with really good range, so it's not like terran doesn't have good anti-air. Terran doesn't really need more anti-air.
The role of the warhound is supposed to be a tank-line busting unit against a weak spot, so that mech vs. mech doesn't stalemate. I don't think it's necessary, but if blizzard wants to do that, I think the best way to do that would be to make it a defensively focused unit rather than a powerful damage dealer. Give them a self-cast defensive matrix instead of the missile cannon.
Terrans get vikings reactively because the unit is one of those 'don't build it unless you need it'. It fills one role - strict AA. If you don't need them right there, the unit is a waste of resources and you're weakening your mech army. It's not interesting to play with one dimensional counter units, as should be obvious by the amount of people complaining about the warhound in this very thread. Giving mech some viable anti air doesn't do much to hurt the game - it could still be designed so that vikings are superior in the air, (in range, dps or whatever) and are still needed somewhat reactively. On the other hand it reduces the BS of 'well I didn't completely prepare for this in time' that's so prevalent in SC2's counter based game design. I don't want to build mech AA reactively all the time, I'd prefer it to be incorporated into a versatile mech unit that can keep me somewhat safe during the mid-game whilst still maintaining a level of utility late game.
The thor design is not too dissimilar from what i'm thinking except its AA is awful, has energy to be feedbacked, is supply heavy and its high dps vs ground units in combination with low movement speed makes it redundant in the face of siege tanks.
I just wrote a blog including an opinion about this!
This is how I see it. The warhound sucks. People have already gone over how it looks stupid. It serves too much as a backbone. 7 range, high dps, decent movement speed, lots of hp. The thing doesn't have any weaknesses. Needs to be changed in some way. Like at least one of those 4 things. I say change the range or the MS so that it isn't a good idea to A-Move em. I could accept the unit if it was much slower. Then it would be like a reaver. That would be fine by me. This unit is just too strong tho because it works well by itself and counters everything on the ground that battle hellions don't.
On August 15 2012 13:57 Absentia wrote: Some decent mech AA would be really welcome. Weaker DPS vs ground than a stimmed marine, weaker DPS vs air than a viking. Provides a versatile mech unit in all the matchups. Instead terran gets a mechnical marauder to fill a role the siege tank should already be performing.
There's so much bad about the unit but instead of writing an essay on the matter, i'd rather just add my dissent to most other people's.
The viking is intended to fill that role. Them having a separate upgrade path is a valid complaint about that, but it is a reactor-produced powerful anti-air unit with really good range, so it's not like terran doesn't have good anti-air. Terran doesn't really need more anti-air.
The role of the warhound is supposed to be a tank-line busting unit against a weak spot, so that mech vs. mech doesn't stalemate. I don't think it's necessary, but if blizzard wants to do that, I think the best way to do that would be to make it a defensively focused unit rather than a powerful damage dealer. Give them a self-cast defensive matrix instead of the missile cannon.
Terrans get vikings reactively because the unit is one of those 'don't build it unless you need it'. It fills one role - strict AA. If you don't need them right there, the unit is a waste of resources and you're weakening your mech army. It's not interesting to play with one dimensional counter units, as should be obvious by the amount of people complaining about the warhound in this very thread. Giving mech some viable anti air doesn't do much to hurt the game - it could still be designed so that vikings are superior in the air, (in range, dps or whatever) and are still needed somewhat reactively. On the other hand it reduces the BS of 'well I didn't completely prepare for this in time' that's so prevalent in SC2's counter based game design. I don't want to build mech AA reactively all the time, I'd prefer it to be incorporated into a versatile mech unit that can keep me somewhat safe during the mid-game whilst still maintaining a level of utility late game.
The thor design is not too dissimilar from what i'm thinking except its AA is awful, has energy to be feedbacked, is supply heavy and its high dps vs ground units in combination with low movement speed makes it redundant in the face of siege tanks.
"I didn't completely prepare for this in time" is the kind of stuff that makes Sc2 a good game. You need to prepare for things. Strategy. If you don't prepare for your opponents strategies and compositions, you shouldn't deserve to win the game. You're essentially asking for a unit that allows you to not think about what you're building. That's kind of a cop out >.>
Mech really isn't about micro except for your mech harassing units (hellions, Widow Mines, Vultures,) it's about positioning and Warhounds are going to be good for defending tanks from blinking stalkers and immortals that is their only job. As well as breaking out of Tank contains in TvT, they are a very specialized unit. They will be good for getting your units into good positions and holding those positions. I don't like them though I don't like any of the HOTS units except Oracle and Viper.
I disagree with it being a-click like. To me it looks like the terran immortal, where you have to always make sure you're focusing armored units with them, and being precious expensive units have to pull them back when they get focused.
Reposting my response on the "In Defence of Mech" blog.
You know, the Warhound could be made a lot more interesting with some simple changes..
-What if the Haywire missiles arent't autocast, and not anti mechanical ground unit. -What if they have to be manually cast, and serve as an anti air attack, this could be a Valkyrie like aoe, or a single target missile. -What if you have to produce a missile like an interceptor gets produced on a carrier, costing a small amount of minerals. -Then lastly a missile limit could be set depending on the nature and overall power of the new AA spell.
Now you have a unit that has limited AA during battles and has to be used at the correct moment vs air units, but has a certain amount of firepower to it so that the enemy has to carefully time out air strikes and movement?
Seems like a way better design that also takes away the A-move syndrome of the new unit and replaces it with strategical depth and micro (focused launch etc).
This would probably be easier than to ask Blizzard to start from scratch after working on this unit since Blizzcon 2011, and makes Mech more interesting at the same time. That coupled with some slight changes being made to the widow mine would recreate the core mechanics that made BW mech so awesome, without actually copying BW.
1. Yes the warhound may not be the most asthetically appealing unit, but honestly does the supposed bad looks even matter. I don't think so, SC2 is a strategy game after all not a game about turning our units into runyway models, but the skin is not that hard to change
I really hate the unit. The haywire missiles only targeting mechanical means this unit is useless vs Zerg, no? One dimensional design with hardcounters in mind. Hate it.
I don't care yet if the unit is A-move or whatever since the beta will show how it plays out.
Although i normally don't care much about art in a RTS game - the unit is really sluggish and ugly. They will hopefully replace it (as done before with the Night-Hawk if i remember correctly.)
On August 15 2012 13:57 Absentia wrote: Some decent mech AA would be really welcome. Weaker DPS vs ground than a stimmed marine, weaker DPS vs air than a viking. Provides a versatile mech unit in all the matchups. Instead terran gets a mechnical marauder to fill a role the siege tank should already be performing.
There's so much bad about the unit but instead of writing an essay on the matter, i'd rather just add my dissent to most other people's.
The viking is intended to fill that role. Them having a separate upgrade path is a valid complaint about that, but it is a reactor-produced powerful anti-air unit with really good range, so it's not like terran doesn't have good anti-air. Terran doesn't really need more anti-air.
The role of the warhound is supposed to be a tank-line busting unit against a weak spot, so that mech vs. mech doesn't stalemate. I don't think it's necessary, but if blizzard wants to do that, I think the best way to do that would be to make it a defensively focused unit rather than a powerful damage dealer. Give them a self-cast defensive matrix instead of the missile cannon.
Terrans get vikings reactively because the unit is one of those 'don't build it unless you need it'. It fills one role - strict AA. If you don't need them right there, the unit is a waste of resources and you're weakening your mech army. It's not interesting to play with one dimensional counter units, as should be obvious by the amount of people complaining about the warhound in this very thread. Giving mech some viable anti air doesn't do much to hurt the game - it could still be designed so that vikings are superior in the air, (in range, dps or whatever) and are still needed somewhat reactively. On the other hand it reduces the BS of 'well I didn't completely prepare for this in time' that's so prevalent in SC2's counter based game design. I don't want to build mech AA reactively all the time, I'd prefer it to be incorporated into a versatile mech unit that can keep me somewhat safe during the mid-game whilst still maintaining a level of utility late game.
The thor design is not too dissimilar from what i'm thinking except its AA is awful, has energy to be feedbacked, is supply heavy and its high dps vs ground units in combination with low movement speed makes it redundant in the face of siege tanks.
"I didn't completely prepare for this in time" is the kind of stuff that makes Sc2 a good game. You need to prepare for things. Strategy. If you don't prepare for your opponents strategies and compositions, you shouldn't deserve to win the game. You're essentially asking for a unit that allows you to not think about what you're building. That's kind of a cop out >.>
Where 'completely prepare' means 'I didn't have 20 vikings to deal with double robo into 6 colossus switch' late game TvP or 'I didn't have a vortex ready to deal with this broodlord army'. Is there anybody who genuinely finds games where player x loses because they didn't build enough vikings to beat y number of colossus interesting? Of course there's got to be some level of 'countering ' otherwise people would just build whatever they want. Yet SC2 hard counter units scale so ridiculously. Look no further than the warhound vs mechanical units at the moment. Why utilise superior strategical positioning, or bio drops to beat siege tank lines when you can build and A move warhounds. You can call building units strategy, sure, but building hard counter units to beat others? That's a cop-out in game design. It's lazy, unimaginative and undermines other elements of strategy like micro and positioning that I imagine most people find more interesting and dynamic.
You need to be able to build some units without thinking about counters (e.g. marines) otherwise the game just ends up being a complete mess. Siege tanks should somewhat fulfil this role in a mech army but they only start reaching good levels of damage output once you start reaching a critical mass out of them. But where is mechs midgame AA? I can make vikings but I referenced the issues with this in my last post.
I personally like the idea of 'buying time units/strategy' where if you don't have, say, enough vikings to beat a broodlord/infestor straight up, you can load up a lot of medivacs and go for a mass drop or push marines back and forth to make the zerg retreat for a few moments. It's that kind of versatility i'm interested in, not just 'build whatever you want and smash two armies together'. In that sense, I don't see any kind of versatile mech unit.
On August 15 2012 16:29 MasterFischer wrote: Enlighten me again, as to why people are overly whiny about balance in HOTS now?
The beta aint even fucking out yet, let alone the full game.... so? Why whine about it now and not wait and see how it pans out?
Theory crafting on baseless grounds is just dumb...
I will agree that the unit DESIGN and look, of especially the warhound, looks kinda silly... but thats another thing (also subject to change)
Maybe because if you dont voice your opinions now, nothing is going to change when the beta comes around. Let Blizzard knows what you think about the new units from what they show you! Despite what majority of the people seem to believe Im sure some of them read feedback online.
Secondly if we do nothing and the beta comes around and the new stuffs do turn out to be horrible, there isnt much time to do any major changes is there, and certainly not major unit design overhaul. This is a unique period of time where Blizzard can make major changes and I really hope they make the best of it. If the warhound make it to the beta, it is not going anywhere.
Along with removing the autocast on the haywire missile, I also think it should have a minimum range. You could get this whole dynamic of having to stay at range, essentially kiting, or kiting sometimes... and stuff.. Idk in my head it just seems way cooler! And then if the missile could actually hit bio targets it would be pretty cool :D
I like the autofiring, doesn't it compare a lot to phoenixes and their attacking while moving? I think the autofiring opens up for a lot of kiting opportunities
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
Focus firing is so micro intensive.
Edit : This is sarcasm btw, but you never know on Internet ^^
You shouldn't have said the sarcasm thing, because you are quite wrong. Focus fire DOES require a lot of micro, especially in big fights, Because unless you want to get demolished, you have to focus fire with a lot of small groups, on multiple targets at a time, or else you whole army will form an arch arround 1 unit, where most of them cant shoot, and your army will take way more damage.
And what he was talking about was focus with a skill, similar to feedback from hightemplar, but vs any mech target, so yes, what Jimmeh was talking about would require a lot of micro, and quite hard to execute perfectly.
sc2 has smart casting which means you can select all of your war hounds, click hotkey for haywire missles and start clicking on enemy units. This is not hard at all.... And focus firing is only hard when you are terran. Zerg doesn't even focus fire at all besides maybe with mutalisks and corruptors, and sometimes roaches on an immortal or sentry (but that's not hard at all). Protoss' focus firing involves double clicking collussi and right clicking shit while you a-move the rest of your army....
In big fights terran doesn't focus fire anything besides perhaps with vikings (also ghosts snipe and with tanks vs banelings/infestors/...), would be a huge waste of dps and one misclick would be so deadly.
And it's not because you have a range unit or a unit with a single target ability, that's it's a good unit with a lot of potential for micro. In theory every (range) unit has unlimited micro potential because you can focus fire with it, retreat wounded,....
The Warhound is necessary to make Mech work because of Immortals ans Blinkstalkers (Chargelots are a pain in the ass too but Battlehellion already adress them). Could be a less dumb/a-move unit, but it's not like he's destroying the game. Mech should be more about positional play, not so much about Micro.
The Warhound is somewhat like a Tank guardian, they do okay against the Immortals (that wrecks whatever other mechanical unit), so the Immortals will not just roflstomp you siege line. The same applies to Blinkstalkers, Blinking in your siege line is accepting all the damage of Warhounds. And they will work better as damage tankers because they have a lot of health and not so vulnerable to AoE damage.
Calling for an AA unit like Goliath is pretty... dumb. The do not make sense in the SC2 reality. There are not so much threats to Mech in the air of SC2 as there were on BW. And Thors and Vikings do OK against them. The really threats there were in the ground and the Warhound adress them.
And I think, in the end, Mech will be standard in the Hots (a more simplified Mech than the BW one, but still very positional).
Ohh god the warhound is such a bad unit. I really hope they do something about it,. Its ugly, boring and unoriginal. Please blizzard wake up man. Dont ruin this game.
If people say terran (the most micro intensive race)shouldn't get A-move units, they shouldn't be creating a post about the warhound, but about every unit zerg and tosses have A-move so they get to terran micro level. And as a spectator, i approve this, but this post is pointless if you don't do that, just a bunch of hypocritic fellas circlejerking about being a micro hipster.
Not sure how warhound will work for pro scene, but for most Terran players on ladder it seems quite good, make mech actually good to use and if you are a Terran who has been sick of getting of losing to Zergs and Protoss who literally just a move into your army and think they are bosses then you can give them a taste of their own medicine. We might actually see an equal amount of Terrans compared to other races on ladder from diamond+.
On August 15 2012 19:54 Swift118 wrote: Not sure how warhound will work for pro scene, but for most Terran players on ladder it seems quite good, make mech actually good to use and if you are a Terran who has been sick of getting of losing to Zergs and Protoss who literally just a move into your army and think they are bosses then you can give them a taste of their own medicine.
No :/
You don't fix a game where half of it is really simple and dumbed down and the other half complex and awesome by dumbing the rest of it down. Same goes for sc2. If protoss and zerg have a bunch of a move units and terran have micro intensive units then what you DON'T do is make make the Terran units only be able to "a move" . Its not about giving "them a taste of their own medicine", thats an incredibly childish way to look at it. Zerg "a move" because what else is there to do?!?! There are no other options, no micro potential in the zerg deathball.
Also, it's not mech. Its just bio in bigger robot suits. You don't actually play it differently with a warhound.
IMO, Blizz are approaching all of this the wrong way - they are trying to force some strategies to work rather than give players the tools to win... What i mean by that is when they sit down and come up with new ideas, they should primarily be thinking (before working on balance) "How can a good player be more effective with this unit, and how can the best players be even better with this unit". They need to be thinking about how to increase the skill cap in the game, about how to make micro more effective, and actually create some micro in some cases (zerg, toss deathballs) that isn't just getting a nice concave/surround
I like it, the terran army already have way more components that need to be controlled to be useful. Overall in HOTS we see alot of units for the other 2 races that need to be microed(Viper, Oracle etc) that will make those armies closer to the terrans when it comes to how hard they are to use. Meanwhile terran gets a lot more fire and forget units like the warhound, battlemode hellions and widow mines(set em n' forget em!). I think they are aiming to make all 3 armies equal when it comes to difficulty to control, the changes they are making are a step in the right direction.
I just wish they would give it the anti-air back. Vikings chew so much gas and are only useful in the air and take away from the main mech army to much. Speaking about that, Can Haywire missle fire @ flying units? Not that it would help vs zerg but still.
Edit: Well, "mech army" is just another form of slightly slower slightly stronger bio, but I welcome viable options, assuming they make the new units good enough in the other MUs to justify going them over MMM, but in that battle report it really just looks like MMM would be so much better and would have an easier time shutting down Oracles/Tempests harrasing.
Edit 2: Also it looks like a fucking mechwarrior unit, get rid of that please.
It's a stimless marauder with more health. It annoys me that it has "Anti-Mechanical Missiles" when anti- mechanical just means anti-armored in matchups not involving zerg... Which is another thing, why create a unit that is absolutely USELESS vs an entire race?
But who cares about that shit, more importantly... IT HAS A FUCKING RAILGUN THAT CAN'T SHOOT UP.
On August 15 2012 21:11 Hypemeup wrote: I like it, the terran army already have way more components that need to be controlled to be useful. Overall in HOTS we see alot of units for the other 2 races that need to be microed(Viper, Oracle etc) that will make those armies closer to the terrans when it comes to how hard they are to use. Meanwhile terran gets a lot more fire and forget units like the warhound, battlemode hellions and widow mines(set em n' forget em!). I think they are aiming to make all 3 armies equal when it comes to difficulty to control, the changes they are making are a step in the right direction.
I just wish they would give it the anti-air back. Vikings chew so much gas and are only useful in the air and take away from the main mech army to much. Speaking about that, Can Haywire missle fire @ flying units? Not that it would help vs zerg but still.
Edit: Well, "mech army" is just another form of slightly slower slightly stronger bio, but I welcome viable options, assuming they make the new units good enough in the other MUs to justify going them over MMM, but in that battle report it really just looks like MMM would be so much better and would have an easier time shutting down Oracles/Tempests harrasing.
Haywire missile couldn't hit Tempest in the recent Day[9] vid.
On August 15 2012 21:11 Hypemeup wrote: I like it, the terran army already have way more components that need to be controlled to be useful. Overall in HOTS we see alot of units for the other 2 races that need to be microed(Viper, Oracle etc) that will make those armies closer to the terrans when it comes to how hard they are to use. Meanwhile terran gets a lot more fire and forget units like the warhound, battlemode hellions and widow mines(set em n' forget em!). I think they are aiming to make all 3 armies equal when it comes to difficulty to control, the changes they are making are a step in the right direction.
I just wish they would give it the anti-air back. Vikings chew so much gas and are only useful in the air and take away from the main mech army to much. Speaking about that, Can Haywire missle fire @ flying units? Not that it would help vs zerg but still.
Edit: Well, "mech army" is just another form of slightly slower slightly stronger bio, but I welcome viable options, assuming they make the new units good enough in the other MUs to justify going them over MMM, but in that battle report it really just looks like MMM would be so much better and would have an easier time shutting down Oracles/Tempests harrasing.
Haywire missile couldn't hit Tempest in the recent Day[9] vid.
On August 15 2012 18:23 RouaF wrote: You should add a poll in the OP. By the way I think the warhound looks awful, give us back goliaths or make something else.
i never understood why they took out the aa of the warhound? we clearly want another unit than the marine to be able to shoot up to the air (no, vikings don't count) apart from that, the unit is extremely ugly and when the warhound shoots it looks like a toy pistol -.-
On August 15 2012 18:23 RouaF wrote: You should add a poll in the OP. By the way I think the warhound looks awful, give us back goliaths or make something else.
i never understood why they took out the aa of the warhound? we clearly want another unit than the marine to be able to shoot up to the air (no, vikings don't count) apart from that, the unit is extremely ugly and when the warhound shoots it looks like a toy pistol -.-
I guess their concern is that there will be little reason to go vikings if they make the Warhound AA good enough to be viable. Then again I dont think vikings 13 range would ever be replaced.
Vikings are actually fine units, i even think they could gbe a liltte tougher on Ground. They still would be very expensive to build as pure meatshield but they wouldn't be "wasted" anymore when not needed...
I mean, theire obviously VERY inspired by the Gholiat, which also did not shine with it's ground attack but felt still way better than a ground Viking... Maybe make the transformation take longer to balance it out? The Viking right now just seems strange to me... Why does it have a pure ground mode when it sucks at it?
I think it is ok, the haywire missile in TvP. Because auto-cast means it will hit anything. A waste on a stalker, a good trade if hit an immortal or colossus. But the question I have for the warhound is that, what is its use in TvZ??? Is blizzard really just going to make it so, in TvP, you use warhound, TvZ, you use thors??? That is the laziest way to make an unit. You want the unit to be viable in all situations.
Honestly I would like to, you know play like 500 games as terran in hots before I can really judge the warhound and whether it's a good unit or not.
You can judge it on one thing though, it's one ugly mother..
Well yeah but hellions look like little toy cars too, tbh I really don't care much about how a unit looks and more about how it works. Other than that yeah it looks like how I would imagine a bigger mechanical marauder.
On August 15 2012 21:57 Cosmos wrote: I feel like it's just an ugly marauder. It should fire in the air, have another design (goliath was nice) and maybe have another role on the ground.
I don't really understand, I mean, it is ok for people to not like the unit by its look, that is subjective, but 95% of people in this thread don't have a clue what they are talking about. You are all judging by one battle report that is in Alpha, if I remember, SC2 WoL wasn't even close to being good as it is now at the start of the game, or beta. I also remember that they have changed tons of stuff in the WoL beta.
Sure, people will always complain, but you could do it by giving constructive criticism, and not by whining, flaming and ranting all over the forums. And for me, it is ridiculous to call Warhound a "Factory Marauder".
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).
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).
If the game is dumbed down, stop nitpicking on the already interesting race who gets 1 a-unit and try to lift up the shitty a-move races, don't you think ?
This thread really doesn't ask the right question.
Should it be changed? This hinges on the reader's assessment of when a unit "should" be changed. How do we know if a unit should be changed? Is it sufficient that it is not a unit we would have designed? Does it need to do something innovative and interesting? Are there certain micro thresholds which should be applied? No one asks these questions, and therefore, the discussion here becomes rather silly exchanges about what "should" qualify a unit for needing change - and nobody actually looks at the unit itself, because they're not thinking about the unit, they're thinking theory about what it "should" or "could" or "ought to" be.
The question this thread hasn't asked, and the one which is most relevant, is this: are the effects of this unit's incorporation into the game obvious, and if so, what will they be?
I'll remind people that the micro intensive marines that a lot of people like to watch now were once thought of early in the games lifespan (pre-MKP/Foxer's rise in the GSL) as a-move units which were hard-countered by banelings, colossi, and siege tanks. How would you have answered this question about marines in the beta?
All I would like from the Warhound is to not work well against tanks. Also slowing it down to tankspeed makes mech easier to handle in the same way having it the way it is now as an easy a-move unit.
As for adding a skillcap, having the haywire as a non-automatic ability, maybe even from an upgrade only like the Thor's cannons would make for a potentially interesting metagame where haywire timings become important. Fake warhound play into bio anyone?
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?
The solution to Terran players having to micro more is to redesign the other races to make them have to micro more, not design a bunch of boring a-move units to dumb Terran down to the level of the other two.
Seriously, all of the new Terran units are just...really, really boring to use.
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).
In HotS custom and in HotS videos I seen that the warhound is about as microable as the marine.
The shooting animation is about the same length, and move speed is about between stimmed and unstimmed marine.
This means kiting is a must, especially with the long range it has, and splitting is viable.
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
I hate it, its like a marauder from the factory. I really dislike the way it does bonus damage vs mechanical since practically every protoss unit is mechanical, zealots arent but im pretty sure these new hellions will be able to deal with them and they are probably going to be the mineral dump for mech Terran. It just leads to an a move composition that will be pretty good vs protoss no matter what they do. Didn't like the 1.5 patch and I am not liking the looks of HOTS either.
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.
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.
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?
All this "mech" stuff really smells of just MM hidden in metal suits. Mech needs tanks to work but if they dont do anything about them I cant imagine why you would go for more tanks instead of more warhounds/hellions/mines.
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.
Really terran just needs the goliath back. It needs to be a solid unit on the ground but not as cost effective as marines or siege tanks. Balance its attack speed versus damage to allow the goliath to soft counter immortals. Take or leave its old anti air ability. I think with those kind of changes TvP mech would play out very well while still feeling like BW mech. Immortals can't just waltz up to siege tanks unless the screen of goliaths is out of position. Blink stalkers onto tanks would be forced to fully engage the goliaths likely with an unfavorable concave.
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).
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!
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!!
And remove the Thor
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.
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.
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!!
And remove the Thor
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.
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!!
And remove the Thor
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.
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.
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!!
And remove the Thor
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.
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.
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.
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.
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!
On August 16 2012 00:12 baba1 wrote: Just do it Blizzard. Put GOLIATH back !! PLEASE!!
And remove the Thor
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.
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
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)
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...
