Why the Warhound should NOT be balanced - Page 2

Reborn8u

United States1761 Posts

September 10 2012 07:48 GMT

#21

It may actually be that it's just to hard to compensate for units with insane micro when it comes to balancing the game for bronze through GSL level all at the same time. Think of what marines do in MKP's hands compared to your average silver player? How good are warp prisms when Hero uses one compared to me? How much better muta's are when idra uses them compared to some guy in gold league? Probably makes getting that 50/50 winrate across all leagues pretty damn difficult when you have units with such depth. Hence, warhound.

ELA

Denmark4608 Posts

September 10 2012 07:49 GMT

#22

On September 10 2012 16:45 kaokentake wrote:

Show nested quote +

hehehe. thors dont do bonus vs armored x.x

thors are kinda created to be a zealot wrecking machine. sadly their energy bar serves as nothing more than a gimmick for templars to help counter them

True about the Thor - It's just flat damage, no modifiers - My mistake TT

bhfberserk

Canada390 Posts

September 10 2012 07:53 GMT

#23

I completely agree with OP. Sc2 is fun because it is difficult, not a lot of people play it, but it is damn fun to watch the pros do amazing things. With more A-move units introduce... I am seriously slowly losing hope in HOTS.
And Beta is the time to remove Colossus and add Reaver back into the mix.

Charon1979

Austria317 Posts

September 10 2012 07:55 GMT

#24

You may enjoy color-by-numbers as a 3-year-old because it's not overwhelming and you get some guidance. Once you reach any reasonable age, however, these types of "easy-mode" activities hold no enjoyment. Adults generally prefer activities with some reasonable level of inherent masterable difficulty.

I think thats the main problem design wise.
Whats a "reasonable level of inherent masterable difficulty"?
You are talking about a game which has the majority of its players somewhere between bronze and gold level. Some of these players massed games like crazy and still do not advance a bit.
So what difficulty level are we talkin about? Thats where the desing problems start. There are roughly 2% of us in ML so where is the "golden path" that makes a unit still demanding and interesting to watch and not frustrating for 98% of the player base when even marine micro is the source of endless complaints?

Murlox

France1699 Posts

September 10 2012 08:01 GMT

#25

I don't see Blizzard simply removing a unit they made the model / animation / sounds for. Not going to happen.

What I do see occuring is some out-of-the-blue nerf. Say Warhounds with bonus versus psionic units*? Hmmm? Now that would be an interesting change, would it not.

...

Edit : *or even bonus versus destructible rocks... Well, yeah, I'm still bitter about the ghosts.

Garmer

1286 Posts

September 10 2012 08:04 GMT

#26

if they can't remove it they can add something that make it more interesting

Blazinghand

United States25551 Posts

September 10 2012 08:05 GMT

#27

This was obvious to me as soon as I saw the warhound at the previous MLG shooting and moving. The problem with the warhound isn't whether it's OP or not (I'm sure this will get fixed) but whether it's a fun and awesome unit.

It lacks fun and awesome.

architecture

United States643 Posts

September 10 2012 08:28 GMT

#28

They've dug themselves into too deep of a hole with:

1. Ridiculous macro mechanics that accelerate the game superfast
2. Sentries (which forces junk like roaches and marauders to compensate)
3. Ridiculous amounts of mobility that negate position

What happens when you have game where you can't hold position? Every army needs to be able to fight on the move at sufficiently high EV, or be easily outmaneuvered and completely crushed

architecture

United States643 Posts

September 10 2012 08:31 GMT

#29

It speaks volumes about their judgment when they decided to redesign the game from the ground up, instead of start with the framework from BW.

It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

killy666

France204 Posts

September 10 2012 08:41 GMT

#30

I agree totally. I'm just afraid that we're too far into the development cycle for them to simply scrape any unit. The best we can expect is a massive redesign, but no scrapping unfortunately.

