EPTThe warhound - a deathball unit, not a "mech" unit - Page 17
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
phisku
Belgium864 Posts
| ||
|
Kortex22
France28 Posts
On September 07 2012 21:19 phisku wrote: why not making the mech attack like snipe and working with a cooldown like the thor strike cannon. you mean manually sniping Immortals and other mech units ? that would be more interesting that's right. Because in a protoss Army what matters when you play mech is Immortals and colossi : you would have to snipe about 6 units, that's achievable I believe. | ||
|
Juisson
Finland52 Posts
On September 07 2012 21:27 Kortex22 wrote: you mean manually sniping Immortals and other mech units ? that would be more interesting that's right. Because in a protoss Army what matters when you play mech is Immortals and colossi : you would have to snipe about 6 units, that's achievable I believe. Yeah, it would be good to remove the auto-cast from the anti-mech missiles forcing players to use them like snipe. That would make warhounds still be useful at breaking tank lines and fighting mech units like immortals and collossi but at least require some kind of management from the player. As is the warhound seems really OP and basically requires no micro at all :/ | ||
|
Mi.rai
178 Posts
| ||
|
FortMonty
United States63 Posts
I don't know, I personally like the design of the Warhound simply because it DOES branch off from the common "mech is slow" standard that has been set. I'd like to be more agile with my mech, ya know, have something to compliment my Helions when rolling around, so that maybe I'm not just doing a harass, I'm actually pushing with the helions and a warhound, I do agree the warhound needs a buff, I like the idea of making it light and giving it 125 HP, while also making it 3 supply, that sounds like a good idea to me. | ||
|
Disconnect
United States84 Posts
On September 06 2012 08:51 EtherealDeath wrote: Because a thor is damn expensive in every way imaginable. I can't believe the Thor is still in the game. Having two mechwarrior style units is just redundant. One of the two should be removed. | ||
|
GohgamX
Canada1096 Posts
| ||
|
triumph
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
On September 07 2012 23:59 FortMonty wrote: Pheonix can pick up Warhounds yes. I don't know, I personally like the design of the Warhound simply because it DOES branch off from the common "mech is slow" standard that has been set. I'd like to be more agile with my mech, ya know, have something to compliment my Helions when rolling around, so that maybe I'm not just doing a harass, I'm actually pushing with the helions and a warhound, I do agree the warhound needs a buff, I like the idea of making it light and giving it 125 HP, while also making it 3 supply, that sounds like a good idea to me. That's the point of mech. You want mech to be the same as bio....except better. That's stupid. You think they need a buff? Are we playing the same beta? You'r esupposed to be harrassing with hellions while building up a huge deathball mech army in your base made of thors and tanks. That's mech style. If you want an agile army you go bio. You shouldn't get both in one. | ||
|
Odinsphere
United States57 Posts
On September 07 2012 05:59 Hider wrote: Your missing the point. Fuck balance. Fuck whether the warhound is OP or not. What matters is the design of the unit (and I am not talking about the appearance). And its absolutely terrible. Warhound will never be an interesting unit, just like the collosus never will be, and the roach never will be. As a terran player I want to switch race. Why don't you interpolate this? I'm tired of reading "its a terrible design". What the hell does this mean? It was supposed to be an anti mech unit but apparently its normal attack seems a little overpowered. You make units interesting by what you do with them. How you use them with the rest of your army makes it interesting. 1a is never interesting, but lets not pretend like protoss and zerg never had similar units. | ||
|
Panikmeister
Germany2 Posts
| ||
|
Noocta
France12578 Posts
I always seen Mech as having the TANK as it core unit... | ||
|
Narw
Poland884 Posts
| ||
|
di3alot
172 Posts
in wol they can kite marines, escape marauder without cs but now they are FUCKED. every aspect of this unit sucks. the current state of sc2 hots is very depressing. and im starting to lose faith because none of the issues wol had have been fixed/changed. the new units are just more shit to the shit pile. | ||
|
XerrolAvengerII
United States510 Posts
On September 08 2012 04:26 Noocta wrote: What I don't understand is Blizzard saying the warhound is supposed to be a good core unit for mech. I always seen Mech as having the TANK as it core unit... It would be nice if tanks were a core unit, but they only serve 1 function outside of the mirror matchup, where yes technically tanks and marines are the core. Against zerg, tanks are made specifically to fight banelings, since marines with micromanagement and positioning can trade for nearly everything else (not if infestors and vipers have anything to say about that!)... If the raven or ghost were actually a respectable caster unit with usable spells against bio, you would likely never see more than 3 tanks or so built in this matchup ever again. Since both snipe and the seeker missile are both horrible, the only answer to anti-bio from zerg is the tank. My guess is that we will still see marine tank, but we will also see a larger conglomerate of mech units included, like hellions and warhounds in order to absorb damage and provide higher mobility. Against protoss, tanks have always been pretty bad because they deal "burst" damage at long intervals, and also protoss units tend to be fatter and sturdier so they minimize the effects of splash. Also, tanks can't deal with the mobility of protoss heavy hitters like the colossus and the archon, as well as the speedy stalkers and charglots. While the warhound IS going to be nerfed, and what is going to be nerfed is up for debate... probably some raw damage, maybe 23 -> 22 or 21... probably missiles requiring an upgrade / and or requiring energy (letting ghosts / Htemplars fight against them)... probably a supply cost increase (though that is less likely since tanks cost tons of supply) however, what this does bring up, is that the warhound OVERperforms, and the siege tank UNDERperforms... so I wouldn't be surprised if you see a supply switch, for tanks being 2 supply, and warhounds being 3 supply... BUT since this is all speculation, its still beta, and perhaps protoss just hasn't learned to be annoying enough with oracles and tempests?? We'll see whats going on soon! On September 07 2012 22:14 Juisson wrote: Yeah, it would be good to remove the auto-cast from the anti-mech missiles forcing players to use them like snipe. That would make warhounds still be useful at breaking tank lines and fighting mech units like immortals and collossi but at least require some kind of management from the player. As is the warhound seems really OP and basically requires no micro at all :/ Except that both snipe and thor cannons are fucking awful mechanics. The easiest way to deal with the missile autocast system is to give each shot a small energy cost: Warhound is made with 50/200 energy, every shot takes 10-20 energy... then using abilities like EMP for terran, and feedback for protoss would allow non-mech styles to perform better against warhounds. With zerg, it wouldn't matter anyway... | ||
|
Herect
Brazil216 Posts
It'll never be a Spellcaster, ou a Siege Tank ou whatever "tatical" shit that some of you want to be. It's just a unit that you can a-move and don't stress about what is doing. It won't suicide itself. And still, if you kite'em and properly position them, their utility will be improved. Just watch Demu Stream. His adjusting the position of his Warhounds all fucking time trying to get a better concave. It's not because it's a simple unit that simplifies strategies and game play. You still can do fun stuff as control map, drop it, flankat same time that smart taticals manauvers work against them. What won't work is blind counters. You don't have a "baneling" or a "collossi" that just melts it. And, more, their attack will be nerfed, so pure warhoud compositons will probably vanish. | ||
|
tarrkin
Czech Republic5 Posts
On September 08 2012 06:50 Herect wrote: Man, they want the Warhound to be a Core unit. That means they will be like Marines, Stalkers, Roaches. Ya, exactly, that's the problem with them. The initial plans blizzard had with them were actually ok. First they were meant to kill mutas, void rays and stuff, much like ol' goliath (which was an uninteresting "not mech" a-move unit btw.). Then zerg players found out that infestors are better than mutas, so blizz made them the anti-stalker weapon. But they kill pretty much everything now. I think if Blizzard really sticked to their initial ideas they would actually be fine (no matter if a-move dumbcausal, or hardcore micro skillcap, or whatever...). There are actually 2 all-round factory units already. Tank (kills everything on ground), and Thor (kills everything, except bcs and stuff). Warhounds just need to be support units. Something like nerf the railgun a lot, buff haywire and add anti-air. (Maybe nerf hitpoints) People would just made them to fill the gaps in their mechball then. | ||
|
RinconH
United States512 Posts
Maybe like a "super SCV" from the factory that builds bunker/turrets/depots twice as a fast so we see more slow, deliberate pushes. | ||
|
architecture
United States643 Posts
1. Remove sentries 2. So that we can remove roaches and marauders 3. So that we can remove stalker blink There are two reasons why mass stalker blink is not viable in the late game a. They get crushed by fungal b. They get crushed by both core bio units (M and M) But do you see the issue with mech vs blink stalker? T doesn't have fungal. AND hellion/tank BOTH lose to blink stalker. That's why Blizzard has added in Warhound, to overpower stalker completely. This is really awful unit design, but they've really worked themselves into a hole. | ||
|
architecture
United States643 Posts
BW was largely balanced because it focused on core RTS mechanics: positioning/speed/production. There wasn't too much gimmick, you might only 1-2 types of spellcaster, and only 3 units or so in most compositions. SC2, Blizzard just keeps introducing poorly thought out mechanics, that require even more complex workarounds. The REAL solution is to strip out the garbage that did not work. | ||
| ||