LOL at the person that posted the 60 apm requirement to cast haywire missiles. What a piece of random sc2BSmath™ :D . 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.
i'm going to put my 2 cents in on this and i'm going to say that while i think the thor is a slow unit it does have it's uses that i rather like in part with tvz. Yes they are slow i won't try to lie about it. But the dps makes up for it so i'll take the dps over speed. With everyone wanting the goliath back i would like to see it back as well so that way you have a lot of choices to pick when you want to make your mech army and it's not just limited to: hellion, tank, thor, warhound. But what i really want to see is the hellion get a major bf buff so that way we don't have to use the battle hellion, otherwise just give us the firebat back and be done with it. hell a lot of terran's would use the firebat more with their tvp bioballs if they had that unit back instead of the hellion.
but on a side note though: i think blizz is running out of ideas on what units to make.
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...
Complaining about lack of anti-air on Warhound is very shallow IMO. Protoss stargate play is almost nonexistant in TvP in WoL, but in HotS the Oracle and Tempest might see some play... do you really think a Goliath would be terribly helpful against either of those?
Sure, Zerg has mutas and Brood Lords, but Thors and Vikings are already as direct of a counter as you could hope for against those, and besides the Warhound is pretty specifically meant to be used in TvP and TvT, not TvZ.
On August 16 2012 01:08 Zato-1 wrote: Complaining about lack of anti-air on Warhound is very shallow IMO. Protoss stargate play is almost nonexistant in TvP in WoL, but in HotS the Oracle and Tempest might see some play... do you really think a Goliath would be terribly helpful against either of those?
Sure, Zerg has mutas and Brood Lords, but Thors and Vikings are already as direct of a counter as you could hope for against those, and besides the Warhound is pretty specifically meant to be used in TvP and TvT, not TvZ.
Agreed. And since the widow mines hit air as well, they can soft counter any really early air busts.
Here's what we want Blizzard. Or at least what I could derive from this thread.
1) 2 food 2) Goliath cost 3) Some anti Air. Doesn't have to be Terrible Terrible Damage. 4) Mobile
This unit doesn't even need to have splash Air. Goliaths used cost efficiency and sheer numbers to deal with Muta flocks. Maybe this unit should get Long Range, and Vikings range nerfed to 4-5 with splash to SUPPORT standard AA against huge flocks. Not to mention a Raven HSM buff would help deter huge flocks.
On August 16 2012 01:12 GinDo wrote: Here's what we want Blizzard. Or at least what I could derive from this thread.
1) 2 food 2) Goliath cost 3) Some anti Air. Doesn't have to be Terrible Terrible Damage. 4) Mobile
This unit doesn't even need to have splash Air. Goliaths used cost efficiency and sheer numbers to deal with Muta flocks. Maybe this unit should get Long Range, and Vikings range nerfed to 4-5 with splash to SUPPORT standard AA against huge flocks. Not to mention a Raven HSM buff would help deter huge flocks.
At this point, just bring the goliath back and tweak it properly. No reason to create a new goliath that is weaker and that we gonna call warhound.
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
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)
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...
First, bringing back old units is a stupid move. It just makes this game, brood war, and that's just moving backward. So definitely no there.
But even skipping that point. Vikings serve a similar role to Goliaths, absolutely, they just don't do one as well, but do another better. Goliath role in BW was to screen against air threats. Single, air threats, mostly for mech. They don't do that great against a ball of mutas, and they aren't spectacular on the ground either.
Vikings serve a very similar role. They are meant to stay around the army, are easily and cheaply producable, and screen it against big air threats. In the middle of everyone whining about one-dimensional units, you suggest removing usefulness from the viking by removing its ground mode. While, it isn't meant to be in that mode frequently, it is DEFINITELY used and should never be removed. Landing on tank lines can do a lot of damage, and there is potential for harassment when landing in mineral lines. There are a number of uses that just make what you said completely wrong and short-sighted.
Goliath would be useless. You would never build it, it would suck, it does not help at all against colossus, and would trade, at best, evenly with stalkers. The goliath does not solve Terran mech's current problems versus Protoss.
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...
The goliath pretty much identical to the Thor's role. Its meant to be decently strong GtG and relatively stronger GtA attacks. They differ in which type of air unit thy excel against but generally are the same. The Thor has the drawback of being a terrible meatshield unlike the goliath because its large and awkward as hell, and it has energy for a bad on use ability that gets it mashed by HTs.
On August 15 2012 01:51 CptCutter wrote: you guys really shouldnt complain until at least the beta has started. you have no idea on how it will play out.
bla bla bla.. heard this a hundred times.. still doesn't change this first point he's trying to make. Helllla ugly.
The fundamental problem with the Warhound is that it's not a mech unit. Sure it's produced in a factory, but it's basically a giant marine without stim. It walks, it shoots like a marine, and gives up no mobility for that firepower (unlike Thors & tanks).
If they want to make mech more viable, I'd recommend not making other units so good at killing tanks (pretty much everything protoss has). If they must add a unit to terran factory, then they need to make it less a movey and more positional based. That's what makes terran so unique, tanks make them a very position army that the other armies lack. This is a very important art in RTS that unfortunately blizzard seems to suck at. Defenders advantage, high ground, flanking, and army position just aren't as important without something like the siege tank.
TL:DR It's a big marine produced from the factory, not a mech unit
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...
First, bringing back old units is a stupid move. It just makes this game, brood war, and that's just moving backward. So definitely no there.
But even skipping that point. Vikings serve a similar role to Goliaths, absolutely, they just don't do one as well, but do another better. Goliath role in BW was to screen against air threats. Single, air threats, mostly for mech. They don't do that great against a ball of mutas, and they aren't spectacular on the ground either.
Vikings serve a very similar role. They are meant to stay around the army, are easily and cheaply producable, and screen it against big air threats. In the middle of everyone whining about one-dimensional units, you suggest removing usefulness from the viking by removing its ground mode. While, it isn't meant to be in that mode frequently, it is DEFINITELY used and should never be removed. Landing on tank lines can do a lot of damage, and there is potential for harassment when landing in mineral lines. There are a number of uses that just make what you said completely wrong and short-sighted.
Goliath would be useless. You would never build it, it would suck, it does not help at all against colossus, and would trade, at best, evenly with stalkers. The goliath does not solve Terran mech's current problems versus Protoss.
See, while I agree about the Goliath's and Viking's role similarities, they aren't comparable.
Viking comes from a starport and is not a 'mech unit'. While it has a lot of mobility because it's a flying unit, it loses a lot of it when it comes to transforming in a battle. The transformation is clumsy and slow.
I've never seen in over 2 years of Sc2 a strategy that involved ground mode vikings so stop saying that we already have 'goliaths' in Sc2.
On August 16 2012 01:12 GinDo wrote: Here's what we want Blizzard. Or at least what I could derive from this thread.
1) 2 food 2) Goliath cost 3) Some anti Air. Doesn't have to be Terrible Terrible Damage. 4) Mobile
This unit doesn't even need to have splash Air. Goliaths used cost efficiency and sheer numbers to deal with Muta flocks. Maybe this unit should get Long Range, and Vikings range nerfed to 4-5 with splash to SUPPORT standard AA against huge flocks. Not to mention a Raven HSM buff would help deter huge flocks.
A unit like that will not 1a in to a siege line and kill it. Killing tanks is one of the main roles of the mechanical marauder, people forget that. THAT is the real problem and why it looks so stupid against protoss.
Imagine TvT, mech vs mech, with those robots running around and killing each other...it counters all factory units, including itself lol
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...
The goliath pretty much identical to the Thor's role. Its meant to be decently strong GtG and relatively stronger GtA attacks. They differ in which type of air unit thy excel against but generally are the same. The Thor has the drawback of being a terrible meatshield unlike the goliath because its large and awkward as hell, and it has energy for a bad on use ability that gets it mashed by HTs.
Wow, really? So, next thing you are going to tell me is that both Baneling and Ultralisk have the same role, because they both do AoE damage, the thing that one does bonus to light and other does bonus do armored doesn't matter at all?
I think you don't understand what people mean by "role". GtA attack isn't a role, unit role is to counter certain type of units, and/or to soak damage for some other units that deal great damage etc. Goliath have completely opposite role of the Thor, it is good against completely different targets than Thor is.
On August 16 2012 01:12 GinDo wrote: Here's what we want Blizzard. Or at least what I could derive from this thread.
1) 2 food 2) Goliath cost 3) Some anti Air. Doesn't have to be Terrible Terrible Damage. 4) Mobile
This unit doesn't even need to have splash Air. Goliaths used cost efficiency and sheer numbers to deal with Muta flocks. Maybe this unit should get Long Range, and Vikings range nerfed to 4-5 with splash to SUPPORT standard AA against huge flocks. Not to mention a Raven HSM buff would help deter huge flocks.
With the widow mines, I don't think alternative anti air will be necessary. And the Warhound almost the same speed as a stalker, which is pretty mobile. It is faster than any unstimmed bio unit.
On August 16 2012 01:12 GinDo wrote: Here's what we want Blizzard. Or at least what I could derive from this thread.
1) 2 food 2) Goliath cost 3) Some anti Air. Doesn't have to be Terrible Terrible Damage. 4) Mobile
This unit doesn't even need to have splash Air. Goliaths used cost efficiency and sheer numbers to deal with Muta flocks. Maybe this unit should get Long Range, and Vikings range nerfed to 4-5 with splash to SUPPORT standard AA against huge flocks. Not to mention a Raven HSM buff would help deter huge flocks.
goliath too? well then give my my beefy dragoon back.
Thou I do wish they would change vikings a bit like you said cuz they deal with 2/3's of protoss higher tech
Remove haywire missiles, add a PROPER AA not the shitty AA that the Thor has. Something like 20 damage with a 1.5 or 2 second attack cooldown and 8 range. Also make it automatically use the air attack against Colossus. Maybe also slow it's movement speed down a bit to be more mechish (I don't know what it is right now but a bit slower). I KNOW this makes it almost identical to Goliath but come on guys...it would just be such a better designed unit. I'm sure Blizzard can think of a way to make it different enough to justify bringing in a very similar unit.
This will do a bunch of things - make the unit less "A-click" because haywire missiles are just auto attack damage. Make PURE MECH actually viable like it was in Brood War, and i was BEAUTIFUL to watch.
Terran won't be forced to get Vikings versus ANY heavy air play. Tank/goliath/vulture was such a cool and well designed composition, we can get something at least close with proper AA mech support unit. Just imagine hellions zipping around scouting and harassing, while Warhounds protect tanks while they set up and give them AA support. Add in stronger tank anti-armor damage and Terran would be PERFECT again and a pleasure to watch.
Just move Vikings to the Factory (armory required), buff their ground Damage (or just don't make them armored anymore). Increase their transform time and let them profit from ground upgrades.
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...
The goliath pretty much identical to the Thor's role. Its meant to be decently strong GtG and relatively stronger GtA attacks. They differ in which type of air unit thy excel against but generally are the same. The Thor has the drawback of being a terrible meatshield unlike the goliath because its large and awkward as hell, and it has energy for a bad on use ability that gets it mashed by HTs.
You could make this argument about reaver-> colossus, vulture-> hellion, infestor->defiler, ... similar roles but one seems a lot better than the other for some reason. If Browder wants a good game he should stop making stupid knockoffs of broodwar units and actually make something interesting.
its best a-move anti-ground unit in the game, pretty much only counter to it is mass immortals and you need to have full supply of immortals to counter them(couple of imortals wont do anything..), not only that if you spread and a move your Warhound's they will beat same supply of tanks(helions wont help, hi hayfire missile), not only that warhounds > any bio composition. not only that even though they dont have any + vs light, they still destroy any light unit, basically this is best anti ground unit in the game, add to that best anti air (viking) and we will see warhound + hellion + viking compo every game, with couple of tanks and mines around the map. Not saying thats bad, but mass warhounds > mass ultras....srsly im terran myself, i acknowledge that warhound atm is op.
What they could do is remove some hp, remove some price, remove haywire add proper anti air, ups we have a goliath :D . srsly just bring back goliath.
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 01:48 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 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.
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.
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
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 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.
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).
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.
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 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.
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?
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.
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 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
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 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 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 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.
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.
On August 16 2012 09:30 GolemMadness wrote: Good game design does not revolve around "We don't like this, let's make a unit designed solely to counter it." What's happened to Blizzard?
On August 16 2012 08:29 SarcasmMonster wrote: Beta is coming soon
Not sure if there's enough time from now till the beta for any major changes.
It's not that there's no time, it's that Blizzard honestly doesn't care about player input unless it's massive whining (which gets races nerfed/buffed).
On August 16 2012 08:29 SarcasmMonster wrote: Beta is coming soon
Not sure if there's enough time from now till the beta for any major changes.
It's not that there's no time, it's that Blizzard honestly doesn't care about player input unless it's massive whining (which gets races nerfed/buffed).
Hey, I'll do my part and whine then
It's pretty obvious that the community is not behind the current iteration of the Warhound.
Poll: First impressions of the Warhound in TvP
Awful (145)
74%
Great (18)
9%
Bad (17)
9%
Good (8)
4%
Neutral (8)
4%
196 total votes
Your vote: First impressions of the Warhound in TvP
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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
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.
?? Goliaths received 75% normal damage from Explosive class attacks, so they were pretty decent vs Goons (Goons overkill while golis don't), fine vs unseiged tanks because the only time they engaged the was when dropped on/overwhelming them anyways, and only kinda bad vs Hydras. I mean, technically they were about cost even at maxed upgrades.... the reason it seemed like they sucked was because marines were just better than them in every way and situation other than Mech TvT or killing Arbiters. (Sometimes they were even okay vs hydra/lurk zerg in weird ZvT if you had non-pro micro capability)
Also... Golis convincingly beating VULTURES? Bwahahahaha NOTHING on the ground even got close to being cost efficient vs Vultures
Oh, but I do agree with you generally that Goli's wouldn't be a godsend... I mean... they were the second most retarded unit in BW and THE most retarded unit in SC2 Single player... almost like the AI stayed the same with JUST the goliath.
On August 15 2012 01:48 Jimmeh wrote: I don't know why people think it's just going to be another "A-click" unit; if anything it'll be fairly micro intensive.
You have to realise that if you have its ability on autocast then it will autotarget units that aren't necessarily the best units to target. Most pro players will probably have autocast disabled and then constantly have to manually cast it on higher priority units like colossus, immortals etc. as opposed to stalkers/sentries.
Exactly! Nuff Said
Hmm, really? How many players do you know manually cast charge on zealots? I realise it's not the same but when you have say 6-10 warhounds and a bunch of siege tanks I just can't see even top tier pros bothering to manually micro that ability.
On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: [quote] 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: [quote] 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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
The real issue with vikings is they can't adapt fast enough from air to ground. You also end up with boring corrupter vs viking battles often times which is basically watching two identical units slug it out. Having a ground form unit thats goliath esque would create some much more interesting ways for all the matchups to play out.
On August 16 2012 00:34 Zach_Attack wrote: [quote]
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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
The real issue with vikings is they can't adapt fast enough from air to ground. You also end up with boring corrupter vs viking battles often times which is basically watching two identical units slug it out. Having a ground form unit thats goliath esque would create some much more interesting ways for all the matchups to play out.
I already wrote this somewhere, but it would be interesting if they just remade viking into more ground based unit. Buff its damage also add long range air anti armored attack(make it crap vs light). Remake air mode for transportation and dealing with light air unit.
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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
The real issue with vikings is they can't adapt fast enough from air to ground. You also end up with boring corrupter vs viking battles often times which is basically watching two identical units slug it out. Having a ground form unit thats goliath esque would create some much more interesting ways for all the matchups to play out.
I already wrote this somewhere, but it would be interesting if they just remade viking into more ground based unit. Buff its damage also add long range air anti armored attack(make it crap vs light). Remake air mode for transportation and dealing with light air unit.
And then colossus become ridiculously strong. Changes like that aren't so easy.
i for one like the warhound as its current build and look foward to see it play in the beta. terrans have enough thing to do during a fight they dont need another unit that need babysitting, in fact the two other races should need somes instead.
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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
The real issue with vikings is they can't adapt fast enough from air to ground. You also end up with boring corrupter vs viking battles often times which is basically watching two identical units slug it out. Having a ground form unit thats goliath esque would create some much more interesting ways for all the matchups to play out.
I already wrote this somewhere, but it would be interesting if they just remade viking into more ground based unit. Buff its damage also add long range air anti armored attack(make it crap vs light). Remake air mode for transportation and dealing with light air unit.
I really like this idea. In fact, make it a factory unit. Buff the ground stats but nerf the stats when they're flying. Like a goliath on ground but wraith when flying.
It was always interesting in BW that terran had the best ground army but worst airforce. It would be much better than now where everything is the same across races.
Hmm... Just an idea: What if the warhound rockets were cd-based, but had a small mineral cost (25-ish). Change targeting to any unit (not just mech) and range of 7. Stuns mech unit for 2-in game seconds. Initially spawns with one.
That way you don't auto-cast it due to mineral drain, but use it more wisely by sniping colossi/casting units/brood lords. But you retain the option of auto-casting it vs tank lines. Since late game mech usually has excess of minerals, this would only inhibit the early/mid game economic management.
On August 16 2012 00:24 Ramiz1989 wrote: [quote] 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: [quote] 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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
I think that an important thing to note is that Goliaths used Factory upgrades. Having your Goliaths get the same upgrades with your Tanks and Vultures meant that you did not need to invest extra to get them, whereas Vikings require a completely different building and upgrade set. If the Viking built from the Factory and used Mech upgrades instead of Sky-mech upgrades, then it might be more like the Goliath.
The warhound is just lazy design imo. It's a terran Roach. It's fast, high health, and good DPS/cost. It seems too general-purpose and all-around good for a factory unit. It certainly doesn't fit the mech playstyle 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.
Not to mention you couldn't make goliaths with a reactor. Goliaths just plain sucked ass on the ground, and they had the exact same function as vikings do: you got them when you badly needed anti-air. Vikings are better goliaths (mobility) that don't need an upgrade to have decent range. The cost factor isn't even that relevant because you gain money quicker in SC2.
As for the warhound now: as it stands it has no unique function or purpose, other than to make terran players play mech like it was bio. It's just a marauder built from the factory for the most part, and not even a particularly good one, since medivacs can't heal it. Mech doesn't need it, it's only function is to have terran make fewer tanks.
Change the ability to be something that actually helps mech, like an ability that acts a spotter for a siege tank and increases its range or vision, or a defensive matrix or something like the BC has in the campaign to allow it to soak damage. They shouldn't just be a quicker, high damage dealing, mech destroyer built from a factory.
The real issue with vikings is they can't adapt fast enough from air to ground. You also end up with boring corrupter vs viking battles often times which is basically watching two identical units slug it out. Having a ground form unit thats goliath esque would create some much more interesting ways for all the matchups to play out.
I already wrote this somewhere, but it would be interesting if they just remade viking into more ground based unit. Buff its damage also add long range air anti armored attack(make it crap vs light). Remake air mode for transportation and dealing with light air unit.
And then colossus become ridiculously strong. Changes like that aren't so easy.
The goliath's AA will kick in and its long range missiles will be engaged ;p PEW PEW It works.
I get the feeling that they are trying to get Terran players to play higher up the tech tree, to look at the terran army options back to as Teir 1,2, and 3 instead of Bio, Mech, and end-game Mech. I think it was kind of surprising that the MMM ball turned out to be so damn good in certain situations (vs Protoss entirely, and pretty good vs Zerg early to mid game and as surgical hit squad in the late game).
The warhouse looks to be an interesting unit. I am not sure if I like the missile that it auto fires. I almost want that to be a cooldown spell - even if the cooldown is the same as that abilities normal rate of fire (slow) - just to force some kind of micro with it. It's standard rate of fire and standard weapon I would leave untouched.
I'd even go so far, to maybe suggest two researchable items for it - the anti ground anti armor attach (with above proposed cooldown) or a research options for an Anti-air attach with no splash, and not very long range. The same missile animation could be used for both. The only thing that would he hard to figure out is how the interface would allow for one or the other, but not both at the same time.
It doesn't bring much more than a marauder does, its probably just going to replace it in situations where there are a lot of mechanical units. Its like they didn't want to look like they were copying the goliath so they just just made a mechanical version of the marauder that's better vs mechanical units.
The design of the unit is really poor, but I'm also worried about how haywire is ever going to be balanced, it can't be good in situations without mechanical units if it has a second attack that does huge damage to mechanical because it will be ridiculous.
I want it to be a unit with a long range attack vs air (BUT NOT A FUCKING AUTOATTACK BECAUSE ITS EASIER THAN MAKING OTHER RACES MICRO MORE) and then a weak ground attack so it needs the support of other ground units like tanks to not die to almost everything that attacks ground.
On August 15 2012 01:51 CptCutter wrote: you guys really shouldnt complain until at least the beta has started. you have no idea on how it will play out.
The issue is that if the unit in general is bad, it might be too late to get rid of it by the time beta is out.
The rise of Goody is incoming massing imbalanced units and 1aing them across the board in games he should not win ^^. Everyone love and bow to the warhound, it is his savior!
I liked the old model when the first announced it, but that would require the Thor to be removed. They've said that they hate the Thor. It's quite puzzling that they brought it back after announcing it to be gone because they didn't like it. Seems lazy.
On August 15 2012 01:51 CptCutter wrote: you guys really shouldnt complain until at least the beta has started. you have no idea on how it will play out.
The issue is that if the unit in general is bad, it might be too late to get rid of it by the time beta is out.
I think there are aspects of it which are very good personally. But to each their own.
I prefer a click units a hell of a lot more than units like infestors imo. If you have a bigger and better upgraded army than your opponent it's because you outplayed him. Micro should just give you small advantages during a fight, not win you the game from a few abilities.
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?
Making other races harder instead of making terran easier would be the better option if you don't want random results in tournaments.
It seemed that, at least in the hots custom game, the warhound really just stood there and fired off its ability randomly. Totally underwhelming; it was just another unit that stood in a line and fired, except it didn't have stim.
It has to be in the game to make Tank Play viable in TvP unless the Immortal, Chargelots and Blinkstalkers are completely reworked (and that is fucking hard to do and would change the game completely). And is not fair to not make it a a-move friendly, because 1) Mech play will be already too APM intensive, Tank and Widow Mine manipulation will be hard as fuck. 2) His counterpart on the Protoss army, the Immortal, is a-move friendly.
Massing them (and BH) shouldn't work in pro level/higher leagues, it lacks AoE damage, it isn't fast (because of the BH) and it is easy to be flanked or forcefielded. Tank and WM play will be required to having better map and ground control.
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?
Making other races harder instead of making terran easier would be the better option if you don't want random results in tournaments.
Yea because we're obviously nearing random results already? People qq to no end about the skill cap of SC2 without realizing we are NO WHERE NEAR IT.
On August 15 2012 02:00 RUFinalBoss wrote: mech will die BIO FOREVER EVEN IN TVT :D
Well, just kinda theorycrafting here but...
The Warhound is good vs Mechanical units(Warhounds, Thors, Hellions, Tanks) due to Haywire missles(. It does 23 damage every 1.3 seconds(17.7 dps to all units, plus 30 damage every 6 seconds to mechanical. Both of these have 7 range. 23 dps when fully attacking a mechanical unit. It does 5 dps when just in range and not fully attacking a mechanical unit.(Haywire Missles) It can be repaired, does dps without attacking the unit(If a enemy mechanical is in range), and has a 2.81 move speed. It costs 150 minerals, 75 gas, 2 supply, and 45 seconds.
A Maurader does 10 damage to all units every 1.5 seconds (6.7 dps), and 20 damage to armored units every 1.5 seconds(13.4 dps). It has 6 range. It can Stim(Going to 10 dps against all, and 20 dps against armored), be Medivac Healed, has 125 health and 1 armor and has a movespeed of 2.25(3.175 with Stim) It costs 100 minerals, 25 gas, 2 supply, and takes 30 seconds.
Wow, actually looking at it, what is the point of mauraders with this?
Unstimmed Maurader It has more base dps(11), More dps against armored(Non mechanical)(4.5), More dps vs Mechanical(10)(17 vs Helions) more health(95), Higher base speed (.56)
It costs 50 more minerals and gas, and 15 more seconds.
Stimmed Maurader It has more base dps(7.7), Less dps vs Armored(Non Mechanical)(-2.3), More dps vs Mechanical(3)(7.7 vs Helions) more health(115), Lower speed(-.3)
Costs and being healed by a medivac seems to be the only thing that makes a Maurader better...
A Warhound, as it is, is basically a high health perma stimmed Maurader without slow. Edit: AS IT IS I know numbers will change, but still
they WANT it to be easy, they say other races can alot a move and terran cant so they gave them the warhound, doesnt get it totally because a move marauders arent that bad are tehy ? ^^
well we should stop talking before we plays it but you right it looks HORRIBLE not fitting in this game (like the sc2 goliat from campange looks bad as well)
Making other races harder instead of making terran easier would be the better option if you don't want random results in tournaments.
I mean, you clearly just watched video of what the pros thought of heart of the swarm because you just quoted cloud word for word with that. And that is cloud being cloud, so its clearly not your opinion at all.
Making other races harder instead of making terran easier would be the better option if you don't want random results in tournaments.
I mean, you clearly just watched video of what the pros thought of heart of the swarm because you just quoted cloud word for word with that. And that is cloud being cloud, so its clearly not your opinion at all.
Quotes Cloud about game design is genrally a bad practice. Also, I don't understand why people assume the unit is an "a-move unit". All unts can be "a-moved" and most of them do very well when they are. If anything, with this units long range, it could be used to focus down high powered units, like immortals, colossi and stalkers. Focus firing requires micro.
We need to see the unit and how it works before we say "this unit is awesome without micro".
Warhound is pretty explicitly designed to empower Mech playstyles vs. Protoss, and possibly to shake up Mech TvT as well, and it does just that from what we know of it. I agree that the aesthetics of the Warhound make it look like it'd fit in better in a Total Annihilation game than in a Starcraft game, so maybe Blizzard should try a different art style for the unit. The unit is not a Goliath from SC:BW and I'm glad it's not, because the Goliath would be a poor fit for SC2. Unless and until serious problems arise with the Warhound during beta testing, I like it just the way it is... well, except for the art.
On August 15 2012 02:00 RUFinalBoss wrote: mech will die BIO FOREVER EVEN IN TVT :D
Well, just kinda theorycrafting here but...
The Warhound is good vs Mechanical units(Warhounds, Thors, Hellions, Tanks) due to Haywire missles(. It does 23 damage every 1.3 seconds(17.7 dps to all units, plus 30 damage every 6 seconds to mechanical. Both of these have 7 range. 23 dps when fully attacking a mechanical unit. It does 5 dps when just in range and not fully attacking a mechanical unit.(Haywire Missles) It can be repaired, does dps without attacking the unit(If a enemy mechanical is in range), and has a 2.81 move speed. It costs 150 minerals, 75 gas, 2 supply, and 45 seconds.
A Maurader does 10 damage to all units every 1.5 seconds (6.7 dps), and 20 damage to armored units every 1.5 seconds(13.4 dps). It has 6 range. It can Stim(Going to 10 dps against all, and 20 dps against armored), be Medivac Healed, has 125 health and 1 armor and has a movespeed of 2.25(3.175 with Stim) It costs 100 minerals, 25 gas, 2 supply, and takes 30 seconds.
Wow, actually looking at it, what is the point of mauraders with this?
Unstimmed Maurader It has more base dps(11), More dps against armored(Non mechanical)(4.5), More dps vs Mechanical(10)(17 vs Helions) more health(95), Higher base speed (.56)
It costs 50 more minerals and gas, and 15 more seconds.
Stimmed Maurader It has more base dps(7.7), Less dps vs Armored(Non Mechanical)(-2.3), More dps vs Mechanical(3)(7.7 vs Helions) more health(115), Lower speed(-.3)
Costs and being healed by a medivac seems to be the only thing that makes a Maurader better...
A Warhound, as it is, is basically a high health perma stimmed Maurader without slow. Edit: AS IT IS I know numbers will change, but still
Whoa, the Warhound is faster than a stimmed Marauder?
On August 15 2012 02:00 RUFinalBoss wrote: mech will die BIO FOREVER EVEN IN TVT :D
Well, just kinda theorycrafting here but...
The Warhound is good vs Mechanical units(Warhounds, Thors, Hellions, Tanks) due to Haywire missles(. It does 23 damage every 1.3 seconds(17.7 dps to all units, plus 30 damage every 6 seconds to mechanical. Both of these have 7 range. 23 dps when fully attacking a mechanical unit. It does 5 dps when just in range and not fully attacking a mechanical unit.(Haywire Missles) It can be repaired, does dps without attacking the unit(If a enemy mechanical is in range), and has a 2.81 move speed. It costs 150 minerals, 75 gas, 2 supply, and 45 seconds.
A Maurader does 10 damage to all units every 1.5 seconds (6.7 dps), and 20 damage to armored units every 1.5 seconds(13.4 dps). It has 6 range. It can Stim(Going to 10 dps against all, and 20 dps against armored), be Medivac Healed, has 125 health and 1 armor and has a movespeed of 2.25(3.175 with Stim) It costs 100 minerals, 25 gas, 2 supply, and takes 30 seconds.
Wow, actually looking at it, what is the point of mauraders with this?
Unstimmed Maurader It has more base dps(11), More dps against armored(Non mechanical)(4.5), More dps vs Mechanical(10)(17 vs Helions) more health(95), Higher base speed (.56)
It costs 50 more minerals and gas, and 15 more seconds.
Stimmed Maurader It has more base dps(7.7), Less dps vs Armored(Non Mechanical)(-2.3), More dps vs Mechanical(3)(7.7 vs Helions) more health(115), Lower speed(-.3)
Costs and being healed by a medivac seems to be the only thing that makes a Maurader better...
A Warhound, as it is, is basically a high health perma stimmed Maurader without slow. Edit: AS IT IS I know numbers will change, but still
Whoa, the Warhound is faster than a stimmed Marauder?
On August 15 2012 02:00 RUFinalBoss wrote: mech will die BIO FOREVER EVEN IN TVT :D
Well, just kinda theorycrafting here but...
The Warhound is good vs Mechanical units(Warhounds, Thors, Hellions, Tanks) due to Haywire missles(. It does 23 damage every 1.3 seconds(17.7 dps to all units, plus 30 damage every 6 seconds to mechanical. Both of these have 7 range. 23 dps when fully attacking a mechanical unit. It does 5 dps when just in range and not fully attacking a mechanical unit.(Haywire Missles) It can be repaired, does dps without attacking the unit(If a enemy mechanical is in range), and has a 2.81 move speed. It costs 150 minerals, 75 gas, 2 supply, and 45 seconds.
A Maurader does 10 damage to all units every 1.5 seconds (6.7 dps), and 20 damage to armored units every 1.5 seconds(13.4 dps). It has 6 range. It can Stim(Going to 10 dps against all, and 20 dps against armored), be Medivac Healed, has 125 health and 1 armor and has a movespeed of 2.25(3.175 with Stim) It costs 100 minerals, 25 gas, 2 supply, and takes 30 seconds.
Wow, actually looking at it, what is the point of mauraders with this?
Unstimmed Maurader It has more base dps(11), More dps against armored(Non mechanical)(4.5), More dps vs Mechanical(10)(17 vs Helions) more health(95), Higher base speed (.56)
It costs 50 more minerals and gas, and 15 more seconds.
Stimmed Maurader It has more base dps(7.7), Less dps vs Armored(Non Mechanical)(-2.3), More dps vs Mechanical(3)(7.7 vs Helions) more health(115), Lower speed(-.3)
Costs and being healed by a medivac seems to be the only thing that makes a Maurader better...
A Warhound, as it is, is basically a high health perma stimmed Maurader without slow. Edit: AS IT IS I know numbers will change, but still
Whoa, the Warhound is faster than a stimmed Marauder?
That's... scary.
Faster than an UNSTIMMED
Slightly slower than a stimmed.
It is slightly slower than a stalker to. It will be able to kit stalkers(range 7) without blink, though its DSP is so high, I don't know why it wouldn't just dump on them. Also with range 7, it can opperate a good distance behind battle hellions.
I still think the warhound looks ugly, scv on stilts type ugly, but I guess that can always be changed.
I dislike the a-click type behaviour of the warhound and the other units in general. It disappoints me a bit to hear from the interviews with David Kim that they add these types of units to cater to the casual players. I think the unlimited selection caters to them enough, but I believe that higher level players should be able to get more out of every unit through some kind of micro, further setting apart rookies to novice to pro and everything inbetween.
Hopefully if they dont change it by beta, the warhound gets abused that they change the unit or remove it entirely before the release of HOTS.
The fact that the beta isn't even out yet and we have complainers about the new units is sad. Why doesn't the community just wait for the beta then complain?
On August 23 2012 03:09 O INSANE O wrote: The fact that the beta isn't even out yet and we have complainers about the new units is sad. Why doesn't the community just wait for the beta then complain?
Because beta is mainly about balance and many of us have problems with the core concepts and design behind this unit.
It's just another no skill a-move unit... and its making mech into a slower bio, which isn't mech (read the big article "In defence of Mech")
Honestly, I think they need to get rid of the haywire missiles and give it an long range single-target DPS AA attack. It would make them more viable in TvZ vs brood lords as well as maintaining effectiveness against collosi.
On August 23 2012 03:09 O INSANE O wrote: The fact that the beta isn't even out yet and we have complainers about the new units is sad. Why doesn't the community just wait for the beta then complain?
It's a reflection of how serious the problems with this unit are. Everything about its design seems detrimental to the game.
The ability should do something tactically, rather than simply being a generic attack. Otherwise you get yawntastic results like we saw in the PvT battle report. There are plenty of debuffs that could be applied, pick one and slap it on in exchange for some of the damage.
I think that haywire is not useful the way it is now. As a result it just gives +5dps against mech units. And warhound with it's current stats really looks like a big maradeur.
I think that haywire must be some kind of a blinding cloud like viper has, but against single mech targets, making them unable to attack for several seconds. And it should not be a cloud of gas so that any unit can easily move out from it, but like an EMP impulse that switches of the weapons of a single target.
With this ability warhound may be used as a tank unit that uses it's high HP to get closely to enemies tanks or colossus and quickly disable them. After changing warhounds dps (I think it should not be higher than 13-14) this ability can be easily adapted to make warhound very good against robotics(immortal/colosus) and factory(tanks/thors) units but weak against stalkers(against them main counter unit still will be maradeurs).
I'm really disappointed after reading (parts of) this thread. I think the Warhound is a quite bad design choice for an RTS, but not because it is an "a-click" unit. It is because it is onedimensional. It is flatout not designed to be built against a whole race and only useful to its full potential if the enemy builds certain units.
Thats pretty bad in the long run, because there are not many options on how to use the unit and they can even be limited more by your OPPONENT, so you don't even have the initiative on how much use you get out of the Warhound.
Besides that, I'm fine with the unit, although I like the Goliath more from a visual perspective.
I can't say anything about the balance and obviously all of the above is my personal opinion, maybe I am wrong.
On August 23 2012 03:09 O INSANE O wrote: The fact that the beta isn't even out yet and we have complainers about the new units is sad. Why doesn't the community just wait for the beta then complain?
Because then it will be too late. what are we here for if not to discuss starcraft?
All the people saying "wait to the beta to judge" probably don't realize that there will be a limit as to what Blizzard will change once it goes beta. If we see serious design flaws now then the sooner they are addressed, or Blizzard states why these concerns are incorrect, the better it is.
On August 23 2012 19:54 Aetherial wrote: All the people saying "wait to the beta to judge" probably don't realize that there will be a limit as to what Blizzard will change once it goes beta. If we see serious design flaws now then the sooner they are addressed, or Blizzard states why these concerns are incorrect, the better it is.
You must have missed the first beta. Infestors had frenzy. Overseers dropped infested marines. Neural Parasite could be casted while burrowed. Id say blizzard is willing to change quite a bit. They have even removed and added entire upgrades post-release.
Also, instead of terran asking for new micro units, why not use the ones you already have? Sure the ghost gets some use, but if you are begging for micro add it in anyways. Or better yet.... a raven. (gasp). Cant get much more micro than a spell caster that you are fighting to keep alive.
And I am missing something with all these claims that protoss and zerg are a-click races? Just because we dont stutter step our first units doesnt make the race an a-click army.
Edit: After all that I forgot to put my opinion on the Warhound. I do feel like it fills the same role as the marauder a bit to heavily. Although that might be difficult to say because we dont have a specifically anti-mech unit in the game yet. It will cause protoss to play with more gateway and stargate plays instead of robo. Thatd be interesting.
Blizzard wants to split up the death ball. The Warhound is the essence of death ball. The Warhound is like the Immortal, a unit built to counter other set units. By them selves they suck, cuz they would die to certain units, but in a clump they help to add the perfect mixture of units which makes a death ball. It´s neat that we get a unit which deals + damage to mechanicle, since we didn´t see that yet, however if this is all the unit does it is too two dimensional and boring. Like the Immortal, like the Corruptor, like the Tempest (All neat about it, is it´s range, nothing else!) The Hydra does absolutely nothing, it has no abilities.. For the age we live in, all units should have abilities, more uses strategically/tactically. The Dragoon is in my opinion, one of the most boring units ever made, the Stalker however is almost my favourite. It´s amazing how much an upgraded ability can do. The Warhound is sadly more like the Dragoon and it´s rather uncanny to add in an expansion.
At it's very worst, even if the unit is the best unit in the game it's self-limiting because of the mechanical restriction on the haywire missiles and the lack of aa that comes out of the factory.
In PvT No one in their right mind is going go robotics against it because it shits on everything on the ground that comes out of the robo and everything on the ground that can protect the robo units, basically making gateway compositions or air your go-to options against a player with enough factories.
Likewise in TvT no one is going to play mech vs mech when these things exist, it will just become a battle of who can make more of them, and unlike colossus wars in PvP the best response would be to switch to a different strategy that didn't involve so many mechanical ground units.
Worst case, we see some terrible warhound vs warhound games, or 1-sided games where protoss is stupid enough to attempt to make robo units against mech. Best case we rarely see the unit because everyone is smart enough not to do that.
What is the proposed range on the things? Is it possible that tanks will still be able to wreck warhounds if you are able to keep an infantry line inf front of them? Or battlehellions I guess.......
It might be one of those relationships like the hellion and speedling/chargelots. Sure the hellions damage counters the unit, just dont let it get touched.
On August 23 2012 21:35 Alabast wrote: What is the proposed range on the things? Is it possible that tanks will still be able to wreck warhounds if you are able to keep an infantry line inf front of them? Or battlehellions I guess.......
It might be one of those relationships like the hellion and speedling/chargelots. Sure the hellions damage counters the unit, just dont let it get touched.
On August 23 2012 03:09 O INSANE O wrote: The fact that the beta isn't even out yet and we have complainers about the new units is sad. Why doesn't the community just wait for the beta then complain?
It's a reflection of how serious the problems with this unit are. Everything about its design seems detrimental to the game.
Agreed but what can Teamliquid do about it? Seriously - we can all sook like babies here (me included) but it's not helping. Should TL do a full article on the unit on the front page? Should some pro gamers provide feedback through official channels?
I find the unit design bad (concept and function) and design bad (graphics, animation, model) it's just a ... 'dumb' unit. Really, really dislike it. So very very Command and Conquer or Supreme Commander, it just seems... dumb and lame - not cool, not clever, not tough and not particularly 'terran' - very unstarcraft like to be honest. Ugh.
If you can find some of the PROS thoughts about this unit you will see a lot of them think its very strong, so for this reason I think it should stay :D.
no, it's not good. it's a dumb a-move microless unit and David Kim has serious understanding issues and an incredibly irritating tendency to ignore everything the community tells him.
also it will most likely fuck TvT up. and TvT is my favorite match up to watch and play, i'm mad.
The way the Warhound runs makes me nuts.. looks really stupid. Why can't they come up with a really new unit. They should think more out of the box rather than putting "old" unit concepts into HOTS. Zerg and Toss have new cool units... why not Terran?
I think that Warhound is way too strong tho. Warhound + Hellions own every single ground unit T.T atleast from my own experience I think that its too good.
don't really see while all the mechanics that made the predecessor special need to be phased out. tanks are getting as irrelevant as ever with the new "mech" additions (+vipers?) when they're basically the soul of mech.
sc2 wasn't the most anticipated rts game of recent times because of bw's amazing zvz games or pvp coinflips, it's the strong area control that forces strategy and dynamic play.
On September 06 2012 03:49 Grebliv wrote: make warhounds more supporty and buff tanks?
don't really see while all the mechanics that made the predecessor special need to be phased out. tanks are getting as irrelevant as ever with the new "mech" additions (+vipers?) when they're basically the soul of mech.
You mean the soul of Terran? Back in BW, the whole gameplay as a Terran player revolved around building tanks in every MU, with everything else supporting haha.
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
The reason I dislike the units very very strongly is that it's preventing tanks from seeing much use. Why would you want to get tanks which are 150/125 if you can get warhounds for 50 less gas? They're fast, more survivable and more dps.
Warhounds needs a role change, frankly. Mech could be made into a lot of fun but right now it's being destroyed. I liked their first approach: Thor becomes a bigger thing, warhounds go to AA, and then it becomes battle hellion/good mine placement/warhounds and thor support.
That would give terran the ability to either go bio (more mobility and harass) or terran (defensive push)
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
Quick nerf it! nerf it to the ground!
No.
or just change other races 1a units???
You expect them to change them which is basically them admitting that they've made a mistake at some point and can't balance them?
abilities will be balanced out over time so i dont care about the abilities too much.
its just soooo damn annoyingly ugly to see going around the map in some numbers.. i cant understand how this LOOK made it to BETA, they have always pointed out how "COOL" they want stuff to be.. i dont see how the designers and subsequent testers thought it looked cool, felt cool or simply was cool.
i know its harsh but its my opinion. I was so sad when watching the terran streams..
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
Quick nerf it! nerf it to the ground!
No.
or just change other races 1a units???
You expect them to change them which is basically them admitting that they've made a mistake at some point and can't balance them?
Good luck with that. Blizz don't admit fault.
i prefer to be the race with no 1a unit that building a mech marauder and a move into win.
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
Quick nerf it! nerf it to the ground!
No.
AHAHAHA, and what response does it force? Going air because it stomps everything on the ground once you get enaugh warhounds? Play the game first, then comment on it.
On September 06 2012 03:49 Grebliv wrote: make warhounds more supporty and buff tanks?
don't really see while all the mechanics that made the predecessor special need to be phased out. tanks are getting as irrelevant as ever with the new "mech" additions (+vipers?) when they're basically the soul of mech.
You mean the soul of Terran? Back in BW, the whole gameplay as a Terran player revolved around building tanks in every MU, with everything else supporting haha.
Which is why they still should be pretty much, why make toss the new boring version of bw terran?
I play terran to make tanks not marauder drop and type gg (win or loss) after 10-13 min.
On the other hand you're also forcing toss players to play the passive role in pvt which is historically not their part. Why switch it up now? Should we just remove zerg t3 in hots and make them the rush race because whatever, time to change things up now and piss off if you actually want to play the same style/race.
The Warhound, aside from being hideous and cartoony, has no role in the game other than "hard counter mech."
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
The Warhound is everything I hate about Sc2 compounded into one unit.
The Warhound is a Goliath that can't be microed or shoot up. Seriously could you just put the goliath back into the game it adds so many more cool options for terran? Tanks are supposed to be the mech army's "anti-mech."
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
Quick nerf it! nerf it to the ground!
No.
or just change other races 1a units???
You expect them to change them which is basically them admitting that they've made a mistake at some point and can't balance them?
Good luck with that. Blizz don't admit fault.
i prefer to be the race with no 1a unit that building a mech marauder and a move into win.
On September 06 2012 03:49 Kamwah wrote: OMG! Terran have an a-move unit that does decent damage and warrants a particular response from the other player.
Quick nerf it! nerf it to the ground!
No.
AHAHAHA, and what response does it force? Going air because it stomps everything on the ground once you get enaugh warhounds? Play the game first, then comment on it.
The same goes for yourself. Play the game then comment on it.
Well, only the autocast on haywire missile is too strong, I mean stalkers don't blink themselves when they get low health and corruptors don't auto-cast corruption, so it make no sense for the war hound to autocast haywire.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video of Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
On September 06 2012 04:02 Sinensis wrote: The Warhound is a Goliath that can't be microed or shoot up. Seriously could you just put the goliath back into the game it adds so many more cool options for terran? Tanks are supposed to be the mech army's "anti-mech."
explain plz how is goliath more microable than warhound.
There is no AA?! I thought that was the point of removing the Thor and adding the Warhound. Fuck anti-tank stuff, I want to be able to defend my army from mutas and void rays.
On September 06 2012 04:02 Sinensis wrote: The Warhound is a Goliath that can't be microed or shoot up. Seriously could you just put the goliath back into the game it adds so many more cool options for terran? Tanks are supposed to be the mech army's "anti-mech."
explain plz how is goliath more microable than warhound.
Alright here. A goliath has 8 range anti-air missiles that can be used to kill most air units extremely effectively, using hold position/patrol micro greatly increases their effectiveness.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
In the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
I love when Terran players justify them having micro with unit control when all they do is stim and stutter step. Protoss has to use perfect forcefields and zerg needs perfect surround. Get over it, every race requires alot of micro but its different approaches to it.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
And in which magical dimension does pure stalker beat pure warhound? You kite the melee, FF the stalkers, win.
I do have to say that I'm a bit disappointed with Blizz for not getting more creative with Terran. I can think of so many cool things u could do. Bringing Thor/Goliath like units into HotS is not really new. Terran needs a lot more work by introducing a real new unit.
Mech in BW was: Tanks for covering ground and dealing damage. Vultures being the "frontiermen" and mining the ground. Goliaths for anti air.
It was great spectator fun to watch, because there was one tank, one human-form, and one bike. Variety, and you could tell the difference by just looking: "Ah, that is a tank blowing anything coming near, and one bike is frantically placing mines in the front, and those robots are firing at air units. I get it!" Vultures were heavy micro intensive, and the tanks slow pushed and covered ground in a way that was different from other races and from bio. Basically, Bill Roper and his gang hit a 3 note chord that rang true and clear. It was basically a perfect unit design that worked well together and were distinct.
What Blizzard is giving us in HOTS is basically bio from the factory. Warhound is another two legged ground to ground unit that hard counter armored units, filling the role as a Marauder. Marauder is not well designed, it just had to be there to be because the roach and the stalker existed for the other two races.
Having Thor, Warhound and BattleHellion ain't good unit design or unit symbiosis, it is just bland. Remove Thor from the game, and try to rethink Warhound, both in design as well as role. Perhaps a walking Valkyrie. Just don't make it so bland and unoriginal. The problem probably lies in that BW mech was perfect, be it a fluke or Roper's pure genious. Either way, they probably realized BW units were great, but they do not want to add the same units so they change them a bit (which makes them worse design wise): Lurkers that send out locusts, mines that walk themselves instead of being deployed by Vultures, Guardians that shoot living things instead of strange fireballs. And, instead of a ground Defiler they introduce the flying Defiler. Either, make up new units, or just use the same units as in BW.
I really don't like it, mech seems to so much better regardless of them, mines and better defensive hellions help a huge amount, they just mean you don't have to build tanks at all, they should be trying to support tanks better, not replace them imo. We'll see, right now they're just pretty damn powerful, and that dominates all discussion about them.
What are you people talking about not being able to micro them,yea when you have like 20 it gets kinda hard but these things are so fast you can micro the shit outta them.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
There's nothing wrong with the Warhound, seriously, that is like asking protoss to have charge not on autocast, Terran is already a hard race as it is.
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.
I concur. Of course I would like to see other races more micro intensive but if this is the way to even out amount of work players have to put to play certain race than so be it. It is better than no changes at all.
Also, maybe Im in minority but I like this unit design and animations - I am too tired of being tied with moaning no-life nerds who whine just one day after the start of the beta.
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:09 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:06 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:02 Sinensis wrote:
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
Lower the range of the standard Warhound attack, make it slightly weaker, and change Haywire missile so it doesn't do much damage but instead stuns mechanical units (or maybe just prevent them from attacking) for a few seconds. That way it could function as a unit designed to help Siege Tanks; in TvP, it could stun Stalkers/Immortals and allow tanks to siege into position, and in the same fashion, it could be used to break siege lines in TvT by giving you a window of opportunity to storm the line with bio or move your own siege line forward.
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:09 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:06 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:02 Sinensis wrote:
It can't be microed effectively vs anything... it's sole purpose it to be 1aed toward mech armies and forgotten about. It's a slow, badly designed, boring unit. How do you break a siege line with Warhounds? 1a. How do you drop with Warhounds? Oh wait you wouldn't because they're just a marauder that can't be healed by medivacs.
What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
On September 06 2012 04:42 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:39 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:09 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:06 Bagi wrote: [quote] What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
That is true. And I was just arguing that just because Warhounds can't kite Stalkers doesn't mean Stalkers are an appropriate response at all lol. I don't know what is atm. Maybe Chargelots, but that's nothing BHs can't handle. Reminds me when I first started playing BW and I used Firebats to kill the zealots while the Marines or Goliaths destroyed Goons and other stuff haha. Then I learned how to play...
On September 06 2012 04:42 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:39 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:09 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:06 Bagi wrote: [quote] What the fuck, have you actually watched a good player use warhounds?
Are you seriously going to tell me that a fast unit with 7 range cannot be microed?