AssyrianKing

Australia2111 Posts

September 10 2012 08:44 GMT

#31

Perfect!

hobbidude

Canada171 Posts

September 10 2012 08:46 GMT

#32

The changes for hots beta where extremely dissappointing especially as the first initial reveal of the new units was actually very promising. Pros has already sad live that David Kim is an idiot (actually quoted) when it comes to design and this only proves it; i would pay more to fire this idiot than i would to actually buy the expo. They have really failed and somehow ended with the wrong mentality; either they can on a new wing or path for each race with units that possible fix holes the other units have, or they make the existing units more diverse and less "works against anythings" and fill in the new holes with new units. Leave it to blizzard to just through something out there without any real thought (ie shreader) when everyone can see from the first second isn't going to work. Its complete bs when thay say they've testing things like ahead of time such as shattered temple especially when the home hobbiest does it more/better the multiple "pro" programmers. Sad to say that the only thing i think of real interest in the expansion is the artwork is thankfully seems seperate the main machine.

Slago

Canada726 Posts

September 10 2012 09:01 GMT

#33

i don't know if I entirely agree but definitely some good points, I find units that have tricks to pull off far more interesting and satisfying so that part i agree with, and the warhound is a pretty dull unit, however having the dull one toned unit is required to make the game more interesting, like a story it needs rounded, flat, dynamic, and static characters to feel full. but than again this ain't a book, so i dunno :p

ArtemisKnives

United States210 Posts

September 10 2012 09:02 GMT

#34

Played a ton of beta so far... Terran moving from microed bio to A-move warhound timing attacks at the master / GM tier.

Pretty boring as a Protoss right now... I'm using WoL builds to deny strong enemy WoL builds except they now have new units that give more synergy to their attacks... I am stuck with a 1 second oracle use and dreaming of making a tempest @ 3-4 base for some tickle damage... I've got to question what they are saying across the table at each design / balance meeting they have...

NATO

United States459 Posts

September 10 2012 09:20 GMT

#35

As a protoss player, shouldn't you be focusing on bigger amove problems, like your entire race? Or is it just that you want other people to need skill and not you?

User was temp banned for this post.

Drimacus

Germany92 Posts

September 10 2012 09:24 GMT

#36

I agree completely.
I know it's hard to develop something for the we-have-everything-terrans, but warhounds don't feel Starcrafty.

Alex1Sun

494 Posts

September 10 2012 09:27 GMT

#37

Well, I basically agree with all that you said, but I still think that interesting positional play can be archived simply by nerfing the warhound. Just nerf it hard enough, so that it becomes a situational unit and is build for-example only against mass immortals/stalkers. Then most of the time people would still be building tanks, and just sometimes sprinkling warhounds to help with specific units.

Problem solved.

blug

Australia623 Posts

September 10 2012 09:27 GMT

#38

I really wish Blizzard put more polls up on there website, things such as "Do you think Metalopolis should be replaced by another map", "Do you think the Warhound needs to be scrapped and replaced with a different unit", or "Do you think Blizzard should nerf zergs queens".

I really feel like Blizzard don't listen to their fans, it really upsets me =(

blug

Australia623 Posts

September 10 2012 09:30 GMT

#39

On September 10 2012 18:27 Alex1Sun wrote:
Well, I basically agree with all that you said, but I still think that interesting positional play can be archived simply by nerfing the warhound. Just nerf it hard enough, so that it becomes situational and is build for-example only against mass immortals/stalkers. Then most of the time people would still be building tanks, and just sometimes sprinkling warhounds to help with specific units.

Problem solved.

Yeah, I would agree with this. Honestly the only real reason I'm not looking forward to HotS is because I get the feeling I am going to be doing nothing but vs war hounds in zvt, pvt, and tvt. The only issue I find with your philosophy is I really don't see a position where situationally it will be good.

Morphs

Netherlands645 Posts

September 10 2012 09:51 GMT

#40

The Warhound is no coincidence. Blizzard wanted exactly this, as stated in interviews. According to Blizzard, the Warhound was purposely created as an a-move unit since there's already so much micro involved in playing Terran...

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 32 33 34 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Why the Warhound should NOT be balanced - Page 2

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming