|
On September 13 2012 14:42 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 09:44 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 09:41 NicolBolas wrote:On September 13 2012 09:29 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 09:19 NicolBolas wrote:On September 13 2012 08:59 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 08:25 jinorazi wrote:On September 13 2012 07:50 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:
Oh no. Should african terrans be removed from HOTS too? Because they do not belong? Maybe we should build a minefield so they cannot cross over the borders of space.
Maybe we should save the sanctity of marriage and remove Archon made from Dark Templars. Starcraft had so many A move units and nobody gave a shit (Some of them even had developed into heavy micro depended units.). This is just another over blown opinion of somebody. If we seriously want these sensational statements to matter we should vote for Slasher to be the eSports president.
EDIT: He could have written this ever since the preview was out. The concept of Warhound never changed. All aboard the warhound bandwagon chuchuchu. the point isnt warhound but design philosophy and warhound is the prime example of whats wrong with their design philosophy. and yes, people have spoken about this topic, good game design taking ques from bw, countless fucking times, even about warhound. but the problem is they are the minority, many with bw background(who understands whats good or bad better), that just gets ignored by sc2 people saying "go play bw then" Seriously a big post about how Warhound should not be in the game at all is not about the concept of warhound? WOW. I like BW, never said anything about them playing Broodwar. Nor that it should matter., whether you do or dont. All i said that this is just a chuchuchu train. Nobody should take beta seriously, unless they work with Blizzard. Making posts like these is not relevant at all to the Beta. It is just a statement of an opinion.(And in this case yet another sensational statement.....) How is a post about units in the beta not relevant to the beta? And yes, it's "just a statement of an opinion;" that's the point! He's stating his opinion about why the Warhound is a bad unit. And while I agree that it's semi-sensationalist to disguise a "remove the Warhound" thread with the title "don't balance the Warhound", it's hardly senationalist to want it removed. As for the "chuchuchu train" (which I presume is some kind of net-speak for "bandwagoning." Wagons aren't trains), yes, he's not alone in wanting the Warhound gone. Lots of people want it gone. But "bandwagoning" is basically accusing someone of not thinking. That they're agreeing with everyone else only because those other people are saying it. That they would not have come to this belief on their own. Just because everyone is against something doesn't make it a bandwagon. Everyone hates drowning; that doesn't mean avoiding drowning is a bandwagon. It just means that we all see the downsides and would rather not do it. I posted why this is a sensational band-wagoning. Warhound did not change from the first sneak peak. Nobody gave a crap about it, except the model being a ripoff of Warhammer. People were talking about the Warhound being bad pretty much since it came to this form. Maybe not as many people; some people decided to adopt a wait-and-see approach. They waited, saw that it still wasn't good, and started complaining. That's not band-wagoning. That's being mistrustful of Theorycrafting. Futhermore, even if it is, how do you know that it's band-wagoning in this case? Did Orb ever once say that he liked the Warhound before? Did he ever once say that it was a good unit before? If not, then you don't know that it's a case of band-wagoning. No thats why it is band wagoning. Nothing changed, except the popularity of the topic. Thats the whole point. If you do not agree with it, its fine. No, actually watching people play it makes a huge difference. Playing it makes a bigger difference and that's what has changed. For instance, I wrote a very long blog on why I felt the the warhound was going in the opposite direction of good mech play. However, because I had only seen battle reports (which are notoriously bad for macro for one thing), I had to leave a back door/caveat at the beginning saying that we were not yet in beta. That's because one needs to see how the unit handles. Particularly on the off chance they included move-shot. The design of it hasn't changed, but more people will become convinced as they see pro's trying to make it work and how it interacts with the rest of the units., But how do you tell the difference between a critical mass of people becoming convinced that the early arguments were correct vs band wagoning? Or would you dismiss any general consensus on a topic as bandwagoning?
It can be both. The general consensus is that the Warhound is broken and not good. However, the band wagon is the further argument that is should be removed and replaced with a world shattering siege tank buff or some omega end game unit. People don't like the warhound, but the band wagon effect is causing people to just assume that Blizzard does not care about the game and just wants it to fail.
The second part of the issue, that Blizzard does not care or wants to make the game for casual players, is valid. However, on this weeks Inside the Game, you can see Idra and Incontrol address both of these topics. I will give you the highlights:
- Is Blizzard making the game easier to casuals: Yes and no, they are trying to put in features that will make the game more accessable for the newest players. However, they are keenly aware that they do not want to go to far are remove that allow high level players to succeed. They are openly discussing the topic with Pro players in a private beta forum. Both Idra and Incontrol both felt Blizzard was focusing on players just getting into the game, but not making it easier for mid or high level players.
- Blizzard is arrogant and unwilling to accept feedback on bad units: No. Blizzard is open to all feed back and is taking it in stride. Idra stated they seem very open to making changes and are aware of many of the issues.