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
Zerg got whole lot of a dumb uninteresting unitswhich are much more boring than Warhound: Roach, Infestor, Hydra, Corruptor
On September 06 2012 04:42 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:39 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:09 Sinensis wrote: [quote]
Stephano is pretty good I was watching him use them for a while. Maybe you can find me a video or Warhound micro maybe I'm missing something.
So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
Zerg got whole lot of a dumb uninteresting unitswhich are much more boring than Warhound: Roach, Infestor, Hydra, Corruptor
Adding more dumb to the game isn't going to fix the dumb that is already there. And the infestor isn't boring.
On September 06 2012 04:42 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:39 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:12 Bagi wrote: [quote] So your argument is that if Stephano didn't micro them while offracing as terran, they can't be microed?
If you can't figure out the potential of having 1 extra range more than most ranged units as well as having good movement speed, I don't think I can help you.
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
Zerg got whole lot of a dumb uninteresting unitswhich are much more boring than Warhound: Roach, Infestor, Hydra, Corruptor
Adding more dumb to the game isn't going to fix the dumb that is already there.
As I said - I much more prefer to make other races more micro demanding but if this is the way to balance out difficulty of mastering races than so be it. Either way it should end the times that Terran players are the only ones that have to micro their heart out.
Edit: Infestor not boring? Lol - counter to everything, chain fungal is retarded.
It's way too fast for a mech unit (faster than most Zerg units!?), has tons of HP, high damage, low cost, excellent against pretty much all units, builds quickly. Needs major changes.
"Fixing the stale tank lines in TVT". Now what I'm seeing with some games is Warhound vs Warhound. Terrible looks so far and then some people just going pure bio again.
On September 06 2012 04:29 Avean wrote: I love when Terran players justify them having micro with unit control when all they do is stim and stutter step. Protoss has to use perfect forcefields and zerg needs perfect surround. Get over it, every race requires alot of micro but its different approaches to it.
In defense of terrans even tho I'm not one..they need good split in TvZ, and EMP, snipes in PvT. Also don't forget we protosses need good Feedbacks, Storms, and blink micro
Warhounds feel like Roaches. Just a very simple, useful in nearly every situation, a-move unit. Depending on the numbers on the Waround, TvT might be like ZvZ where you just get tons of Warhouds and try to form the better concave with upgrades.
On September 06 2012 05:07 Animostas wrote: Warhounds feel like Roaches. Just a very simple, useful in nearly every situation, a-move unit. Depending on the numbers on the Waround, TvT might be like ZvZ where you just get tons of Warhouds and try to form the better concave with upgrades.
At least you can burrow-move roaches, Warhounds have literally no fun utility.
Warhounds and entombs are the worst additions so far. One needs to be removed completely (entomb) the other needs to be changed. Both have the same problem - being terribly boring - specially entomb. They couldn't have made a more one dimensional spell even if they tried.
They're not even as interesting as roaches. Roaches at least have a few interesting features (lava cheap, but very expensive in supply) and weaknesses (low range, crap in big fights...).
Warhounds look... perfect. It's a high-damage tanky unit with long range and great speed. It looks cheap, supply efficient and good against everything. It's big and beefy enough to not be vulnerable to splash damage. I wonder what the idea is supposed to be with them because I can't see what this unit is supposed to be about.
On September 06 2012 05:11 Apolo wrote: Warhounds and entombs are the worst additions so far. One needs to be removed completely (entomb) the other needs to be changed. Both have the same problem - being terribly boring - specially entomb. They couldn't have made a more one dimensional spell even if they tried.
Exactly! It is terribly boring. But we as players and spectators have learned one thing we did not know in WoL: If we do not shout loud enough, some things that are detrimental for the game will stay. The Colossus stayed in WoL because B themselves did not see how poorly designed the unit was. And, we did not make our voices heard so they kept it. This time we know that even poor design choices will stay, and have stayed in WoL, so if we do not step up, it will stay, just like Colossus did, just like Mothership did, just like Thor did. People kept saying the mantra: "The Colossus is good, it is cool. GIVE IT TIME." They gave it time, they gave it 2 years, and it must be the worst designed unit in a RTS so far. We can not bide our time and wait for it to evolve, since it wont like we have seen with numerous WoL units. The only unit that actually was hated upon that grew in WoL was the Baneling. It was frowned upon in Beta, and it turned out to be one of the best designed units in WoL. However, Warhound and Entomb are not the Baneling.
On August 15 2012 01:45 Sircoolguy wrote: 1. It's ugly 2. Very A-Click like, making it not very useful to micro 3. Doesn't feel very mech like 4. No AA
It looks laughly bad and I'm surprised Blizzard even released it in a beta looking like that. Its like a Chinese rip-off of a Goliath or something. Like a horrendously ugly goliath.
Warhound is the worst new unit by far. It makes the game boring, discourages tanks, it's ugly , has an ugly attack animation, and a stupid name. There's pretty much nothing good about it.
On September 06 2012 04:42 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:39 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:36 JudicatorHammurabi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:28 Sinensis wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:26 Bagi wrote:
On September 06 2012 04:17 Sinensis wrote: [quote]
The movement speed is 2.81. So, they're as fast as an SCV. Which is slower than every attacking unit with 6 range. Wait, maybe not ghosts or non-stimmed m/m.
So in the early game, pretty much the only units that can keep up with them are lings (battle hellions deal with them) and stalkers.
If you rushed warhounds against toss, would you kite back and forth, sniping stalkers and sentries with the missiles? Or would you just a-move?
Stalkers are faster than warhounds how do you plan on kiting them? The second you get close enough they can just walk toward you and kill you because you are not fast enough to get away.
This used to happen with hydras all the time in ZvP back when people still tried to make hydras work. Then everyone realized they were just slow, boring, useless, 1a units that have no purpose in the game.
Warhounds also ridiculously hardcounter Stalkers. You don't even need to try to kite them.
Hydras also "ridiculously hardcounter" stalkers. That doesn't mean they are an exciting or worthwhile unit.
Hydras are not good in many other situations. Meanwhile, Warhound spam is raping the whole beta haha.
I'm not arguing about how "good" warhounds are relative to other units right now. I am arguing for how "dumb" or how "boring" warhounds are relative to other units right now. The only unit in Sc2 right now that is as bland as the Warhound is the hydralisk.
Zerg got whole lot of a dumb uninteresting unitswhich are much more boring than Warhound: Roach, Infestor, Hydra, Corruptor
Adding more dumb to the game isn't going to fix the dumb that is already there.
As I said - I much more prefer to make other races more micro demanding but if this is the way to balance out difficulty of mastering races than so be it. Either way it should end the times that Terran players are the only ones that have to micro their heart out.
Edit: Infestor not boring? Lol - counter to everything, chain fungal is retarded.
I completely agree with you that they should be making the other races more micro demanding.
My problem with balancing out the races like this is it makes it harder and harder for the best players to actually dominate. Part of the fun of Broodwar (and to some extent WoL) is there were those transcendent players (Flash, Bisu, Jaedong, Mvp, maybe MC, maybe Taeja, etc.) Worst case scenario is if Blizzard continues to balance races the way they appear to be (less and less micro/macro mechanics to worry about) we will get to a point where the skill ceiling plateaus at a lower level and we'll hit a wall where the skill ceiling will plateau and anyone will be able to beat anyone at any given time. This is really frustrating to me as a spectator of the game, as part of the fun is seeing who's really the best. If we get to a point where there's no consistency in results because the game is too simplistic it will become much more boring to watch.
I don't think we're there yet, and likely aren't even close, but so far all the additions (be it auto-mine or warhounds) seem to be pointing towards an easier game where it's harder to differentiate oneself from the elite and "the best".
EDIT: I cannot wait for IdrA to get a beta-key and see him face Warhound/BH pushes.
It is a noob friendly unit. Terran is too weak on low skill levels. I hope they balance it i a way that it is used the lesser the higher the level of the participating players.
On September 06 2012 04:56 Danzo wrote: "Fixing the stale tank lines in TVT". Now what I'm seeing with some games is Warhound vs Warhound. Terrible looks so far and then some people just going pure bio again.
Pretty much. Instead of "stale tank lines" we'll see Warhound/bio death-balls
On September 06 2012 04:56 Danzo wrote: "Fixing the stale tank lines in TVT". Now what I'm seeing with some games is Warhound vs Warhound. Terrible looks so far and then some people just going pure bio again.
Pretty much. Instead of "stale tank lines" we'll see Warhound/bio death-balls
I haven't tried out the beta, but from it's stats the warhund makes the impression he will be rolled by pure bio. So if he goes bio/Warhound, focus on making more marines and less siege tanks.
On September 06 2012 05:31 hitpoint wrote: Warhound is the worst new unit by far. It makes the game boring, discourages tanks, it's ugly , has an ugly attack animation, and a stupid name. There's pretty much nothing good about it.
There is two things good about it, it's portrait and unit voice are amazing.
Siege Tank wars is the philosophy/ideology of playing terran: good positioning. Why are we changing the tradition of Siege Tank wars that started with the first starcraft game?
Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
Warhoudn sounds good, unit voice is cool and portrait looks awesome! As a terran player im happy if there is 1 more unit that i dont have to micro TBH. Thank lord for that! Mech here i come!
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
On September 06 2012 05:42 Sp00ly wrote: So has anybody seen how a tradition MMM ball does against a mostly warhound comp?
I've seen ForGG's MMM lose against CuteAngel mech (who was that again, sounds familiar), but the latter one just used some warhounds to strengthen the traditional mech against marauders (he went plenty of hellion/warhound with some tanks).
Part of what makes mech mech isn't that units come from the factory (as described in a pretty good thread that I can't find at the moment [EDIT: Thank you Gindo (In Defense Of Mech]) - it's that it's based around the siege tank and controlling space. The warhound COULD be useful in defending tanks from immortals - which is currently one of the biggest threats to mech (the other being charge zealots). However even if its damage was nerfed it's too fast and honestly too good - it's not like I understand the HOTS meta at ALL but in the few games I've seen the Terran starts off with some tanks, then realizes Thor/Hellion/Warhounds is so good you don't need to control space anymore. And I'm not saying it's imbalanced - Protoss I've seen are dealing with this by going mass tempest and kiting the units - but the play isn't really what traditionally makes mech "mech". It's like bio that isn't as good at dealing with air.
Everything else I think for terran is pretty great in the expansion. Widow mines have a lot of potential and I won't buy that it has to come from the Hellion ONLY because that's how it worked in Brood War. They're 1 supply, they build two at a time and they're cheap, and not only can be powerful on their own, they more importantly buy time to get siege tanks in place to control the space your opponent wants to occupy - that's very powerful. Battle Hellions have great potential in being both harass units and units that can protect siege tanks from charge zealots.
It seems like Terran players would rather have spider mines and an upgrade for tanks rather than the Warhound. Maybe Blizzard will listen to your feedback and make changes.
Keep it as it is with perhaps slight stat adjustments, and make Thors AA attack do 48 dmg to all types of air units. Nerf ground atack to compensate. That way Thor doesn't overlap with Warhound as ground support and never gets made.
Option 2, remove Thor, give Warhound AA attack and nerf other stuff accordingly.
I prefer option 1 personally. Either way, Mech REALLY needs a viable AA unit, not the shitty Thor we have now.
Terran is the only race that relies on micro and real skill to win, cut them some slack. I just wish they added tons of micro intensive units for P and Z to balance this out..
Blizzard come on. Why cater so much to the the extreme casual wing? When you do that you not only lose the hard-core wing, but you lose alot of moderates as well.
I think the issue is that although Hardcore players stay around, the casuals are larger in number and buy more games, though none of my nub SC friends still play.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
I'd rather they bring back the Goliath. It's a standard mech unit that has high DPS (so the Immortal's Hardened Shield wouldn't matter), would still allow Immortals to be viable agaisnt Mech (which is important for balance), and it can be micro'd to better usage. It has an Anti-Air attack so it allows better transitions into Mech versus Zerg since the only anti-air Mech is the Thor (not counting the Viking) and the Goliath was known for chasing off Mutas in Brood War. It just bridges so many gaps that currently are presented.
I think it looks pretty cool. Sure, it's just another a move unit, but that's the state of SC2- Maradaurs, roaches, collosi, archons, chargelots, zerglings.
That said, I'd rather if it had the anti air attack instead of the anti armor missles. It would feel more mech that way.
I've already sayed that before. But as an Only mech player whatever the MU is right now. If the Warhound makes it through the beta. I'll just switch race.
This units just make everything is fun and interesting in mech going away. where are positionnal play? Where are leapfroging? And weaknesseses when extending too far with too few units. Batlle Hellion and 1 supply widowmines alone would have make TvP mech pretty much more easy to pull off. But this... thing, is just killing meching terran.
Swarm, i'm just coming ! Never through of switching before, but this, omagad, it's just the worst addition i can think of in mech.
On September 06 2012 06:01 Jasiwel wrote: I'd rather they bring back the Goliath. It's a standard mech unit that has high DPS (so the Immortal's Hardened Shield wouldn't matter), would still allow Immortals to be viable agaisnt Mech (which is important for balance), and it can be micro'd to better usage. It has an Anti-Air attack so it allows better transitions into Mech versus Zerg since the only anti-air Mech is the Thor (not counting the Viking) and the Goliath was known for chasing off Mutas in Brood War. It just bridges so many gaps that currently are presented.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
It's a freaking a-move unit with an autocast dmg ability which does amazing dmg and it is just 2 supply. I think if it's made 4 supply or atleast 3 and the missle thing isn't autocasted it could become an interesting unit but from the streams I've watched so far it seems a bit too good especialy vs protoss. Also blizzard has said that they like for people to have multiple army comp choices and the warhoud kinda forces protoss to go zealot/archon/ht(which I like but it takes out the choice).
On September 06 2012 05:49 Scila wrote: There's 2 options:
Keep it as it is with perhaps slight stat adjustments, and make Thors AA attack do 48 dmg to all types of air units. Nerf ground atack to compensate. That way Thor doesn't overlap with Warhound as ground support and never gets made.
Option 2, remove Thor, give Warhound AA attack and nerf other stuff accordingly.
I prefer option 1 personally. Either way, Mech REALLY needs a viable AA unit, not the shitty Thor we have now.
i think thors are great and completely fine as the source of mech anti-air
i think mech in WoL is much better designed than mech in BW because I think the thor fits it much better than the goliath. Unlike goliaths the thor is slow (fits mech) and moreso big and powerful (fits mech). The thing making mech so weak against toss is theres no optimal thing the tank for the tanks (unlike mines in BW).
I believe battle hellions by itself completely solve the lacking aspect of Mech in WoL.
i believe the warhound is completely unneeded and should essentially be removed. Battle Hellion/tank armies should be ALMOST as powerful as warhound based armies, without the lameness of the warhound needing to exist
back to thors
thors are weak anti-air, sure, however I think they are fine because the mech area of terran can be focused on anti-ground (with small anti-air capability in the thor) while the terran gets vikings for anti-air if needed
the problem is not that mech lacks anti-air, the problem is that fungal absolutely and completely rape-fucks vikings all day. not to mention infestors also get to add in infested terrans to compliment the fungal (as if fungal wasnt bad enough) and the broodlings tank damage making the infested terrans stay alive alot longer and so powerful, and you cant really "run" from the infested terrans since mech is so slow and you lose too much while retreating to the infestors/broodlords
I believe the biggest problem in WoL right now is the infestor. Collossi isnt really that badly designed compared to the infestor. What makes collossi the most OP is forcefields. Roach/hydra/corrupter would trade well with it if not for the forcefields.
i believe the source of the problem in almost all things in WoL is the infestor. fungal rapes air too hard. If fungal was changed to not target air it would fix SO MUCH. vikings would become so much stronger against broodlords, zerg could just mass queen/hydra against voidrays/carriers and would still be completely fine, and ZvZ doesnt matter (heck, muta wars is more fun than this current crap)
The warhound sucks...just give tanks + vs mechanical or something. The warhound is just a flawed and dumb unit that overlaps to much with other units. Either this or bring the goliath back instead of it. Just do something to get rid of this disgusting thing... This isn't the mech I enjoy...this is a slower and more powerful MMM without the micro
I hate how mech looks, it's not even mech anymore. Terran now has like 4 units which looks the same way, a mechanical walker robot. They got: Battle Hellion, Warhound, Thor, Landed Viking. Let's also note that they make two transformer units now the hellion and viking. I think that's the worst design ever. Make new units instead of making unit copies.
A counter to tanks? Makes no sense, we hardly see huge tank stalemates anymore due to better maps. (I don't even know where DB got the idea) A counter to archons and immortals? Maybe, but they could've just buffed tanks and modified hardened shield, a much more interesting option. I don't think it has a role in TvZ, tanks are better vs roaches and thors are better vs mutas. And all 3 suck vs BLs.
I like the widow mine and battle hellion. The battle mode adds another dimension to the hellion, which is cool. The concept of the widow mine is good, but I feel like the damage/cost/supply should be tweaked. Maybe make it static defense? Solves the supply problem, and isn't too much of a BW-copy.
It doesn't fit T, it looks like something that comes from the C&C universe, where a bunch of bland robots walk around.
Look at a mech army with tanks, thors, and warhounds. It looks really really awkward - only tanks look appropriate. Maybe 1-2 thors looks ok, but when you have like 6-7, they look really dumb too.
1. It looks bad because it's a bland generic robot. 2. There are too many robot walkers, T has FOUR! Thors, vikings, battle hellion, warhound! 3. The attack looks really uninspired: looks like stalker shot 4. The feel is wrong. T is all about grit and resourcefulness. There are transformations because of necessity. I'm not sure what the warhound represents in any sense. And why does it have a shield?
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
I'm not talking about the foreign scene... Blizzard killed BW in Korea. They bullied the whole scene for two years, blackmailed KeSPA to force them to switch to sc2. To the point all sponsors outside KeSPA did not want to have anything to do with "illegitimate leagues".
You seem pretty blind. People optimistically looking forward to hots are in a minority. Not to mention the fact that sc2 lost half of its original player base since release, while both BW and WC3 were actually gaining players over the years.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
It doesn't even make sense because they nailed it with the aesthetic on viking and hellion. They DO feel Terran.
And then they come out with Thor and Warhound. Thor looks really dumb when you have a ton of them, though 1-2 with a primarily bio army looks kinda cool.
Honestly, if you just used the Goliath model instead of the Warhound model, it would look 100x better.
On September 06 2012 06:06 xrapture wrote: I think it looks pretty cool. Sure, it's just another a move unit, but that's the state of SC2- Maradaurs, roaches, collosi, archons, chargelots, zerglings.
That said, I'd rather if it had the anti air attack instead of the anti armor missles. It would feel more mech that way.
You can do basic kite micro with marauders, you can spread them out and shit. With roaches you can burow micro(granted we never see this but the possibility is still there), you can do some pickup micro with WP as far as colossi is concerned. Archons are a-move sure, chargelots too..with lings you set up flanks and counter attack & hold micro etc.
Warhounds?
AMOVEAMOVEAMOVE. -_____- I hate this unit. If the best MU to watch becomes who makes more warhounds i'll be super pissed.
No more Gumiho vs MMA style games, MVP vs MMA. it's all about who makes more warhounds..I hope not :[
I would definetely change warhound, nerf its HP a bit and make the rocket manually-castable so it actually requires some skill to use.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
When I talk about bringing the Goliath back, or rather into SCII Multiplayer (since it is in the Single Player), it's not for some displaced sense of nostalgia. It's legitimately for better balance and qualitative gameplay. The Warhound just feels like a plug-in solution that offers little reward in the way of gameplay and as a designer it just reeks of a half-assed attitude. There are so many better ways to make Terran Mech viable. The Goliath just currently works well with the metagame and how everything is trying to balance as of now. The Warhound ruins the point of the Immortal (which was to help Protoss Gateway units be able to fight Mech Terran and Armored Zerg, that of which it does well) and throws PvT into a massive question mark, more so as a result of the War Hellion and Widow Mines.
As for people not being majorly disappointed or bringing up BW units that can fill in gaps (like giving Protoss the Scout could also help legitimize Stargate further from a balance perspective), not a lot of SCII players have played Brood War. You will run into them frequently on Customs, but just as frequently as you run into them you'll run into players that have only heard of Brood War. It's not because people are BW nostalgiacs that BW units are called back to replace half-assedly designed units, I assure you.
It has no sense to have a amove unit in mech play, remove it (2)
11%
Ugly, another robot unit, but could be nice with another design (1)
5%
Currently too much OP but could be nice (0)
0%
19 total votes
Your vote: What is worst in the Warhound ?
(Vote): Ugly, another robot unit, but could be nice with another design (Vote): Currently too much OP but could be nice (Vote): It has no sense to have a amove unit in mech play, remove it (Vote): Option 1, 2 & 3
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
I'm not talking about the foreign scene... Blizzard killed BW in Korea. They bullied the whole scene for two years, blackmailed KeSPA to force them to switch to sc2. To the point all sponsors outside KeSPA did not want to have anything to do with "illegitimate leagues".
You seem pretty blind. People optimistically looking forward to hots are in a minority. Not to mention the fact that sc2 lost half of its original player base since release, while both BW and WC3 were actually gaining players over the years.
I think Blizzard really needs to be worried.
Lots of bad decisions have made the reception and growth of SC2 and D3 fairly lukewarm. I imagine they wanted to make a bigger splash.
As much of a disaster as D3 was, it sold well. But I don't think they will have that luxury with HOTS.
Most people are not looking forward to it: 1. Most people are not interested in playing Z only single player. Not _that_ many Z fans in casual players 2. Game doesn't have public mindshare, everyone was still playing SC1 when BW came out 3. Game doesn't have momentum, it's not growing.
Increase Haywire cooldown but allow it to be used against air units as well. Now there's your reason to build Warhounds against Zerg - Haywire vs small amounts of Mutas/Broodlords.
On September 06 2012 03:50 Psychobabas wrote: LOL so warhounds are imba now.
Or is it that they change the game too much for some people's liking...
dont u like imba warhounds?
I love the warhound. Just noticing all the zergs and protoss complaining in the first day of beta makes me want to strangle a puppy.
We want amove too you know... or at least some of us.
only some T want an a move unit. T is interesting because it makes fight challenging (like ling/bling zvz you have to give it all :p) not because you MBS/macro your shit and a move.
On September 06 2012 05:42 Sp00ly wrote: So has anybody seen how a tradition MMM ball does against a mostly warhound comp?
I've seen ForGG's MMM lose against CuteAngel mech (who was that again, sounds familiar), but the latter one just used some warhounds to strengthen the traditional mech against marauders (he went plenty of hellion/warhound with some tanks).
First, let's try the game before !! I think Warhound looks incredibely strong, even vs zerg. But maybe other races will need to find a way to play against it, new unit composition, new gameplan, etc etc. Current metagame is obviousely not adapted to these new units. I like +2 supply count, you have such a big army with 200 supply that it reminds be BW. Remember this is only a beta version, and anyway I won't be suprised if they already nerf the warhound because everyone want to keep 20% terrans GM and master league.
Problem of warhound isn't that they are too strong.
That, is a beta problem.
Problem is that this unit has NOTHING TO DO in mech army. Just kill the playstyle. Kill the fun of it. Zerg Swarm Host centry army are more mech thant terran mech in HoTS.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
I'm not talking about the foreign scene... Blizzard killed BW in Korea. They bullied the whole scene for two years, blackmailed KeSPA to force them to switch to sc2. To the point all sponsors outside KeSPA did not want to have anything to do with "illegitimate leagues".
You seem pretty blind. People optimistically looking forward to hots are in a minority. Not to mention the fact that sc2 lost half of its original player base since release, while both BW and WC3 were actually gaining players over the years.
I think Blizzard really needs to be worried.
Lots of bad decisions have made the reception and growth of SC2 and D3 fairly lukewarm. I imagine they wanted to make a bigger splash.
As much of a disaster as D3 was, it sold well. But I don't think they will have that luxury with HOTS.
Most people are not looking forward to it: 1. Most people are not interested in playing Z only single player. Not _that_ many Z fans in casual players 2. Game doesn't have public mindshare, everyone was still playing SC1 when BW came out 3. Game doesn't have momentum, it's not growing.
I really doubt that HOTS will sell well.
For the past several years blizzard has been riding on their impeccable reputation alone. Their recent releases are getting progressivly worse. From giving people what they wanted they turned to telling people what they supposedly want. From creating the best games they turned to marketing them as the best thing since sliced bread.
I don't think blizzard can do that any longer. If VALVE decides to make a competitive RTS they might as well beat blizzard in that regard because they actually listen to their player base, they don't just catter to casual players and understand that a game requiring lots of skill can still be fun for casuals. They also are great at delivering their games in an accessible manner (Steam, reasonable pricing).
I also think the new battlecruiser is incredibly ovepowered. im a high master toss and already some terrans on ladder are doing turtle style with planetaries, sensor towers, some defensive tanks, hellions.
only way to beat mech is to catch the terran unsieged. sieged tanks will trade fairly well with all the toss counters. every time you see mech lose in pro games its where the terran was retarded and lost 20 hellions doing a stupid runby, or was caught unsieged
if the terran just always is sieged in a defensive location by his planetaries, with a couple sensor towers revealing all prism harass attempts, he can slowly leapfrog his tanks across his side of the map being defensive and turtling and eventually take his half of the map. as protoss wtf can you do? attack into sieged positions?
thats suicide. instead i immediately expand 5 times for free the moment i see the terran doing this. take my half of the map, heck even take some of HIS untaken expansions. And still im at a loss because we both reach 200food at around the same time since 3bases can reach 200food quickly. So im left charging into his sieged positions suiciding all my money. i try taking 200food of stalkers blinking around the map, but sensor towers see it and 3/3 hellions trade pretty well with 3/3/3 stalkers. he unsieges 3 of his tanks and takes 3 tanks and 35 hellions and responds to my blink stalker harassment and deals with it pretty well then stalkers die to the hellions + planetaries and also die to new hellions/thors popping out.
i dont face much terrans who do this but its maybe 1 in 10 games now becoming alot more common. mech turtle into battlecruiser/tank/thor/ghost
once they get that... its like WTF stupid.
warhounds will likely get nerfed (as their statline now is about 35% stronger than the buffed battlecruiser), but this battlecruiser buff will stay. Battlecruisers already are insanely strong against stalkers. Do not like this BC buff at all (+2 damage, essentially +25% damage). My main option against the 3/3 battlecruisers was suiciding waves of 3/3/3 stalkers against it combined with storm+mothership+ archon toilet. But this +25% damage buff, thats insane
On September 06 2012 06:20 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Terran = the new A move race.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
Wait, you can't click on enemy units to see their upgrades? Or click enemy resources to see how much gas they've mined??
valve has past of making any rts games. apart from that I find their games quite bland apart from vanilla tf2. they do catter ther players alot, and present very straight foward gameplays.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
I'm not talking about the foreign scene... Blizzard killed BW in Korea. They bullied the whole scene for two years, blackmailed KeSPA to force them to switch to sc2. To the point all sponsors outside KeSPA did not want to have anything to do with "illegitimate leagues".
You seem pretty blind. People optimistically looking forward to hots are in a minority. Not to mention the fact that sc2 lost half of its original player base since release, while both BW and WC3 were actually gaining players over the years.
I think Blizzard really needs to be worried.
Lots of bad decisions have made the reception and growth of SC2 and D3 fairly lukewarm. I imagine they wanted to make a bigger splash.
As much of a disaster as D3 was, it sold well. But I don't think they will have that luxury with HOTS.
Most people are not looking forward to it: 1. Most people are not interested in playing Z only single player. Not _that_ many Z fans in casual players 2. Game doesn't have public mindshare, everyone was still playing SC1 when BW came out 3. Game doesn't have momentum, it's not growing.
I really doubt that HOTS will sell well.
For the past several years blizzard has been riding on their impeccable reputation alone. Their recent releases are getting progressivly worse. From giving people what they wanted they turned to telling people what they supposedly want. From creating the best games they turned to marketing them as the best thing since sliced bread.
I don't think blizzard can do that any longer. If VALVE decides to make a competitive RTS they might as well beat blizzard in that regard because they actually listen to their player base, they don't just catter to casual players and understand that a game requiring lots of skill can still be fun for casuals. They also are great at delivering their games in an accessible manner (Steam, reasonable pricing).
I'm going to write a piece about this at some point, but basically Blizzard is living in the past.
1. Valve has already made a competitive RTS. It's called DOTA. It will overshadow SC2 globally. 2. The fact that Blizzard did not buy up DOTA, and/or passed on it is a significant lack of judgment. 3. The reason they did it is because they think they can make a platform where there's a huge network effect of people playing all of their games. If you see your buddy playing D3, you will want to hop on and play with them, and vice versa for SC2 and WOW. 4. They think they can make a game like SC2 and D3, with significant features cut and have the game stand, because if you look back at SC1 and D2, those games were able to stand missing a few features.
But what they don't understand is that in 1998, FOURTEEN YEARS AGO, THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. BNET was one of the FEW platforms where you could reliably hang out. That's why people played UMS, there wasn't another place to socialize and play random games. Today there is STEAM, with any game that you can imagine.
The position of SC1 and D2 was different. They were big fish in a small pond. If you wanted to play online, they were one of the few options with a lot of players.
On September 06 2012 06:20 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Terran = the new A move race.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
Wait, you can't click on enemy units to see their upgrades? Or click enemy resources to see how much gas they've mined??
not until you enable the option to "click neutral units" in controls
After watching streams the entire day i've not seen a single good game involving Warhounds at all. This unit has to be one of the most boring things they could add.
DotA is not an RTS though. Far from it. It's much more similar to Diablo 2's arena or something. The only thing it has in common with RTS is that it originted from BW/WC3 (AoS/DotA).
On September 06 2012 06:20 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Terran = the new A move race.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
Wait, you can't click on enemy units to see their upgrades? Or click enemy resources to see how much gas they've mined??
I think you can still click on geysers to check, but you cannot click on mineral patches, period. Not even your own. Meh, it's not going to ruin it for me.
Warhounds are like stimmed roaches though, it's A move shit. Only 150/75 for a 2 supply unit that seems to slaughter absolutely everything when in a group of 15+ with some hellions. I take pride when I win a game as terran with siege tanks, they can be tricky and I feel nervous every time I unsiege and push forwards. Now it's just A move blob vs blob.
On September 06 2012 05:43 vOdToasT wrote: Another uninteresting a move marauder type unit. Yeah, it's shitty design, but what the hell are we going to do about it at this point? I don't see how we can rescue the messy trainwreck that is StarCraft 2.
One question - why are u even on this forum? If SC2 is that shitty game just leave - believe me no one will cry after you.
Well, blizzard killed BW for this thing. StarCraft fans are just trying to salvage whatever they can.
Try to be objective. Compare HotS to BW and TFT. When experiencing the latter two for the first time, pretty much everybody was like "OH SHIT, OH SHIT, I CAN'T WAIT!!". When it comes to HotS, most additions are either meh or making the game worse. There are tons of people who are majorly dissapointed. Blizzard is dumbing down the game even more, adding blatant a-move units and showing they have no clue were they're going with this expansion pack.
Instead of fixing the flaws, they are botching the game further.
First off Blizz killed nothing - BW died naturally, it wasnt popular outside Korea these days and there were difficulties with sponsors - thus as buisness model it was unsustainable.
Secondly, I don't see tons of people majorly dissapointed - what I see is a vocal minority of whiny nerds and dumb BW fanbois. BW is still there - if this is such a perfect game no one is denying them to play it. So BW fans, dont salvage what is best in your opinion in SC2, you still got your precious BW.
I love SC2, most of my friends play it too, it is great game. Of course some decisions of the developers might be questionable but contrary to most whiners I look forward optimistically.
I'm not talking about the foreign scene... Blizzard killed BW in Korea. They bullied the whole scene for two years, blackmailed KeSPA to force them to switch to sc2. To the point all sponsors outside KeSPA did not want to have anything to do with "illegitimate leagues".
You seem pretty blind. People optimistically looking forward to hots are in a minority. Not to mention the fact that sc2 lost half of its original player base since release, while both BW and WC3 were actually gaining players over the years.
I think Blizzard really needs to be worried.
Lots of bad decisions have made the reception and growth of SC2 and D3 fairly lukewarm. I imagine they wanted to make a bigger splash.
As much of a disaster as D3 was, it sold well. But I don't think they will have that luxury with HOTS.
Most people are not looking forward to it: 1. Most people are not interested in playing Z only single player. Not _that_ many Z fans in casual players 2. Game doesn't have public mindshare, everyone was still playing SC1 when BW came out 3. Game doesn't have momentum, it's not growing.
I really doubt that HOTS will sell well.
For the past several years blizzard has been riding on their impeccable reputation alone. Their recent releases are getting progressivly worse. From giving people what they wanted they turned to telling people what they supposedly want. From creating the best games they turned to marketing them as the best thing since sliced bread.
I don't think blizzard can do that any longer. If VALVE decides to make a competitive RTS they might as well beat blizzard in that regard because they actually listen to their player base, they don't just catter to casual players and understand that a game requiring lots of skill can still be fun for casuals. They also are great at delivering their games in an accessible manner (Steam, reasonable pricing).
I'm going to write a piece about this at some point, but basically Blizzard is living in the past.
1. Valve has already made a competitive RTS. It's called DOTA. It will overshadow SC2 globally. 2. The fact that Blizzard did not buy up DOTA, and/or passed on it is a significant lack of judgment. 3. The reason they did it is because they think they can make a platform where there's a huge network effect of people playing all of their games. If you see your buddy playing D3, you will want to hop on and play with them, and vice versa for SC2 and WOW. 4. They think they can make a game like SC2 and D3, with significant features cut and have the game stand, because if you look back at SC1 and D2, those games were able to stand missing a few features.
But what they don't understand is that in 1998, FOURTEEN YEARS AGO, THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. BNET was one of the FEW platforms where you could reliably hang out. That's why people played UMS, there wasn't another place to socialize and play random games. Today there is STEAM, with any game that you can imagine.
The position of SC1 and D2 was different. They were big fish in a small pond. If you wanted to play online, they were one of the few options with a lot of players.
One awesome thing about the Warhound I just realized - you won't need Vikings to counter Colossus anymore. Take Haywire off auto cast and nuke down all the Colossus with it from far away before they can even do anything.
On September 06 2012 06:39 architecture wrote: I'm going to write a piece about this at some point, but basically Blizzard is living in the past.
1. Valve has already made a competitive RTS. It's called DOTA. It will overshadow SC2 globally. 2. The fact that Blizzard did not buy up DOTA, and/or passed on it is a significant lack of judgment. 3. The reason they did it is because they think they can make a platform where there's a huge network effect of people playing all of their games. If you see your buddy playing D3, you will want to hop on and play with them, and vice versa for SC2 and WOW. 4. They think they can make a game like SC2 and D3, with significant features cut and have the game stand, because if you look back at SC1 and D2, those games were able to stand missing a few features.
But what they don't understand is that in 1998 THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. BNET was one of the FEW platforms where you could reliably hang out. That's why people played UMS, there wasn't another place to socialize and play random games. Today there is STEAM, with any game that you can imagine.
The position of SC1 and D2 was different. They were big fish in a small pond. If you wanted to play online, they were one of the few options with a lot of players.
Today, they are one fish in a big sea.
1. It's called Dota 2, and I agree. 2. Blizzard doesn't buy mods. Valve is opposite, they're world renowned for it. 3. Blizz caters to WoW players and the WoW mentality. 4. I agree.
On September 06 2012 06:42 sAsImre wrote: DOTA an RTS? good try !D
On September 06 2012 06:39 architecture wrote: I'm going to write a piece about this at some point, but basically Blizzard is living in the past.
1. Valve has already made a competitive RTS. It's called DOTA. It will overshadow SC2 globally. 2. The fact that Blizzard did not buy up DOTA, and/or passed on it is a significant lack of judgment. 3. The reason they did it is because they think they can make a platform where there's a huge network effect of people playing all of their games. If you see your buddy playing D3, you will want to hop on and play with them, and vice versa for SC2 and WOW. 4. They think they can make a game like SC2 and D3, with significant features cut and have the game stand, because if you look back at SC1 and D2, those games were able to stand missing a few features.
But what they don't understand is that in 1998 THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. BNET was one of the FEW platforms where you could reliably hang out. That's why people played UMS, there wasn't another place to socialize and play random games. Today there is STEAM, with any game that you can imagine.
The position of SC1 and D2 was different. They were big fish in a small pond. If you wanted to play online, they were one of the few options with a lot of players.
Today, they are one fish in a big sea.
1. It's called Dota 2, and I agree. 2. Blizzard doesn't buy mods. Valve is opposite, they're world renowned for it. 3. Blizz caters to WoW players and the WoW mentality. 4. I agree.
On September 06 2012 06:39 architecture wrote: I'm going to write a piece about this at some point, but basically Blizzard is living in the past.
1. Valve has already made a competitive RTS. It's called DOTA. It will overshadow SC2 globally. 2. The fact that Blizzard did not buy up DOTA, and/or passed on it is a significant lack of judgment. 3. The reason they did it is because they think they can make a platform where there's a huge network effect of people playing all of their games. If you see your buddy playing D3, you will want to hop on and play with them, and vice versa for SC2 and WOW. 4. They think they can make a game like SC2 and D3, with significant features cut and have the game stand, because if you look back at SC1 and D2, those games were able to stand missing a few features.
But what they don't understand is that in 1998 THE WORLD WAS DIFFERENT. BNET was one of the FEW platforms where you could reliably hang out. That's why people played UMS, there wasn't another place to socialize and play random games. Today there is STEAM, with any game that you can imagine.
The position of SC1 and D2 was different. They were big fish in a small pond. If you wanted to play online, they were one of the few options with a lot of players.
Today, they are one fish in a big sea.
1. It's called Dota 2, and I agree. 2. Blizzard doesn't buy mods. Valve is opposite, they're world renowned for it. 3. Blizz caters to WoW players and the WoW mentality. 4. I agree.
dota is not an rts and valve didnt made it, valve reskined it.
dota or any other moba overshadowing starcraft2 has nothing to do with their quality. Full throttle is the greatest game ever made but sold 1/12349023450259390490 or sims.
On September 06 2012 06:45 Cuce wrote: dota is not an rts and valve didnt made it, valve reskined it.
dota or any other moba overshadowing starcraft2 has nothing to do with their quality. Full throttle is the greatest game ever made but sold 1/12349023450259390490 or sims.
In addition, RTSs are too difficult to play for many people. It takes so much focus and concentration to get shit done. Meanwhile, I can jump on CoD after being awake for 20 hours and drunk as fuck and still smoke noobs and even if I don't, it's still not frustrating or boring. That said, CoD is a shitty game XD. I feel like it's just a "party game" so to speak; anyone can play it and it takes 0 skill.
Warhounds seem slightly too fast for mech units imo, but I like it since it gives you a good way for dealing with roach harass playing mech since hellions are garbage at dealing with it and tanks are far too slow - so making 5 - 6 warhounds tvz to deal with roach harass is good.
On September 06 2012 06:52 Jaegeru wrote: Warhounds seem slightly too fast for mech units imo, but I like it since it gives you a good way for dealing with roach harass playing mech since hellions are garbage at dealing with it and tanks are far too slow - so making 5 - 6 warhounds tvz to deal with roach harass is good.
What's wrong with marauders or banshees?
You don't have to go hellion + thor in every TvZ you know...
On September 06 2012 06:50 architecture wrote: If you want to split hairs and not consider DOTA a RTS, then you should know this:
The market for RTS is really small. Most people these days are not interested in a pure RTS a la AOE2/SC1.
So if you don't want to consider DOTA an extension of RTS, then we can safely say RTS is dead.
ok then should we include farmvilles to icon adventure genre so that we can call adventure games "alive" real time tactics is a genre as old as rts, its not spliting hairs. its being accurate. moba's would not replace the experience of an rts game and vice versa.
On September 06 2012 06:20 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Terran = the new A move race.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
Wait, you can't click on enemy units to see their upgrades? Or click enemy resources to see how much gas they've mined??
I think you can still click on geysers to check, but you cannot click on mineral patches, period. Not even your own. Meh, it's not going to ruin it for me.
How are you supposed to know how many minerals are left in a patch, and how many probes are worth keeping at a mining base? Wow that is terrible.
Roach harass must be dealt with POSITIONNAL tank play. Some hellions/Thors ready to move. that's how mech players do it right now, and it works. You can even use HSM Raven to help defend some tanks or deflect any drop roach on your army. WH just doesn't fit in.
For me, everything will be balanced eventually, and terran already has a lot of micro, so I'm fine with how it works. It's more just the artwork. Needs less walkers, also, the thor is a walker, but it's like big badass, and looks cool, the warhound is actually aesthetically ugly though imo.
I mean think about this, with it's haywire missiles, surely it'd be better off to have the model as something similar to the tank? That way it actually is a mech unit, the haywire missiles would be like a rotating turret thing on the back like you get on some tanks, and it would just look more fitting.
It just looks like a drunken mess.. And espcially with the battle hellions. I mean come on, tanks, warhound, battle hellions? This isn't star wars.
On September 06 2012 06:43 aeroblaster wrote: DOTA is an RTS
hahahahahahahaha
ahahahahahahaha
oh man
It is though, it's heavily strategy-based and it's in real time.
it's an heavily tactical oriented game with small stratedy inside (like sc2 anyways) if you want to take that path which doesn't explain at all what an rts is.
Mech play is supposed to be powerful, positional and with low mobility. Warhound is too fast, too powerful and just a move. It is as non mech as anything can be. It has to be adjusted a lot to make it good.
Least exciting unit of the expansion. Not only that, it was designed to fix a problem that's not even worth fixing. Who wants to watch two armies A-move each other in TvT? I'd rather watch Tank Wars.
On September 06 2012 06:59 Arco wrote: Least exciting unit of the expansion. Not only that, it was designed to fix a problem that's not even worth fixing. Who wants to watch two armies A-move each other in TvT? I'd rather watch Tank Wars.
Exactly. Plus, I haven't seen anything worthy of being called a stale-mate tank line since Shakuras Plateau at like...maybe MLG Anaheim 2011 (sorry that I can't name the game, it is a little too long ago for me).
On September 06 2012 06:59 Arco wrote: Least exciting unit of the expansion. Not only that, it was designed to fix a problem that's not even worth fixing. Who wants to watch two armies A-move each other in TvT? I'd rather watch Tank Wars.
Exactly. Plus, I haven't seen anything worthy of being called a stale-mate tank line since Shakuras Plateau at like...maybe MLG Anaheim 2011 (sorry that I can't name the game, it is a little too long ago for me).
which is normal considering the fact blizz are really late on their vods :D
On September 06 2012 06:20 Duncaaaaaan wrote: Terran = the new A move race.
No thought required, make battle hellions, make warhounds, make vikings, A move, win game.
So this is how Dustin Bowder thought of making mech more viable in TvP? Just turn mech into bio in big metal boxes with legs?
Fuck this shit. I can stand changes like worker auto mine and not being able to click on enemies or mineral patches, but I cannot stand the way the terran game is shifting.
I've been watching ForGG and all he's done every single match is make those two units and just tried to out-upgrade and out-concave his opponent, absolutely zero skill involved compared to making tanks or going bio.
Wait, you can't click on enemy units to see their upgrades? Or click enemy resources to see how much gas they've mined??
I think you can still click on geysers to check, but you cannot click on mineral patches, period. Not even your own. Meh, it's not going to ruin it for me.
How are you supposed to know how many minerals are left in a patch, and how many probes are worth keeping at a mining base? Wow that is terrible.
Someone said something about being able to toggle this in options.
If you can't though, doesn't really break the game, I can tell how many minerals there are left approximately in a patch by just taking a glance, and I'll peel a few workers off and send them to a different expansion.
On September 06 2012 06:52 Jaegeru wrote: Warhounds seem slightly too fast for mech units imo, but I like it since it gives you a good way for dealing with roach harass playing mech since hellions are garbage at dealing with it and tanks are far too slow - so making 5 - 6 warhounds tvz to deal with roach harass is good.
What's wrong with marauders or banshees?
You don't have to go hellion + thor in every TvZ you know...
The problem with going marauders or banshees is that weapons and armour upgrades to mech wouldn't benifit bio or air. Unlike how protoss upgrade affect their WHOLE army and zerg upgrades only worry about GROUND and AIR upgrades.
In this case if you have 3/3 upgrades on mech and 1/0 on bio and the zerg is building roaches. Most terran would prefer to get warhound, tanks, or thors instead of marauders or banshees (banshees are more of a harras unit than an army vs army unit)
TL;DR when Terran goes bio, mech, air its because they are upgrading those things and you'll most likely see little of anything else in the compositions.
On September 06 2012 06:50 architecture wrote: If you want to split hairs and not consider DOTA a RTS, then you should know this:
The market for RTS is really small. Most people these days are not interested in a pure RTS a la AOE2/SC1.
So if you don't want to consider DOTA an extension of RTS, then we can safely say RTS is dead.
It's not about splitting hairs. DOTA is closer to an MMORPG than an RTS (leveling up, controlling only one unit, spells, items, the social aspect...). MOBA games are not RTS.
That said, Terran's new units look kind of boring. War Hound doesn't really seem to fit the terran arsenal.
While of course it's opinions, and I don't agree with everything, you see that MMA is pretty high so it's not like it's disregarded in comparison to Basketball. Hell, Boxing is #1. And while I do think Boxing is harder than mma (more technical, more dangerous, and more endurance-taxing), I think the activity of an MMA match is harder than Basketball, but becoming an NBA star is harder than MMA because several more million people are trying to do the same thing than as mma.
On September 06 2012 05:53 GinDo wrote: This is Mech
Blizzard come on. Why cater so much to the the extreme casual wing? When you do that you not only lose the hard-core wing, but you lose alot of moderates as well.
I think the issue is that although Hardcore players stay around, the casuals are larger in number and buy more games, though none of my nub SC friends still play.
Flash's OSL match raked up 3k viewers from foreign fans TODAY(!), while a standard MOBA clone rakes up five-ten times that amount for a standard tournament match. That is just scary numbers. The Star2 guys that were cheering for BW's death in the forums some month ago already left the sinking ship playing MOBA or some other fluke. Left are those of us who wanted to watch RTS, but saw BW killed by the "new" Blizzard. What do we have left? A completely dead BW scene killed by "fans" and "Blizzard", and a train wreck of a game that dared to brand itself Starcraft 2.
I don't understand why Blizzard say they want to fix the "problem" of the siege tank's power in TvT. Do they not realise that the siege tank is what TvT revolves around? Literally almost everything in tvt from start to finish is linked to the siege tank (exemple: air switch as an answer to mass tank lines). And yet it is the best mirror MU, and arguably the 2nd best MU in the game to watch. Normal mech requires very thoughtful positioning and excellent decision making: how to set up your defence, timing your expansions/factories/upgrades, spending your gas correctly, anticipating your opponent's moves... A mech army is supposed to require some time to get in an optimal position (siege mode), and needs a lot of babysetting and careful movements. Instead, we get the warhound, which was openly made as an "a-move" unit, and specifically designed to crush siege tanks. Rather than have epic mech TvTs like Mvp vs TOP, we'll get bio vs bio or two huge warhound armies ramming against each other... I know it's only the beta, but the whole premise of the unit seems flawed. Mech doesn't need a marauder without stim, and TvT does not need siege tanks to be weaker.
the warhound is ok imo, they need to nerf its hp a bit i think because of its strength in the early game.
I think the thor needs a complete role change. Make it a Ground to Air fighter, and thats all it specializes in. it could change modes, one mode does bonus to light, the other does bonus to armored, and it could even require it to be stationary like a tank to do this. essentially, make it a completely new unit with a new model/skin and everything. thoughts?
On September 06 2012 06:52 Jaegeru wrote: Warhounds seem slightly too fast for mech units imo, but I like it since it gives you a good way for dealing with roach harass playing mech since hellions are garbage at dealing with it and tanks are far too slow - so making 5 - 6 warhounds tvz to deal with roach harass is good.
What's wrong with marauders or banshees?
You don't have to go hellion + thor in every TvZ you know...
The problem with going marauders or banshees is that weapons and armour upgrades to mech wouldn't benifit bio or air. Unlike how protoss upgrade affect their WHOLE army and zerg upgrades only worry about GROUND and AIR upgrades.
In this case if you have 3/3 upgrades on mech and 1/0 on bio and the zerg is building roaches. Most terran would prefer to get warhound, tanks, or thors instead of marauders or banshees (banshees are more of a harras unit than an army vs army unit)
TL;DR when Terran goes bio, mech, air its because they are upgrading those things and you'll most likely see little of anything else in the compositions.
Except this is completely wrong.
If you're going bio mech, mech upgrades don't have priority. The tanks are just there as area denial, long range bombardment and basically making your opponent stop sitting in the same spot. You need 3/3 marines as soon as possible. Even then, you can still afford to upgrade mech, and with siege tanks all you need is + weapon attack. You don't need more armour. In fact it's pretty pointless, if your tanks are attacked first by another siege tank, it will die.
On September 06 2012 07:14 kaokentake wrote: starcraft 2 is MMA
dota 2 is basketball
sadly, one is more impressive, and one is more popular
i watch MMA, dont watch popular
however, on a flip side, most people probably give GSP or Junior Dos Santos or Cain Velasquez more respect than Ron Artest
but basketballs biggest star kobe bryant / Jordan gets more respect (or should i say recognition) than MMA stars
I like Starcraft alot better than MOBAs, but in reference to your analogy I must say that in general team games are more impressive to me than individual sports.
To me personally, and to many more I suspect, a non-violent teamsport is more interesting than a cage fight any day of the week.
On September 06 2012 07:23 architecture wrote: They are trying to solve a problem (tank stalemate TvT) that doesn't exist.
This game is littered with their dumb ideas, and a ton of gimmick units that are only useful for the first X minutes.
The game is entirely their ideas. Honestly sometimes I am surprised at the hate that Blizzard seems to get and the rehashing of ideas that gets thrown about. Blizzard comes up with these things, playtests these original ideas and sometimes make changes. They have the vision to see a change with a view to the entire game. They make their decisions with the ideas that players shouldn't have an infinite amount of menial tasks, should employ foresight, should be able to produce fun and enjoyable games. Sometimes they are wrong, but they seem to be mostly right (hey we are watching sc2 aren't we?).
The main problem with the warhound is basically it's an easymode unit that does a few things that are very bad for the game design and balance-wise:
a) it's a marauder in a mech suit. It plays exactly like a bio unit does, not a mech unit. b) now this is the interesting part - you can say it completely makes the siege tank pointless, or you can say it highlights how much the siege tank actually sucks. Blizzard should be promoting siege tank usage with heart of the swarm, the warhound simply is better than the tank in every way. c) another ground to ground only unit. Terran's mech weakness is heavily due to lack of anti-air.
A proposal / idea. Get rid of the warhound in it's current form, buff the siege tank / widow mine (widow mine is completely suck right now because they pre-emptively nerfed it before beta started due to forum noob balance whining).
Change the warhound to be a similar "siege mode" unit like the siege tank and battle hellion are. What I mean is give it a seconday mode where it is able to have a long range solid anti-air attack similar to the goliath or to the original proposed anti-air role of the warhound but make it be completely immobile like the siege tank in this "siege mode."
What this does is it gives the unit depth like the siege tank. You now have a very capable anti-air factory option with the warhound, but it requires good usage in managing it's "siege mode" just like siege tanks in siege mode are different than in non siege mode. It also makes Terran require a higher skill cap because then you not only have to know when to siege it up for anti-air but you also have to POSITION it is the main point I will make, and on top of that you now have to perfectly manage 3 different mech units that go into "siege mode" - the siege tank, the warhound, the battle hellion.
Its bad because it doesn't "feel" like mech? WTF people thinking theres something wrong with a game that someone else made because it doesn't "feel" the way they want it to?
On September 06 2012 08:29 superbarnie wrote: Its bad because it doesn't "feel" like mech? WTF people thinking theres something wrong with a game that someone else made because it doesn't "feel" the way they want it to?
Faster than unstimmed bio,insane DPS, 2 food cheap unit. Its like a roach on crack that crushes mechanical units.
Yea, for all the reasons stated so far, warhound's gotta go. Which sucks because I really wanted more than bio in TvP. But they have to fix it, not just nerf it's damage, but like, remove it and buff tanks or something.
On September 06 2012 08:29 superbarnie wrote: Its bad because it doesn't "feel" like mech? WTF people thinking theres something wrong with a game that someone else made because it doesn't "feel" the way they want it to?
It's bad because SC2 is unrecognizable from BW (the undisputed superior game). Mech isn't "mech". Mech is supposed to be about positioning, harrass, and strategy. Not a moving warhounds as if it was just a bio unit.
The warhound is strong against mechanical untis, alright, so strong that it breaks all the characteristics of a Terran mech amry.
A fast long range unit that costs less supply and resources than a tank and requires next to no micro. I fear that by the time the toss expansion comes out, the game will be in "full retard" mode. And you know you never go "full retard".
On September 06 2012 08:29 superbarnie wrote: Its bad because it doesn't "feel" like mech? WTF people thinking theres something wrong with a game that someone else made because it doesn't "feel" the way they want it to?
Faster than unstimmed bio,insane DPS, 2 food cheap unit. Its like a roach on crack that crushes mechanical units.
Faster than a chargelot, up to four times the dps of a stalker, goes through hardened shells, has 220 hp, has 7 range (more than a stalker, almost twice that of a roach), costs a paltry 150/75 and takes up two supply.
Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
I'm ok with it. But i think it will require a nerf, because is too strong in the early game (High range, fast, good dps, health, and can be repaired). At least, its weak against AoE, flanks and most Tier 2-3 units, so its not a problem in the whole game. Unless some kind of ridiculous fast cheese, you cant die in the early game with Warhound openings. Warhound all-ins seem ridiculous strong against Protoss too.
Making Haywire a upgrade instead of a natural ability can help. Or reducing its range/speed to increase with some upgrade should be ok too.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
I'd say a raven ability instead of another factory unit/cast. Anyway, I wonder why Blizzard didn't fix something that is dead obvious - tempest, warhound, locust.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
EMP? I understand that's super gas intensive but if we're talking about a late game tank heavy army.... why can't you land a few emps and suddenly turn those immortals into large paperweights?
The current warhound itteration reminds me of day1 reapers.
On September 06 2012 05:53 GinDo wrote: This is Mech
Blizzard come on. Why cater so much to the the extreme casual wing? When you do that you not only lose the hard-core wing, but you lose alot of moderates as well.
I think the issue is that although Hardcore players stay around, the casuals are larger in number and buy more games, though none of my nub SC friends still play.
Flash's OSL match raked up 3k viewers from foreign fans TODAY(!), while a standard MOBA clone rakes up five-ten times that amount for a standard tournament match. That is just scary numbers. The Star2 guys that were cheering for BW's death in the forums some month ago already left the sinking ship playing MOBA or some other fluke. Left are those of us who wanted to watch RTS, but saw BW killed by the "new" Blizzard. What do we have left? A completely dead BW scene killed by "fans" and "Blizzard", and a train wreck of a game that dared to brand itself Starcraft 2.
The really sad thing is, now with BW basically gone I would expect a rise in viewer number since all RTS gamers are (to an extend) forced to SC2. One may argue that GSL is more appealing than OGS atm but the idea stays the same. Still we aren't outnumbering one Moba game. The question may be what is needed to attract/hold more people. Without the diehards the proscene can't exist but the casuals will attract sponsors. I also think we need some easy to recognize features which show "skill" like marinesplitting vs banelings. Otherwise we have just stuff exploding in various ways which may not distinguish enough from a moba. Watching people macro up for 10 mins is as exciting as creeping for 10 min for one big explosion of skills. That being said i'm not really convinced by the latest queen buff which killed a lot of midgame and i also don't like the warhound. It just seems to be a hardcounterunit which doesn't encourage any kind of additional micro. at least you'd have to stim the marauder. the warhound is completely 1a.
But I've been playing a bit D3 lately and if I have learned anything there is that whining can change the world. If you cry long and loud enough about the features Blizz thinks is good, they will finally move. + Show Spoiler +
I don't like the inferno nerf but hey, at least they changed what the majority seemingly wanted.
That being said I think we all should move to the Blizz Forums and start spamming/flaming there instead of having a conversation here.
On the last remark about the BW vs SC2 front: One problem is that a lot of BW fans sounded like old men simply clinging to BW for the pasts sake. An example would be the damnation of the baneling where they were partially wrong. It turned out to be a fun unit. (Not implying the lurker would have been better/worse.) They were right on the colossus though because of its extreme mobility. It was hard to filter out the well deserved critic from the die hard conservatives. I think the debate is over without any winner. We should focus on making Starcraft 2 a better game and (stop the warhound)
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
EMP? I understand that's super gas intensive but if we're talking about a late game tank heavy army.... why can't you land a few emps and suddenly turn those immortals into large paperweights?
The current warhound itteration reminds me of day1 reapers.
Even with EMP immortals trade incredibly well against a massive amount of tanks. This is coming from someone who was playing hellion/tank/ghost in the matchup for the past few weeks until nightmarjoo (Lyra) taught me his style yesterday which involves teching quickly to air.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
EMP? I understand that's super gas intensive but if we're talking about a late game tank heavy army.... why can't you land a few emps and suddenly turn those immortals into large paperweights?
The current warhound itteration reminds me of day1 reapers.
Even with EMP immortals trade incredibly well against a massive amount of tanks. This is coming from someone who was playing hellion/tank/ghost in the matchup for the past few weeks until nightmarjoo (Lyra) taught me his style yesterday which involves teching quickly to air.
Mn. My problem with immortal nerfs is that mass repair on thors seems like a super easy and viable strat then. (recalling the last TSL) I'll agree that mech needs to be really tough to face head on after awhile to justify abusing warpins and blink.
On August 15 2012 01:58 Plansix wrote: I need to see and use the unit before I can make a decision on it. There are a number of factors that we have no idea about:
- Can it be dropped effectively during combat? Can a small group of them be used to flank units like colossi, using their front loaded damage to take them down quick?
- How do they control? Do they feel like stalkers, immortals or roaches? Can they kite melee units or units with shorter range?
As for looks, I like my mechs ugly and dumb looking. The unit looks like something out of mech warrior, which is awesome in many ways. I am not willing to jump on to the warhound-hate-wagon yet. Much like people I have never meet and books I have not read, I wait until I interact with the Warhound before passing judgment.
So true. Also, some people seem to be missing the point that warhounds cannot be stimmed or healed by medivacs. Doesn't seem like a marauder to me.
On September 06 2012 05:53 GinDo wrote: This is Mech
Blizzard come on. Why cater so much to the the extreme casual wing? When you do that you not only lose the hard-core wing, but you lose alot of moderates as well.
I think the issue is that although Hardcore players stay around, the casuals are larger in number and buy more games, though none of my nub SC friends still play.
Flash's OSL match raked up 3k viewers from foreign fans TODAY(!), while a standard MOBA clone rakes up five-ten times that amount for a standard tournament match. That is just scary numbers. The Star2 guys that were cheering for BW's death in the forums some month ago already left the sinking ship playing MOBA or some other fluke. Left are those of us who wanted to watch RTS, but saw BW killed by the "new" Blizzard. What do we have left? A completely dead BW scene killed by "fans" and "Blizzard", and a train wreck of a game that dared to brand itself Starcraft 2.
The really sad thing is, now with BW basically gone I would expect a rise in viewer number since all RTS gamers are (to an extend) forced to SC2. One may argue that GSL is more appealing than OGS atm but the idea stays the same. Still we aren't outnumbering one Moba game. The question may be what is needed to attract/hold more people. Without the diehards the proscene can't exist but the casuals will attract sponsors. I also think we need some easy to recognize features which show "skill" like marinesplitting vs banelings. Otherwise we have just stuff exploding in various ways which may not distinguish enough from a moba. Watching people macro up for 10 mins is as exciting as creeping for 10 min for one big explosion of skills. That being said i'm not really convinced by the latest queen buff which killed a lot of midgame and i also don't like the warhound. It just seems to be a hardcounterunit which doesn't encourage any kind of additional micro. at least you'd have to stim the marauder. the warhound is completely 1a.
But I've been playing a bit D3 lately and if I have learned anything there is that whining can change the world. If you cry long and loud enough about the features Blizz thinks is good, they will finally move. + Show Spoiler +
I don't like the inferno nerf but hey, at least they changed what the majority seemingly wanted.
That being said I think we all should move to the Blizz Forums and start spamming/flaming there instead of having a conversation here.
On the last remark about the BW vs SC2 front: One problem is that a lot of BW fans sounded like old men simply clinging to BW for the pasts sake. An example would be the damnation of the baneling where they were partially wrong. It turned out to be a fun unit. (Not implying the lurker would have been better/worse.) They were right on the colossus though because of its extreme mobility. It was hard to filter out the well deserved critic from the die hard conservatives. I think the debate is over without any winner. We should focus on making Starcraft 2 a better game and (stop the warhound)
can you garbage cans stop talking out of your arses? i mean shit, there was both gsl and osl on at the same time, Even i missed flash vs whoever because i was watching marine king vs jaedong, only after the 3rd game i realized flash was on and apparently it was over already. Then you add on the fact that hots beta out and everybody is watching beta streams. ( as i did last night, watched dimaga/thorzain whole night.
god, all these damn baseless apocalyptic posts really annoy me, so much opinions, so much b.s
And just to be on topic with the thread, i like the warhound.
Warhound looks good guys. Everyone needs to chillax and stop throwing terribad ideas down in this thread.
2-3 warhounds is a good answer to 5queen infinity creepspread and forces Z to delay tech for lings, which you can answer with battle hellions. They can also go SpeedRoach or Muta because factory shit doesn't shoot up until Thor and speedroaches look like they would be cost effective and allow you to base up and drone.
Cool unit that gives Terran a cool way to pressure while teching and can be mixed in to a variety of comps.
On August 15 2012 01:58 Plansix wrote: I need to see and use the unit before I can make a decision on it. There are a number of factors that we have no idea about:
- Can it be dropped effectively during combat? Can a small group of them be used to flank units like colossi, using their front loaded damage to take them down quick?
- How do they control? Do they feel like stalkers, immortals or roaches? Can they kite melee units or units with shorter range?
As for looks, I like my mechs ugly and dumb looking. The unit looks like something out of mech warrior, which is awesome in many ways. I am not willing to jump on to the warhound-hate-wagon yet. Much like people I have never meet and books I have not read, I wait until I interact with the Warhound before passing judgment.
So true. Also, some people seem to be missing the point that warhounds cannot be stimmed or healed by medivacs. Doesn't seem like a marauder to me.
It can be repaired by though. Warhound rush may be a more viable Thor rush (with some Hellions for the ling counter e.g.)... Overall the unit is ok, but too powerful, when you look at the numbers. Anyway, it's not the time to make a final judgement. The game and the matchups have to develop a bit first. (remember the Zealot nerf,buff,nerf,buff,buff,...)
Warhound needs to be changed immediately. It's essentially become the Marauder of the Beta days, except Stim comes for free in every aspect of the word. With good micro, Warhounds are near unkillable and DEMOLISH Protoss units.
There are several aspects that should be fixed. 1) Mobility. It's too mobile for a mech unit that does as much damage and tanks as much damage as it does. This clearly needs to be changed to 2.25, maybe 2.5.
2) DPS. It shreds mechanical units, meaning Protoss basically can't do anything to defend against it early on due to the combined mobility and DPS of the damned thing. Haywire missles should either be removed or reassigned to it's normal attack, maybe having it so that it's a unit that does 12 damage (+18 vs Mechanical).
3) Range. You don't put high DPS, mobility, and high range together in one package. If you drop the DPS, it's fine, but at the moment it shreds everything.
4) Health. While mech should be tanky, you can't put blah blah blah together (points 1-4). You create and inherently broken unit. It's fast, it's hard to kill even if you catch it, it will kill you much faster than you kill it, and it can shoot you from afar. Kite kite kite=gg.
5) It's basically a super Marauder, which makes it's role weird. It's a giant, mechanical, infantry unit. What does mech need? It needs something to basically protect the Tanks from blitzing armored units and air units. You basically can't defend against that, which is why the Tank is essentially removed from current mech play. Suggestion? Buff tanks (both in siege time and damage vs Armored), and have the Warhound play the light anti-air role whereas the Thor can play more of a heavy anti-air mode. Though no matter how you look at it, everything is weird and hard to fit in. But for anti air there are Vikings... Which creates a war for air superiority, which mech shouldn't really be about until 40+ minutes into the game when you transition into sky Terran.
The Warhound simply needs to be remade, the Tank improved, and maybe the Thor removed. I don't know about anyone else, but the Tank felt a lot better in BW and it was always the core of mech. Now, it's sort of lost it's role except in TvT mech. In TvP mech (for HotS), it's basically everything mech except for Tanks. Why make Tanks when they slow you down and don't do remotely enough damage to make up for it. You have stronger, more mobile options. If this continues, the Tank will die out in mech play except to deal with Marauders and Marines.
On September 06 2012 09:56 Deezl wrote: Warhound looks good guys. Everyone needs to chillax and stop throwing terribad ideas down in this thread.
2-3 warhounds is a good answer to 5queen infinity creepspread and forces Z to delay tech for lings, which you can answer with battle hellions. They can also go SpeedRoach or Muta because factory shit doesn't shoot up until Thor and speedroaches look like they would be cost effective and allow you to base up and drone.
Cool unit that gives Terran a cool way to pressure while teching and can be mixed in to a variety of comps.
The issue with Warhounds isn't against Zerg. It's against Protoss. They aren't nearly as useful against Zerg because nothing is mechanical. Sure, their base stats are pretty good, but just go defensive mech with everything in the Mech arsenal except Warhounds. Then march across the map and win because 20 Tanks will demolish any armored ground unit, the Battle Hellions will buffer extremely well and demolish all the incoming Lings, and the Thors will clean up the air and remaining Roaches/Hydras. If necessary, add Vikings for Broodlords. Move across the map and win.
Against Protoss... You build 2-3 quick Warhounds and win with good micro.
On September 06 2012 10:22 LgNKami wrote: My only Problem with #2 is that if you remove the haywire ability and throw in something else, it will more than likely be a reason to add in energy.
warhound + energy = (drumrollllllll) A weak, half health, half strength, non AA thor.
I dont think the warhound is a bad unit at all, it just needs a few tweaks as far as cost and some damage tewaks.
Dear Lord.. I have a feeling this will be how the warhound will turn out to be like given Blizzard trackrecord.
Blizzard is doing a really bad job. I mean weren't one of the priorities in HOTS was to break up the deathball? The warhound simply makes T have access to.. a Bio deathball and a Mech deathball. Also dont be fooled by the whole "mech" thing. The "mech" deathball simply consists of marauders within mini thors.
I still dont get there hatred for siege tank play evident by so many deathball units that counter the unit which emphasises on positional play. Not only that but theres literally a million ways to get through a tank line and 2~3 tanks cant even hold onto their territory very well either. One of things that annoy me so much is when they always bring up "tank line" scenarios and make it sound like its so dominant that these "new" units and skills are required.
Also lets not get confused about the warhound. The problem isn't the stats/cost w/e. Those can all be changed. The big problem is its role within the "expected" unit composition. From what we can see, its a super marauder that further overshadows the need of the tank which discourages positional play, contributes more to the deatball syndrome that is all too common, not filling the easily accessible GtA (a middle man between the marine and the thor) and kills the "mech" play which emphasises on positioning/firepower while lacking mobility. The unit looking awkward and ugly doesn't help their reasons for adding such a unit in the first place.
I mean so many things can be done to make mech viable in all matchups (especially vP) but they choose the silliest option out of them all.
edit - stick to the fundamentals blizzard. No need to be all gimmicky and "cool". Those can come later once the fundamentals of an RTS game are solid which in the context of SC2 are not (warp gate for instance) which has resulted in lots of volatility and difficult balancing sessions..
On August 15 2012 01:45 Sircoolguy wrote: EDITS: Quite a bit of talk about the warhound being nothing but a factory marauder, my own opinions aside, please be specific about why it is one, and how it does or does not contribute to a mech position play. Simply stating it is a factory marauder gets us nowhere. Thanks!
TBH, if I have to explain to Blizzard why it's nothing but a factory Marauder, then it's not going to get us anywhere either because they are blind to the obvious. But not to be difficult....
Counters mech. Beefy. Fast. Better range than Marine. Lacks AA. Comparable life to cost. Comparable damage to cost. Second letter in name is A...
My idea for the "improving mech" slot has always been to build a Medic analog, but for mechanical units. Being Medic analog, would then constitute being something like a super SCV, but using energy rather than resources to repair units. Additionally, to address anti-air issues, it'd be able to build unique missile turrets. (Balance as necessary)
They've essentially made two units completely useless in TvT.
You can't Marine-Tank anymore. Positioning doesn't matter anymore. Playing defensive has become even more dangerous. It's so dumb.
And what's the point of MMM now? Warhound tank better, doesn't take energy away from Marine Stim AND frees up Barracks. Only thing stopping People from never putting a Tech lab on their Barracks is for the upgrades.
As a Protoss player I've been tunnel visioned. I thought the new units for Protoss was terrible. Oracle and Tempest might be stupid and redundant but at least it doesn't HARM the meta, or totally ruin the mirror match (errr.... PvP.... ughhhh....ahhh...)
Sorry, random tangent.
Yeah, Warhounds. What the hell? Why do they exist?
But slight attack speed and movement is all that we want. Except maybe some skin changes: Theses little tweaks with litlle mines buffs will allows Terran mech map control in a more mechlike way than WH provides. Bust statwise, WH makes meching less about positionning and checkstyle than SwarmHost.
The thing is... if they were cool like the immortal which was pretty cute at 5 range as it waddles around trying to get a shot but does inhuman damage and erased tanks from tvp (for a long time anyway). we might have accepted the warhound. But they are ugly, look like they belong in a DIFFERENT GAME. and they shoot missiles out of their arse that do silly damage.
So no love lost. Just get rid of it or make it look less stupid when one 1 or 2 rock up and start zapping queens.
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.
fuck off lol, not like terran was op for the first year of sc2 at all...
So what? I'm sure everyone agrees with that, but where's the link between your statement and the "common knowledge" that terran is the most micro-/multitask-heavy race with the highest skill ceiling? He just stated that Blizzard is obviously trying to lower the skill cap for them in HotS and many people rather'd like to see an "anti-deathball"-improvement for Z and P.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
I dont think that mass immortal beats mass hellion (with same cost for the 2 armies)
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
200food of hellion tank defeats 200food of immortal. try it in the unit tester
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
200food of hellion tank defeats 200food of immortal. try it in the unit tester
lol you stupid or what ? I asked for same cost for each armies. Hellions only cost mineralz, immortalz costs gas. Obvsly 200 200 immo beats 200 200 hellion... --
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
200food of hellion tank defeats 200food of immortal. try it in the unit tester
lol you stupid or what ? I asked for same cost for each armies. Hellions only cost mineralz, immortalz costs gas. Obvsly 200 200 immo beats 200 200 hellion... --
i said hellion tank
140 food of immortals, 35 of them, cost 8750 minerals 3500 gas
28 tanks costs 4200 minerals 3500 gas, takes up 84 supply. 28 hellions costs 2800 minerals and 56 supply
thats 140 food, 7000 minerals, 3500 gas. And it defeats and equal amount of food in immortals
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
One specific unit composition? I get a masive mech army comprised of some thors, hellions and lots of tanks and an army of just immortals comes and kills it. Nothing else, just immortals.
No one unit should be able to be good enough to take out an entire army.
200food of hellion tank defeats 200food of immortal. try it in the unit tester
lol you stupid or what ? I asked for same cost for each armies. Hellions only cost mineralz, immortalz costs gas. Obvsly 200 200 immo beats 200 200 hellion... --
Im watching thorzain play atm, and I must say, from a top down view, warhounds arent that bad looking. Slender with a cool animation, so its not that bad.
Warhound does too much damage and looks a bit silly. Not sure what exactly it's meant to do, but they'll find a niche for it. A lot of bitter BW fanbois have chosen this place to vent, no surprise of course.
Warhound seems ridiculously OP in Beta right now, I just Barracks Expand into a Reactor on the Barracks, Factory with a Tech Lab and a naked Starport and Medivac drop the things vs Terran and Protoss and watch those Haywire Missiles blow up all of their SCVs and Probes. I'm even building them vs Zerg regardless of no mechanical units because they're way too cost efficient for what they do even without Haywire Missiles, so it's either over powered or under costed and is going to get nerfed to hell and back for sure, increase Gas to 100, reduce movement to 2.5, reduce range to 6, increase supply to 3, slightly decrease health and DPS at a minimum.
I think they should just cut the Thor and make the Warhound a less powerful, more cost efficient version of the Thor that can move and shoot to either break Tank lines or chase Mutalisks, and for the love of god require you to build an Armory to produce them.
On September 06 2012 19:21 Evangelist wrote: Warhound does too much damage and looks a bit silly. Not sure what exactly it's meant to do, but they'll find a niche for it. A lot of bitter BW fanbois have chosen this place to vent, no surprise of course.
Has nothing to do with being a scbw fanboy. Many people just don't think the units fits the game or the style mech how mech is supposed to be played. Other than it coming out of a factory and being a roboter it has NOTHING to do with mech gameplay...it basically feels like a bio unit.
On September 06 2012 19:21 Evangelist wrote: Warhound does too much damage and looks a bit silly. Not sure what exactly it's meant to do, but they'll find a niche for it. A lot of bitter BW fanbois have chosen this place to vent, no surprise of course.
Has nothing to do with being a scbw fanboy. Many people just don't think the units fits the game or the style mech how mech is supposed to be played. Other than it coming out of a factory and being a roboter it has NOTHING to do with mech gameplay...it basically feels like a bio unit.
I don't understand this. What's the difference between the warhound, the goliath and the thor?
On September 06 2012 19:21 Evangelist wrote: Warhound does too much damage and looks a bit silly. Not sure what exactly it's meant to do, but they'll find a niche for it. A lot of bitter BW fanbois have chosen this place to vent, no surprise of course.
Has nothing to do with being a scbw fanboy. Many people just don't think the units fits the game or the style mech how mech is supposed to be played. Other than it coming out of a factory and being a roboter it has NOTHING to do with mech gameplay...it basically feels like a bio unit.
I don't understand this. What's the difference between the warhound, the goliath and the thor?
On September 06 2012 19:21 Evangelist wrote: Warhound does too much damage and looks a bit silly. Not sure what exactly it's meant to do, but they'll find a niche for it. A lot of bitter BW fanbois have chosen this place to vent, no surprise of course.
Has nothing to do with being a scbw fanboy. Many people just don't think the units fits the game or the style mech how mech is supposed to be played. Other than it coming out of a factory and being a roboter it has NOTHING to do with mech gameplay...it basically feels like a bio unit.
I don't understand this. What's the difference between the warhound, the goliath and the thor?
The main point those people are trying to make isn't specifically about the units but rather the style a composition is played. The core of BW was the siege tank which was insanely powerful at defending. Together with the mine from the vulture one could set up huge lines of defense and literally zone out the enemy from parts of the map. This encouraged strong positional play and forced the enemy either to try to find the weak spot in the line or circumvent the whole line with multipronged harass/drop. The warhound seems to do the exact opposite. It renders the siege tank useless and resembles a more flexible and mobile style of play, which is mostly associated with stimmed marines running around like crazy hence bio. E: mech explained
Watching games and reading forums I've got some ideas. First, in the current form warhounds are not the tank line busters that they were advertised as. In TvT my observations have been Tanks > Warhounds > Thors > Tanks. So although they are not tank line busters, I do enjoy that they are a counter to Thors (to protect YOUR tank line).
Mech could really benefit from having a unit that could push forward and bate engagements (hellions don't do enough damage, thors are too slow and tanks need to stay sieged in this scenario). I like how the warhound is a mech marauder. People talk about how boring they are, and although the unit doesn't have any "skill" they're still able to be micro'd a lot because they are so fast. One suggestion I would make is to remove the haywire missles and instead just have a straigt +mech damage modifier (similar to archon's +bio damage). Now it seems that Blizzard wanted warhounds to counter immortals and they do, but maybe too well. Giving them a double attack (similar to zealot, reaper, thor etc) would allow them to still damage immortals better than other mech units but require target micro.
Final wild idea... because they share so much in common otherwise with thors (but are very "boring") why not make the thor an upgrade for the warhound (corruptor > bl style build/morph - maybe requires an SCV to build)
half off topic... they should scrap battle helions and give bio some aoe (firebats?) otherwise mech will just be the only option available (and I do like the options having a warhound gives terrans).
On September 06 2012 21:05 LloydPGM wrote: I wonder who will play bio now ? They should remove marauder. And reaper, useless since queen range is 5 now.
im against removing any underused units, niche units are nice for team games, ffas, and special situations. no units should ever be removed from the game on the ground that they are barely used
On September 06 2012 08:41 Qikz wrote: Terran really do need something with mech to beat Immortals as mass immortal is almost unbeatable even with a fully maxed out, fully upgraded mech army right now. I don't think the Warhound is what we need for it though. The warhound could be a cool unit if they slowed it down, made the model slightly smaller and upped it's supply by one to make it harder to spam. Also make Hayfire Missiles a cast, rather than auto.
We still have banshees right?
Banshees really don't do well enough against Immortals, especially since they require a completely different upgrade path. Terran needs something on the factory to make mass immortal (which shouldn't be viable) less viable against mech.
Why? You aren't actually supposed to be able to counter everything in the game with a single tech building (even if Freaky would argue otherwise).
There's nothing wrong with needing to build some banshees, or marines, or ghosts, to deal with one specific unit composition.
Ever watched Broodwar? The Terrans there would like to contest your statement of not being able to deal with every unit in the game with just the Factory.
Lings? Vulture, Spider Mines, and Tanks. Hydras? Same as with Lings. Lurkers? Tanks. Muta? Goliath (LOTS of them). Ultra? Tanks. Defiler? Spider Mines and Tanks. Guardian? Goliath. Queen? Goliath and Turrets.
Marines? Tanks, Spider Mines, and Vultures. Firebats? Basically all mech. Ghosts? Tanks and Spider Mines. Wraiths? Goliaths. BCs? Goliaths. Drops? Goliaths. (See how sexy these things are?
Zealots? Vultures. Spider Mines and Tanks work but with varying degrees of success and failure. Dragoons? Spider Mines and Tanks. Holy crap Tanks did great against Dragoons. High Templars? Tanks. DTs? Spider Mines. Shuttle? Goliaths. Reaver? Spider Mines and Tanks. Scout? Goliaths. Carriers? Goliaths. Arbiters? Goliaths.
Sure, you can accentuate it with Science Vessels and Wraiths. But you can BASICALLY deal with everything reasonably well using pure Factory mech.
As to the Immortal problem... Did you know Ghosts remove EXACTLY 100 Shields? And Immortals are only strong as long as they have 1 point out of their 100 Shields? Sooooo... If you went Ghost Mech vs Protoss (which you are SUPPOSED TO DO ANYWAY), Immortals aren't a problem. However... Hellions also do rather well, though they do terribly versus mass Stalker. But you'd be amazing at how effective mass Hellions are if you get a good angle. The splash damage is ridiculous.
As to the problem with Mech and Warhounds... It feels like Blizzard is afraid of essentially recreating an easier Broodwar, so they venture away from creating the exact same units/abilities. I mean, Blinding Cloud and Dark Swarm... We'd all rather have Dark Swarm. Consume and Consume? We'd rather have the Broodwar Variant. We'd rather have Broodwar Siege Tanks (in siege mode, though to me they feel like they did more damage all around and sieged and unsieged faster). The Goliath would fit in better than the Warhound (especially if you buffed Tanks). Overall, like many have said before, Mech should be slow, VERY difficult to beat if in a static position, and reasonably position based. As it is now, Siege Tanks cost too much supply, cost quite a bit (+25 gas and +1 supply over it's BW version), and deal LESS damage in Siege mode. Now we have an A-move unit that essentially takes away ALL the weaknesses of mech while maintaining the strengths. Does it help to alleviate the weaknesses of a mech army? Yes. But is it so good that it completely eclipses the mech army as a whole instead of being a component of mech play? Absolutely. Like everyone said, why spend 150/125/3 when you can spend far less for a far better unit in the Warhound? It literally contributes nothing to mech except to destroy it (along with everything else in the game that walks instead of flying). If anything, this should be remade to be a bio unit that requires Armory to unlock (as well as having SEVERAL stats nerfs), and something similar to a Goliath should be added to Mech (and buff Siege Tanks, hint hint). Honestly, if you want to improve mech, buff the sheer CORE of mech, which should always be the Tank. Everything else should serve no other purpose other than to protect you and your Tanks until you can get a number of them with which you can slowly move across the map. From there, give the other two races something to slowly push the mech army back or weaken it through some form of disruption (like Dark Swarm and Statis Field). Then give Terran back Irradiate and everything works out! Seriously though, buff Tanks, nerf Warhounds.
I love (not) that toss players are trying to give terran players advice considering mech vs toss in WoL. Just make ghost... Just include some more banshees. Mech vs toss in WoL - it dosent work and never will work! This have been tried a billion times, ghost mech, raven mech, skyterran-mech. Toss deathball simply crushes mech. Tanks really suck against immortals and zealots.
As for the warhound. I am SO excited that terrans get their own "colossus". A-move unit? Yeah, but the speed really makes me happy as for the possibility to micro. However, for the sake of balance, its a little bit to strong, and very supply efficient. Include armory and make it a 3 supply unit.
On September 06 2012 22:23 Solid_J wrote: As for the warhound. I am SO excited that terrans get their own "colossus". A-move unit? Yeah, but the speed really makes me happy as for the possibility to micro. However, for the sake of balance, its a little bit to strong, and very supply efficient. Include armory and make it a 3 supply unit.
Its not a colossus. Its basically a stimmed Marine/Marauder coming from the factory which is pretty stupid since it doesn't fit mech gameplay at all.
If the warhound really was introduced as a means of 'busting tank lines' in TvT then that is just stupid. Tank lines should not be able to be overrun by a ground force of comparable value. You should need a much higher value groundforce to take out a tank line. What's most annoying for me is that terrans have adapted to tank lines in TvT so well in the last year that tank lines aren't even an issue anymore (in terms of spectator enjoyment). TvT is truly a great matchup to watch, and probably has more action than any other matchup on average.
I'm all for making mech more viable against protoss so we don't have to make bio every single game, but I have to agree with the fact that warhounds do not fit in to "mech style play", i.e. they can't lock down areas. Even Protoss has a better way of locking down areas in the midgame compared to terran, with colossi (which you can't really engage until you have vikings, or a much greater bio force).
In the end it comes down to whether we really want this 'area control/lockdown' style play, and whether widow mines can take over this responsibility in tvp? (well, I guess not, since protoss always has observers, but i haven't seen them in play much). Well, we'll always have tanks for TvT at least, in TvP tanks aren't really used anyway so we're not loosing much, we're just getting another viable option (which doesn't really come with a different playstyle).
I can't believe how many of the complaints are because of the visual design of the unit aha. Seems like it has a lot bigger issues than that. I, personally, hate it. It's a terrible a move unit and more than that it's an unnecessary a move unit.
it has bigger problems than being a-move friendly, namely having ridiculous stats. it's just too fucking strong in every way.
literally every terran has been doing the warhound expand build spamming nothing but warhounds rallied at the enemy base, in many cases winning only with 1 factory, winning 90% of the time. the unit clearly is really really off
oh and they are faster than void rays and mass warhound beats mass immortal. i've been saying this since months... its just too strong.
it's like a beefy goliath without the utility of the goliath's long AA range... and it looks 100000000x worse than a goliath.. ugh it just looks so goofy i hate it, which is suprising because i actually don't mind the thor and its' movement animations, they're a lot more fluid and weighted.. the warhound is just so jerky and stupid, it looks like a childs toy.
A terrible unit as it is, just everything is too strong. Considering the cost (and also how boringly good all-round it is), changing the following along these lines might be ideal:
Speed: 2.8125 -> 2.5 HP: 200-> ...less. 150-180? It seems pretty dodgy that they have more life than tanks while costing less and being stronger in the majority of circumstances Supply: 2 -> 3 Damage: 23 straight out makes them better for straight fights than hydralisks (ignoring all splash damage etc). Their normal attack only being able to target ground is the only downside to them. I think only stim marauders, marines and roaches are even likely to be more cost efficient, is that right? This hasn't even counted the extra 5 damage per second on average from the Haywire Missiles.
Yeah, I don't like it but hey I am really biased as a protoss player
It just wrecks stalkers sooooooooooo hard even much better than marauder. Did terran really need a better marauder??????? This unit really shocks me because I always think the fundamental problem in Terran which creates balance problems is marauder. Now they created even a bigger problem source
Warhound, to simply put it, is tooooooo strong. They are really good even on their own but especially in combination with helion or banshees they are really broken. I think only real response is void rays but then two reactor barracks churning out marines and you are done
I don't know, right now, I have no real answer against this unit. Collosus is the best counter if you can survive to reach it.
The warhound, The roach,The collosi, the Thor, and the marauder.....I'm seeing a theme.
Can't dustin design good units yet?
Like Even C&C wasn't all attack moving, it was all about postioning,flanking, target firing, harassment, multi prong attacks... unit diversity... you guys get the point.
The warhound will get the marauder treatment... " Hellfire missles now a upgrade costing 100/100 build time 100 seconds"
On September 07 2012 02:43 Zergrusher wrote: The warhound, The roach,The collosi, the Thor, and the marauder.....I'm seeing a theme.
Can't dustin design good units yet?
Like Even C&C wasn't all attack moving, it was all about postioning,flanking, target firing, harassment, multi prong attacks... unit diversity... you guys get the point.
The warhound will get the marauder treatment... " Hellfire missles now a upgrade costing 100/100 build time 100 seconds"
Calling it now.
Wait, you didn't like the collossus and the thor? Those units are awesome imo. Marauder is kinda dumb though, Seems like they put it there for an Awalk unit.
Anyways, I think the Warhound is quite terrible. It's very uncreative, it's ugly (It moves to fast for a mech walking unit), and simply doesn't fit with the mech mentality. I really dislike how Blizzard are starting to give all races tech paths all options, for example they are giving terran mech the option of being mobile now, they are giving protoss detection through stargate, and they are giving zerg a siege unit. Just seems kind of uncreative and takes a bunch of depth away from sc2.
Personally I think theyshould get rid of the warhound and give terran something more creative.
As a zerg player, I really feel I'm not being biased when I say Terran got jipped. Give them a cool exciting science unit or something.
Take out the Warhound and HotS is pretty solid. I can even tolerate the Tempest and its silly 22 range.
All the other units do something that is new, or at least slightly interesting. The Warhound is a Marauder built from the Factory. We do not need or want more basic ranged attacking units that are pretty good against everything. In BW only Protoss had Dragoons. Now every race has one or two Dragoons. Roach, Marauder, Immortal, Warhounds....it's the same design recycled over and over.
On September 07 2012 02:57 Scufo wrote: Take out the Warhound and HotS is pretty solid. I can even tolerate the Tempest and its silly 22 range.
All the other units do something that is new, or at least slightly interesting. The Warhound is a Marauder built from the Factory. We do not need or want more basic ranged attacking units that are pretty good against everything. In BW only Protoss had Dragoons. Now every race has one or two Dragoons. Roach, Marauder, Immortal, Warhounds....it's the same design recycled over and over.
I probably play more Terran than the other two races and honestly feel this is one of the worst ideas that has come out of Browder. Firstly, I agree, the thing looks absurd and has an atrocious attack animation. What happened to the days of Terran being the race of necessity and survival in the face of ferocious/advanced alien life? I liked the feel in BW of hobbled together rebel tech (vulture) and awesome dominion feats of engineering (BC) working together to save humanity from the alien menace. Terran is just becoming the OMGGUYSyouknowwhatscool-TRANSFORMERS! race. Everything looks too slick and shiny and robotic.
With that out of the way, here comes the more important gripe: it's BORING. Boring to watch and I imagine just as boring to A-move. It was added in to make the skill curve lower for being successful with Terran down to Zerg/Protoss levels. But they did the worst way possible. They took away the micro.
WTF.
TvT is the best mirror match because of the micro and the positioning and the razor's edge timing stress of unsieging tanks and drops. Want to know why people like watching Dota2? Because it's like 80% micro. Instead of introducing micro-less units, introduce carefully balanced minor buffs and units that require control. I don't think anybody honestly can say right now if it's overpowered or not, the metagame has had like a single day to develop, what I care about is that it is taking away the single most awesome aspect of Terran.
FFS Browder just swallow your pride and make it a goliath and then shuffle a few other things around to compensate. At very least change the model, make the missiles manual cast (why the shit they are autocast is completely beyond me), and nerf the stats so that there isn't soooo much incentive for Terrans to throw away all the awesome playstyles they've developed in favor of warhound centric builds.
TLDR: MICRO IS FUCKING FUN. Don't take it away. Warhound has the potential to flush all the cool Terran playstyles down the toilet just to stroke the boner Browder has for A-move mech units.
On September 07 2012 02:34 foxmulder_ms wrote: Yeah, I don't like it but hey I am really biased as a protoss player
It just wrecks stalkers sooooooooooo hard even much better than marauder. Did terran really need a better marauder??????? This unit really shocks me because I always think the fundamental problem in Terran which creates balance problems is marauder. Now they created even a bigger problem source
Warhound, to simply put it, is tooooooo strong. They are really good even on their own but especially in combination with helion or banshees they are really broken. I think only real response is void rays but then two reactor barracks churning out marines and you are done
I don't know, right now, I have no real answer against this unit. Collosus is the best counter if you can survive to reach it.
I dont like it and im a terran player stupid unit that was not needed to make Mech viable as claimed Blizz really have dropped tha ball on this one
This and some of the other changes have me rather worried about HoTS right now just seems Blizz want to appeal to a broader audience by making the game easier which is a massive mistake.
Get rid of the Warhound and thor buff tanks a bit and add in factory AA and your set for amking Mech viable and you dont even need Battlehellions regular hellions work fine already in TvT and would in TvP if tanks were better and you had a way to counter Pheonix/Void out of the factory and your set
Ugly unit design - Small, but just ugly to look at
Terrible game design - Supposed to help mech? No, Make the tank more viable, make widow mines do aoe and more damage take away their air attack. And make the warhound similar to the goliath A-A. - Get rid of thor.
Most people hated the maurader in the beta for WoL for the same reasons they hate the warhound now. However, what makes the warhound worse is that it requires 0, literally 0 micro. The maurader ends up being a cool kiting armor pericer unit. While the warhound is the same thing but 2x as better but with no kiting ability.
The Warhound needs to be at least slower than it is now, it's completely destroying everything in the beta.
On September 07 2012 04:00 Moonling wrote: The warhound
Ugly unit design - Small, but just ugly to look at
Terrible game design - Supposed to help mech? No, Make the tank more viable, make widow mines do aoe and more damage take away their air attack. And make the warhound similar to the goliath A-A. - Get rid of thor.
Most people hated the maurader in the beta for WoL for the same reasons they hate the warhound now. However, what makes the warhound worse is that it requires 0, literally 0 micro. The maurader ends up being a cool kiting armor pericer unit. While the warhound is the same thing but 2x as better but with no kiting ability.
I've seen plenty of terrans kite with the Warhound, it's brutal vs protoss.
I really don't like anything about the Warhound, bad unit in general, but I think by far the worst effect they have is that they completely ruin TvT.
The battle-hellion isn't that bad but it kinda makes mech way stronger than bio in TvT, and now that everyone has to go mech, they end up having to go mass Warhound because the Warhound destroys every other mech unit...
No more chess like positional games. No more fast paced bio vs bio. No more bio trying to pick apart mech players.
Most pro players are complaining about how terrible it is now too, it changed from one of the most decision making oriented match-ups to the absolute least =(
On September 07 2012 04:08 ilikeredheads wrote: The warhound is essentially a marauder piloting a Gundam. It's a terribly, terribly designed unit that does terrible, terrible damage.
Can Dustin think of anything else besides 1a2a3a???
As starcraft is destoryed before your eyes with bad unit designs..
Let us ask.... why is that?
Because dustin never played BW so he has no clue what makes a good RTS game.
Hes jump from company to company to work on RTS games, and at this point hes just smooshing things together.
I don't hate the guy, just his unit designs.
Searously I know ways to fix the game and make it better for all 3 races... but no one is willing to listen.. or let me post a thread
anyways, The unit designs are the main flaw is SC2..... its like dustin was transfered to blizzard pruposely to mess with sc2...
And lets be honest HOW IS THE ROACH,WARHOUND,MARAUDER,THOR,COLLOSI FUN?????
How are they good for strategy?
RTS should have a mix of fun and strategy and it should be easy to learn.. but hard to master, and rewarding over time.
On September 07 2012 04:00 Moonling wrote: The warhound
Ugly unit design - Small, but just ugly to look at
Terrible game design - Supposed to help mech? No, Make the tank more viable, make widow mines do aoe and more damage take away their air attack. And make the warhound similar to the goliath A-A. - Get rid of thor.
Most people hated the maurader in the beta for WoL for the same reasons they hate the warhound now. However, what makes the warhound worse is that it requires 0, literally 0 micro. The maurader ends up being a cool kiting armor pericer unit. While the warhound is the same thing but 2x as better but with no kiting ability.
I've seen plenty of terrans kite with the Warhound, it's brutal vs protoss.
doesn't make warhound micro heavy though relatively speaking, you can kite zealots with roaches and still roaches are one of the most 1a friendly units in the game
Actually I have a theory... Blizzard made the Warhound a bit too strong in the beta so that people would make it all the time and really test it well, because they are not sure the unit fits well in the game. I hope this is why it is so strong right now. Please Blizzard remove it.
On September 07 2012 04:31 transcendent one wrote: doesn't make warhound micro heavy though relatively speaking, you can kite zealots with roaches and still roaches are one of the most 1a friendly units in the game
I think the Warhound has a ton of micro potential, to be honest. Long range, slowly attack frequency but fast response, reasonably fast movement, useful for drop harass, etc.
Mind you, I still don't think it seem like a very good unit since it doesn't actually NEED to micro in it's current state, but the micro POTENTIAL is there.
Either way, I still don't like how it acts right now. It removes most reasons for Terran to ever build tanks and makes mech gameplay very mobile and bio-like.
So its universal everyone from every every race hates the warhound
LOL blizz relay have dropped the ball on this one my only concern is that they have already gone too far with the current HoTS build to change much and the end result is going to be awful
The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
So i have read your post and I have to say I disagree with most of what you say but you really seem to have missed a few things given your first sentence. The warhound was touted as a unit to make Terran Mech play more viable and as a unit It wrecks Mech units making Standard Mech play not viable. How is that not a design flaw?.
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
I don't think you completely understand what other people (mostly high level players) consider good design.
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
It's extremely easy to tech to, it's cheap as hell, has lots of HP, moves quickly, has pretty damn good range, decent damage, a special attack and only takes up 2 supply. It's also durable vs AoE due to it's size.
The ONLY downside to this unit is it's inability to shoot up. The TvT matchup revolves pretty much completely around this unit, in TvP terrans are combining this unit with either hellions, vikings (both very cheap and easily mass produced) or both and steamrolling whatever they are up against. In TvZ it performs OK vs every ground unit, even against Ultralisks due to the Haywire missiles.
I don't think T3 air units should be a requirement to battle a unit that requires a factory with a tech lab to produce.
At this point in the game, the unit is simply too strong.
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
So i have read your post and I have to say I disagree with most of what you say but you really seem to have missed a few things given your first sentence. The warhound was touted as a unit to make Terran Mech play more viable and as a unit It wrecks Mech units making Standard Mech play not viable. How is that not a design flaw?.
You're thinking too straight and just joining the bandwagon of blizzard hate. To make Tank play viable in TvP you need something on the factory to adress immortal hardened sheilds; The haywire missile is a ability that can bypass it. So Immortal just do not roflstomp Tank play.
First of all, do you really think that pure warhound defeats Warhound + Tank just a-moving? The answer is big NO. Tanks have extra damage against armored. They melt warhounds. And Warhounds on Tank's side just serve as a meat sheild.
The most magnificient thing about the Warhound. Its that is the first unit on Terran arsenal that just can't be A-moved to win. Zerg and Protoss have to Micro and use positional play. Terrible, terrible damage just don't work against them. You have to use AoE, abuse chokepoints, flank, etc. The blind counters are just too extreme.
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
So i have read your post and I have to say I disagree with most of what you say but you really seem to have missed a few things given your first sentence. The warhound was touted as a unit to make Terran Mech play more viable and as a unit It wrecks Mech units making Standard Mech play not viable. How is that not a design flaw?.
You're thinking too straight and just joining the bandwagon of blizzard hate. To make Tank play viable in TvP you need something on the factory to adress immortal hardened sheilds; The haywire missile is a ability that can bypass it. So Immortal just do not roflstomp Tank play.
First of all, do you really think that pure warhound defeats Warhound + Tank just a-moving? The answer is big NO. Tanks have extra damage against armored. They melt warhounds. And Warhounds on Tank's side just serve as a meat sheild.
The most magnificient thing about the Warhound. Its that is the first unit on Terran arsenal that just can't be A-moved to win. Zerg and Protoss have to Micro and use positional play. Terrible, terrible damage just don't work against them. You have to use AoE, abuse chokepoints, flank, etc. The blind counters are just too extreme.
Ok your officially trolling now and if by some chance you arent just go and watch ANY pro terran stream all they are doing is a-moving warhounds into race x and winning .
There is so much wrong with this unit, but im still excited to get the beta and try it for myself :O
If I worked on the Blizzard design team, i would change the hell out of the warhound.
IMO it should be more similar to the funciton of a goliath. I was really happy to see the warhound have an anti air, but now that it has been changed the unit has become incredibly dull.
A more perfect warhound would have the same anti mech properties but with a decent anti air (maybe splash).
Another idea i'd like to propose would be modeling it after a japanese animu-style mech. Give that sucker a sword. Warhound now becomes a melee unit that deals splash. It could also have a Goliath style splashing anti-air in this re-imagining of the unit.
On September 07 2012 05:25 Herect wrote: The Warhound doesn't have design flaws. Maybe, it's a bit overpowered now, but not in a design PoV. It's really strong in the early game, but it becomes weak as time passes on when AoE, FF, big ranged units come in to play (and doesn't have a exclusive upgrade like stim, range, speed, wtv) . It's big, so it' pretty useless on Choke points. And in open field they can be easily flanked.
People complain about how the Warhound is a 1A unit, but i'm only seeing people trying to blind counter it with other 1A units instead of using shit that have to be microed and positional play. The Warhound, besides stimmed marauders and roaches sandwiches or anything that is air and attacks to the Ground doesn't have a counter. And that's good, sC2 is a strategy game, and not Rock Paper Scissor.
And, plz, people that are wanting the Goliath back. The goliath is the most dumb unit in all Mech of bw, its a counter to air. Just that. The Thor is 100 times better. Is slow, huge and have AoE to air. Positioning is everything to Thors, and his AoE promote cool shit like Muta magic boxing. If you want the Goliath, i can only say that you don't want to SC2 become a better game, you just want BW back.
Its not because a unit is simple, that doesn't bring interesting play. Look at the Marine, the Zergling, the Zealot. all unit simple as hell, and still promote cool play. The Colossus, and the Broodlord even if they are non-intuitive and do strange stuff are just Juggernauts that kill diversity in the gameplay.
I'm looking for when people start to play a strategy game. When you do that you'll just roflstomp warhound. (Besides Warhound/scv train all in, that shit is strong).
So i have read your post and I have to say I disagree with most of what you say but you really seem to have missed a few things given your first sentence. The warhound was touted as a unit to make Terran Mech play more viable and as a unit It wrecks Mech units making Standard Mech play not viable. How is that not a design flaw?.
You're thinking too straight and just joining the bandwagon of blizzard hate. To make Tank play viable in TvP you need something on the factory to adress immortal hardened sheilds; The haywire missile is a ability that can bypass it. So Immortal just do not roflstomp Tank play.
First of all, do you really think that pure warhound defeats Warhound + Tank just a-moving? The answer is big NO. Tanks have extra damage against armored. They melt warhounds. And Warhounds on Tank's side just serve as a meat sheild.
The most magnificient thing about the Warhound. Its that is the first unit on Terran arsenal that just can't be A-moved to win. Zerg and Protoss have to Micro and use positional play. Terrible, terrible damage just don't work against them. You have to use AoE, abuse chokepoints, flank, etc. The blind counters are just too extreme.
Ok your officially trolling now and if by some chance you arent just go and watch ANY pro terran stream all they are doing is a-moving warhounds into race x and winning .
Well, i said it's strong on early game (probably OP), If that's a issue, and Blizzard will deal with it eventually.
But, still, i'm really disapointed by the thought process of some pros. Gretorp, yesterday, was just raging and trying to Blind counter it. He was just getting ridiculous compositions and a-moving them. He was screaming to the chat "guys, what do i make to counter this shit"? Man, he really should think something like "what do i do, guys? How can i engage this shit?". Starcraft 2 isn't a Rock-Paper-Scissor game, fuck.
First of all, Terrans really should rediscover the Tank. With Warhound support, the will be incredible.
And second, Protosses and Terrans really should start playing more smartly. they really need to exploit the weakness of a pure Warhound army. In late game, they literally suck. AoE, flanks, swarmhosts, infestors, tempests, archons. They all do great in the late game. People should just begin to use it more smartly.
Watching Demuslim right now and he is just killing everyone by doing a one-base 2 factory warhound allin. Zerg seems to be able to survive with mass ling and terran with more warhounds, but protoss is getting destroyed so hard it's unbelievable. That unit is complete bullshit.
On September 07 2012 07:26 NeonFox wrote: Watching Demuslim right now and he is just killing everyone by doing a one-base 2 factory warhound allin. Zerg seems to be able to survive with mass ling and terran with more warhounds, but protoss is getting destroyed so hard it's unbelievable. That unit is complete bullshit.
Yeah, he even get the biggest mannerd guy ever (White-Ra) a bit flamed :D
Obvs its op but we all know blizz will nerph it before realese so no prob, just hate the look also, designe is AWEFULL! Running like some stupid hippie
On September 07 2012 08:45 Kireak wrote: So Blizzard wanted an AA unit that was more flexible then the Thor so that it could more easiliy move around and defend.
Behold the Warhound, but opps, instead of having an AA attack it destroys everything on the ground.
Where did it all go wrong? :/
they were too scared to just make goliaths so they made these retarded wanna be PoS goliaths
What i gather from a lot of professional streams is that the Warhound has become the crutch of most of the match-ups due to it's cheap cost, low supply, fast movement and repairability paired with it's tough damage. I was watching a TvT between DeMusliM and Ourk where Ourk was fundamentally ahead; more workers, more factories, more Warhounds. The moment Ourk began to spend gas on Armories and Upgrades (instead of more factories and subsequently more Warhounds) he began to lose every fight and soon after, the game. A problem arises where: If you devote your resources into factories in TvT, you can't match an army containing Warhounds without Warhounds yourself (Tanks are just too weak). This leads to a Warhound vs Warhound mid-game in TvT, much like primitive ZvZ Roach vs Roach battles. The problem? As soon as you stop building Warhounds and factories, you're immediately behind without previously dealing significant damage. This is by no means game-breaking. Some players have started alternate strategies, for example Thorzain with his typical MMM push vs a Warhound composition. It deals with it well and is very potent if your opponent isn't careful. What I wonder is: What if the Warhounds base attack was reduced, with its Anti-mech missile remaining the same, to make the Warhound more upgrade dependant? It would still allow Warhounds to be exceptional against Mechanical units but have a hard time with non-mechanical, muscular unit compositions, would it not?
On September 07 2012 09:09 SC_Ghost wrote: What i gather from a lot of professional streams is that the Warhound has become the crutch of most of the match-ups due to it's cheap cost, low supply, fast movement and repairability paired with it's tough damage. I was watching a TvT between DeMusliM and Ourk where Ourk was fundamentally ahead; more workers, more factories, more Warhounds. The moment Ourk began to spend gas on Armories and Upgrades (instead of more factories and subsequently more Warhounds) he began to lose every fight and soon after, the game. A problem arises where: If you devote your resources into factories in TvT, you can't match an army containing Warhounds without Warhounds yourself (Tanks are just too weak). This leads to a Warhound vs Warhound mid-game in TvT, much like primitive ZvZ Roach vs Roach battles. The problem? As soon as you stop building Warhounds and factories, you're immediately behind without previously dealing significant damage. This is by no means game-breaking. Some players have started alternate strategies, for example Thorzain with his typical MMM push vs a Warhound composition. It deals with it well and is very potent if your opponent isn't careful. What I wonder is: What if the Warhounds base attack was reduced, with its Anti-mech missile remaining the same, to make the Warhound more upgrade dependant? It would still allow Warhounds to be exceptional against Mechanical units but have a hard time with non-mechanical, muscular unit compositions, would it not?
They probably will nerf it. It is just too strong in the early game. They should reduce the normal attack and the speed. Make haywrie a upgrade instead of a natural ability.
On September 07 2012 09:09 SC_Ghost wrote: What i gather from a lot of professional streams is that the Warhound has become the crutch of most of the match-ups due to it's cheap cost, low supply, fast movement and repairability paired with it's tough damage. I was watching a TvT between DeMusliM and Ourk where Ourk was fundamentally ahead; more workers, more factories, more Warhounds. The moment Ourk began to spend gas on Armories and Upgrades (instead of more factories and subsequently more Warhounds) he began to lose every fight and soon after, the game. A problem arises where: If you devote your resources into factories in TvT, you can't match an army containing Warhounds without Warhounds yourself (Tanks are just too weak). This leads to a Warhound vs Warhound mid-game in TvT, much like primitive ZvZ Roach vs Roach battles. The problem? As soon as you stop building Warhounds and factories, you're immediately behind without previously dealing significant damage. This is by no means game-breaking. Some players have started alternate strategies, for example Thorzain with his typical MMM push vs a Warhound composition. It deals with it well and is very potent if your opponent isn't careful. What I wonder is: What if the Warhounds base attack was reduced, with its Anti-mech missile remaining the same, to make the Warhound more upgrade dependant? It would still allow Warhounds to be exceptional against Mechanical units but have a hard time with non-mechanical, muscular unit compositions, would it not?
They probably will nerf it. It is just too strong in the early game. They should reduce the normal attack and the speed. Make haywrie a upgrade instead of a natural ability.
Warhound will be hit hard with the nerf bat first beta patch. So obviously OP
On September 07 2012 04:31 transcendent one wrote: doesn't make warhound micro heavy though relatively speaking, you can kite zealots with roaches and still roaches are one of the most 1a friendly units in the game
I think the Warhound has a ton of micro potential, to be honest. Long range, slowly attack frequency but fast response, reasonably fast movement, useful for drop harass, etc.
Mind you, I still don't think it seem like a very good unit since it doesn't actually NEED to micro in it's current state, but the micro POTENTIAL is there.
Either way, I still don't like how it acts right now. It removes most reasons for Terran to ever build tanks and makes mech gameplay very mobile and bio-like.
yeah it has potential, but not the good kind of potential. it doesn't have any interesting attribute or ability or concept. it just has better stats than other units therefore it can be abused.
focus fire/kite can be used by any unit in the game with ranged attack. not the good kind of micro potential for a new unit. and yeah especially not for an unit that you'll mass cuz its stats are so good
i hate it i hope it gets removed. there is absolutely nothing original about this unit.
on the other hand i watched babyknight's stream and realized that swarm hosts are even more retarded stat wise. 2 locusts do almost 40 dps wtf... one locust beats a stalker 1vs1 WTF
seriously stalkers are only good for anything in pvp now in the beta, or strictly for anti air
On September 07 2012 09:09 SC_Ghost wrote: Some players have started alternate strategies, for example Thorzain with his typical MMM push vs a Warhound composition. It deals with it well and is very potent if your opponent isn't careful.
tbh it doesnt deal with it well at all, thorzain was just outclassing everyone by miles.
On September 07 2012 07:26 NeonFox wrote: Watching Demuslim right now and he is just killing everyone by doing a one-base 2 factory warhound allin. Zerg seems to be able to survive with mass ling and terran with more warhounds, but protoss is getting destroyed so hard it's unbelievable. That unit is complete bullshit.
Yeah, he even get the biggest mannerd guy ever (White-Ra) a bit flamed :D
Obvs its op but we all know blizz will nerph it before realese so no prob, just hate the look also, designe is AWEFULL! Running like some stupid hippie
I watched that too, during multiple games x.x The roflhounds look insanely strong- certainly the unit most in need of an immediate patch.
Yesterday I did see BabyKnight go blind, super fast void rays and they did hold off the initial roflhound push (but then I think he lost to roflhounds + marines after that).
It's exactly what terran needed. T v T can take 2-3 times as long as other matchups due to siege tank lines. Terran had absolutely no counter to siege tanks, other than making siege tanks.. the whole t v t matchup was just tank vs tank and whoever loses patience first loses, now terran finally has a counter to siege and a unit that you can a-move like the other 2 races have.
i have an idea to fix this shit: remove warhound and make mine do bonus damage against mechanincal let's say base 120+80 bonus and increase also the splash damage to 80 at least, keep the other stats the same
Why did they have to make it so big? Granted, it is still beta but look at every other new unit they put in, the model size is really big compared to some other stuff and I think that is really ugly, but the Warhound looks worse of course because it looks like a huge box. Did they make the stuff big so it is easier for noobs to click on them or what?
On September 07 2012 16:34 Garmer wrote: i have an idea to fix this shit: remove warhound and make mine do bonus damage against mechanincal let's say base 120+80 bonus and increase also the splash damage to 80 at least, keep the other stats the same
Considering that the Warhound was implemented to give meching players a mobile alternative to tank lines in TvT and an alternative to bio in TvP, I don't really see how giving an immobile/short range unit an ungodly damage boost would solve either of those.
I'd rather they did something along these lines: Reduce attack range by 1 Increase attack interval by somewhere between .3 to .5 And either increasing supply by 1 or Reducing health by 20-45 ish
Oh, and the model size is grossly large, I wouldn't mind if they reduced the model size while maintaining the same pathing size.
Would ultimately make it a little less effective against everything while still capable of outranging and 2-shotting marines, and still capable against tanks.
On September 07 2012 08:45 Kireak wrote: So Blizzard wanted an AA unit that was more flexible then the Thor so that it could more easiliy move around and defend.
Behold the Warhound, but opps, instead of having an AA attack it destroys everything on the ground.
Where did it all go wrong? :/
they were too scared to just make goliaths so they made these retarded wanna be PoS goliaths
They like taking basic units and splitting it into two separate units. Dragoon -> Immortal/Stalker. Goliath -> Warhound/Thor. I think it doesn't work out so well for Terran because they already have a dedicated GtG mech, the Seige Tank.
It's funny how some people think they already figured out HoTS in 2-3 days and know what's balanced and what's not. The fact is, people need to rethink their build-order. All of them. And in depth.
Using pretty much the same bo with slight variations in the expansions than in War3:ROC or Starcraft vanilla would also have been a freelose.
I hope Blizzard don't implement any patch before at least 2-3 weeks. I remember in the early day of Wol when people believed Zerg had no lategame army, that forcefields were super-imba, that marauders push were unbeatable and so on...
On September 07 2012 16:34 Garmer wrote: i have an idea to fix this shit: remove warhound and make mine do bonus damage against mechanincal let's say base 120+80 bonus and increase also the splash damage to 80 at least, keep the other stats the same
Considering that the Warhound was implemented to give meching players a mobile alternative to tank lines in TvT and an alternative to bio in TvP, I don't really see how giving an immobile/short range unit an ungodly damage boost would solve either of those.
I'd rather they did something along these lines: Reduce attack range by 1 Increase attack interval by somewhere between .3 to .5 And either increasing supply by 1 or Reducing health by 20-45 ish
Oh, and the model size is grossly large, I wouldn't mind if they reduced the model size while maintaining the same pathing size.
Would ultimately make it a little less effective against everything while still capable of outranging and 2-shotting marines, and still capable against tanks.
mobile alternative is bio, don't need to make mech style the same as bio style, if you like mobile units just play bio, mech should be about positional play imho
It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
In fact they actually aren't that bad from balance perspective. But I can't watch any terran stream like that. Just massing warhounds in every matchup isn't fun to watch.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
it's just too sad that when I read the most retarded comment in a thread I know that if I lift my eyes to the location of the poster it's my country please shoot me in the face
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
it's just too sad that when I read the most retarded comment in a thread I know that if I lift my eyes to the location of the poster it's my country please shoot me in the face
Don't tell to me, it's not only the same country, but even the same team :|
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
Features required to play toss: one hand or, even better, one hook.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of years and now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
it's just too sad that when I read the most retarded comment in a thread I know that if I lift my eyes to the location of the poster it's my country please shoot me in the face
Don't tell to me, it's not only the same country, but even the same team :|
You bought me 'cause I'm skilled. Tell the others that you saw the light once I joined the team.
p.s. munsu, go to a-move zealots in the italian channel.
Since I don't have a beta and barely watched anything HOTS wise, I won't comment on the functionnality of the unit itself.
What I will say though is that IT LOOKS LIKE SHIT. My god, Blizzard seriously?? Is that really the best concept your artists came up with? It looks so fucking ugly I don't think I'll ever get over it.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of yearsand now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
Features required to play toss: one hand or, even better, one hook.
The fact that you think Protoss and Zerg players only a-move is rather silly. I figured the first time you said it, it was just sarcasm... but really, a second time in a row? Come on now.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of yearsand now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
Features required to play toss: one hand or, even better, one hook.
The fact that you think Protoss and Zerg players only a-move is rather silly. I figured the first time you said it, it was just sarcasm... but really, a second time in a row? Come on now.
Oh yeah, they don't amove. They also make "HUGE FUNGALS" and "HUGE STORMS".
The notorious skill cap in spamming fungal growths and storms. Only protoss player who microes: MC. All the others are retarded. Only zerg player who microes: none. Do you really want to compare people like MKP or MVP to guys like Parting or Stephano? SC2 is ridicolous.
Watched a bunch of HOTS replays. Here is what I think.
1) Model is ugly as hell. 2) No use in TvZ in a straight up games. (Gets kill by Roaches, lings..etc etc) 3) Why not just put Haywire missile on to the thor??? Then terrans can just use Thor in TvP. Seriously, blizzard did not fix mech in TvP, but just add a super pure anti protoss mech unit.
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of yearsand now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
Features required to play toss: one hand or, even better, one hook.
The fact that you think Protoss and Zerg players only a-move is rather silly. I figured the first time you said it, it was just sarcasm... but really, a second time in a row? Come on now.
Oh yeah, they don't amove. They also make "HUGE FUNGALS" and "HUGE STORMS".
The notorious skill cap in spamming fungal growths and storms. Only protoss player who microes: MC. All the others are retarded. Only zerg player who microes: none. Do you really want to compare people like MKP or MVP to guys like Parting or Stephano? SC2 is ridicolous.
No offense, but you seriously have no idea what you are talking about and you are probably too bad at the game or just don't understand it well enough to actually recogize the skill it takes to play like for example Stephano
On September 07 2012 19:37 Gantritor wrote: It is so funny to read at all the protoss/zergs that happily amoved for like a couple of yearsand now are crying like babies: "Omfg! No you cannot amove! I have to amove with my zealots/lings!!! Imba!Imba!!!1!!1!111!!!"
Now you know, how P/Z felt after the first full year of WoL. This experience will make you a better person and poster hopefully.
Yo microbeast, have you ever played the other races? I bet playing toss would push you straight to GM because it's so unbelievably easy...
Btt: Of course all the matchups and builds will develop, but anyone believing the Warhound will stay in its current state is delusional imo.
Features required to play toss: one hand or, even better, one hook.
The fact that you think Protoss and Zerg players only a-move is rather silly. I figured the first time you said it, it was just sarcasm... but really, a second time in a row? Come on now.
Oh yeah, they don't amove. They also make "HUGE FUNGALS" and "HUGE STORMS".
The notorious skill cap in spamming fungal growths and storms. Only protoss player who microes: MC. All the others are retarded. Only zerg player who microes: none. Do you really want to compare people like MKP or MVP to guys like Parting or Stephano? SC2 is ridicolous.
While I'll be the first to roll my eyes when the casters constantly over-hype a normal fungal growth or psi storm (or EMP, mind you), microing spell casters is not the only thing that every race needs to do. And while MC is quite noteworthy for having possibly the best and most consistently good micro for a Protoss player (especially those forcefields), there are still plenty of other top non-Terrans who don't just a-move to victory. Parting's storms, Hero's warp prism harrass... hell, even IdrA's mutalisk micro is top notch when he's on his A-game, and he's not even a top contender at the moment. And everything in between.
To make the sweeping generalization that all non-Terran pro-gamers "are retarded" just because you haven't seen some of them always employ the same level of micro that stimmed bio might require is a ridiculous generalization. Are Terrans who go mech or sky Terran retarded too? Sure, Mvp and MKP have amazing micro; I wouldn't dream of taking away anything from them. But it appears that you're really just trying to be an elitist and subtlely whine about how much more your race has to do to keep up with the other races. Get over yourself, and recognize that everyone's keyboard has the same number of buttons.
What about removing the mechanical tag on Stalker? I think the gateway units should not be extreme countered by the warhounds, but robo units. As far as I'm aware, moving stalker away from being mechanical would not affect the game anywhere else? Correct me if I'm wrong.
On September 08 2012 00:15 bhfberserk wrote: 3) Why not just put Haywire missile on to the thor??? Then terrans can just use Thor in TvP.
that's a fantastic idea. it could replace the 250mm cannon which no one uses. and i feel the thor has a questionable role right now with the warhound in place. would be nice if someone posts that on the us battle.net forum.
and seriously, the warhound needs to go the way it is now. it destroys the beauty of positional play in tvt. that was the perfect matchup, and they destroy it with this unit. i'm already bored watching these warhound vs warhound battles. it also destroys the dynamic of bio in tvp when the warhound becomes the new prime unit. it's terrible to watch these warhound fights.
I'm loving the warhound, it's fast, can pick off queens from range early in the game, but is weak to air. It reminds me of a cross between a Black Knight and a Mauler from Mechwarrior. It's attack animation looks like a gauss rifle, which is cool.
A unit like the warhound will help avoid hour-long games which consistently would be the death of e-sports. If you want a commercial game for the masses, you can't run the risk of having lots of games run over 30 minutes. The warhound gives players good early attacking options, which is excellent for a growing game.
On September 09 2012 11:51 Harbinger631 wrote: I'm loving the warhound, it's fast, can pick off queens from range early in the game, but is weak to air. It reminds me of a cross between a Black Knight and a Mauler from Mechwarrior. It's attack animation looks like a gauss rifle, which is cool.
A unit like the warhound will help avoid hour-long games which consistently would be the death of e-sports. If you want a commercial game for the masses, you can't run the risk of having lots of games run over 30 minutes. The warhound gives players good early attacking options, which is excellent for a growing game.
Many of the games that are considered classics in the SC2 scene are long games. MOBA matches tend to be averaging around a 30 minute mark, or even longer from my vague recollection.
Stalemates are boring, yes but length in itself doesn't make anything boring.
On September 09 2012 11:51 Harbinger631 wrote: I'm loving the warhound, it's fast, can pick off queens from range early in the game, but is weak to air. It reminds me of a cross between a Black Knight and a Mauler from Mechwarrior. It's attack animation looks like a gauss rifle, which is cool.
A unit like the warhound will help avoid hour-long games which consistently would be the death of e-sports. If you want a commercial game for the masses, you can't run the risk of having lots of games run over 30 minutes. The warhound gives players good early attacking options, which is excellent for a growing game.
Dude, Starcraft is about long games, you clearly havent seen BW :\
Love the idea of putting haywire on thor as replacement for the cannon (without having to upgrade it) Maybe warhound can then get some low damage non splash aa attack instead and act as a midgame unit before you get to thor. Maybe also remove their base 1 armour, they now good against zealot/marine/zergling and terran dont even need the battle hellions to go with the warhounds to counter thoose.
On September 09 2012 20:40 Rassy wrote: Love the idea of putting haywire on thor as replacement for the cannon (without having to upgrade it) Maybe warhound can then get some low damage non splash aa attack instead and act as a midgame unit before you get to thor.
yes i feel they could switch the roles and it would be more fun imo. the thor loses his anti air and 250mm cannon, but gets the warhound missiles instead, so it will be the massive siege breaker. and the warhound becomes the new anti air unit, with a weak (or even no) ground attack. i think it would make more sense.
one problem in tvz when meching was that muta builds could kill you quite fast if you weren't prepared, because thors are so expensive and take long to build, and aren't even that great against air. a cheaper and not so bulky anti air unit would help.
AS i have watched some streams, they will not stay in their current state. They do far too much dps for their supply and cost. But to Z/P players who says this micro is silly, IT IS! As terran we have faced SO many two/three base camping protosses and zergs that just defend and sit till they have the tech and try to a move their heart out (speaking of masters level here). Now when terran can do it, why all the complain?? :D
It will be chanced to reasonable state. But it isn't stupid if terran has this option, as spooning wasn't very good in WOL as terran.
Micro vise, SC2 is pretty silly in current state if you ask me. Make all races a move ftw.
On September 09 2012 20:40 Rassy wrote: Love the idea of putting haywire on thor as replacement for the cannon (without having to upgrade it) Maybe warhound can then get some low damage non splash aa attack instead and act as a midgame unit before you get to thor.
yes i feel they could switch the roles and it would be more fun imo. the thor loses his anti air and 250mm cannon, but gets the warhound missiles instead, so it will be the massive siege breaker. and the warhound becomes the new anti air unit, with a weak (or even no) ground attack. i think it would make more sense.
one problem in tvz when meching was that muta builds could kill you quite fast if you weren't prepared, because thors are so expensive and take long to build, and aren't even that great against air. a cheaper and not so bulky anti air unit would help.
I love this idea too! The thor can pull out the 250mm and fire "Haywire cannon". for 6 secs. It can even use up energy! And the Warhound gets the anti air from the thor! If Warhound is quite beefy but not extreme strong GvG, I think it will be quite balance in TvZ. 3-4 warhounds should hold off the initial 8 mutalisks easily. (With good position of course)
EPT
![[image loading]](http://shokzguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/starcraft-2-heart-of-the-swarm-warhound-570x333.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb57525/starcraft/images/6/6a/Warhound_SC2-HotS_DevRend2.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.armyrecognition.com/images/stories/europe/united_kingdom/wheeled_vehicle/simba_tow/Simba_TOW_missile_light_wheeled_anti-tank_armoured_vehicle_British_United_Kingdom_640.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://t.qkme.me/3qsbj5.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/d/dc/Locust.jpg/191px-Locust.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/9/9b/Porcupine.JPG/191px-Porcupine.JPG.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/6/6d/Snowfox.jpg/191px-Snowfox.jpg.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/6/61/Thorn.jpg/191px-Thorn.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/9/90/Firefalcon.jpg/191px-Firefalcon.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/1/1c/Icestorm.gif/191px-Icestorm.gif.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/d/d1/Mongoose.jpg/191px-Mongoose.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/7/70/Sling.jpg/191px-Sling.jpg.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/1/19/Solitaire.jpg/191px-Solitaire.jpg.png)
![[image loading]](http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/0/09/3050U_Atlas.jpg/635px-3050U_Atlas.jpg.png)
![[image loading]](http://img837.imageshack.us/img837/886/sc2lol.png)