- Does Blizzard know that the Warhound is crap: Yep. They are focusing on getting it a place in the match up and giving it abilities that make sense.
- Does Blizzard know that Protoss got a whole bunch of useless crap: Yep. They are working on that as well and are taking advice on how to change things.
People should go watch the episode. It will make you feel a whole lot better about the beta, the maps and that things are going to get better.
|
Everyone is acting as if the Warhound won't function completely differently by the end of beta. Doesn't anyone remember WoL beta?
|
On September 14 2012 01:38 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 14:42 Falling wrote:On September 13 2012 09:44 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 09:41 NicolBolas wrote:On September 13 2012 09:29 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 09:19 NicolBolas wrote:On September 13 2012 08:59 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:On September 13 2012 08:25 jinorazi wrote:On September 13 2012 07:50 [NSL]BansheeHero wrote:
Oh no. Should african terrans be removed from HOTS too? Because they do not belong? Maybe we should build a minefield so they cannot cross over the borders of space.
Maybe we should save the sanctity of marriage and remove Archon made from Dark Templars. Starcraft had so many A move units and nobody gave a shit (Some of them even had developed into heavy micro depended units.). This is just another over blown opinion of somebody. If we seriously want these sensational statements to matter we should vote for Slasher to be the eSports president.
EDIT: He could have written this ever since the preview was out. The concept of Warhound never changed. All aboard the warhound bandwagon chuchuchu. the point isnt warhound but design philosophy and warhound is the prime example of whats wrong with their design philosophy. and yes, people have spoken about this topic, good game design taking ques from bw, countless fucking times, even about warhound. but the problem is they are the minority, many with bw background(who understands whats good or bad better), that just gets ignored by sc2 people saying "go play bw then" Seriously a big post about how Warhound should not be in the game at all is not about the concept of warhound? WOW. I like BW, never said anything about them playing Broodwar. Nor that it should matter., whether you do or dont. All i said that this is just a chuchuchu train. Nobody should take beta seriously, unless they work with Blizzard. Making posts like these is not relevant at all to the Beta. It is just a statement of an opinion.(And in this case yet another sensational statement.....) How is a post about units in the beta not relevant to the beta? And yes, it's "just a statement of an opinion;" that's the point! He's stating his opinion about why the Warhound is a bad unit. And while I agree that it's semi-sensationalist to disguise a "remove the Warhound" thread with the title "don't balance the Warhound", it's hardly senationalist to want it removed. As for the "chuchuchu train" (which I presume is some kind of net-speak for "bandwagoning." Wagons aren't trains), yes, he's not alone in wanting the Warhound gone. Lots of people want it gone. But "bandwagoning" is basically accusing someone of not thinking. That they're agreeing with everyone else only because those other people are saying it. That they would not have come to this belief on their own. Just because everyone is against something doesn't make it a bandwagon. Everyone hates drowning; that doesn't mean avoiding drowning is a bandwagon. It just means that we all see the downsides and would rather not do it. I posted why this is a sensational band-wagoning. Warhound did not change from the first sneak peak. Nobody gave a crap about it, except the model being a ripoff of Warhammer. People were talking about the Warhound being bad pretty much since it came to this form. Maybe not as many people; some people decided to adopt a wait-and-see approach. They waited, saw that it still wasn't good, and started complaining. That's not band-wagoning. That's being mistrustful of Theorycrafting. Futhermore, even if it is, how do you know that it's band-wagoning in this case? Did Orb ever once say that he liked the Warhound before? Did he ever once say that it was a good unit before? If not, then you don't know that it's a case of band-wagoning. No thats why it is band wagoning. Nothing changed, except the popularity of the topic. Thats the whole point. If you do not agree with it, its fine. No, actually watching people play it makes a huge difference. Playing it makes a bigger difference and that's what has changed. For instance, I wrote a very long blog on why I felt the the warhound was going in the opposite direction of good mech play. However, because I had only seen battle reports (which are notoriously bad for macro for one thing), I had to leave a back door/caveat at the beginning saying that we were not yet in beta. That's because one needs to see how the unit handles. Particularly on the off chance they included move-shot. The design of it hasn't changed, but more people will become convinced as they see pro's trying to make it work and how it interacts with the rest of the units., But how do you tell the difference between a critical mass of people becoming convinced that the early arguments were correct vs band wagoning? Or would you dismiss any general consensus on a topic as bandwagoning? It can be both. The general consensus is that the Warhound is broken and not good. However, the band wagon is the further argument that is should be removed and replaced with a world shattering siege tank buff or some omega end game unit. People don't like the warhound, but the band wagon effect is causing people to just assume that Blizzard does not care about the game and just wants it to fail. The second part of the issue, that Blizzard does not care or wants to make the game for casual players, is valid. However, on this weeks Inside the Game, you can see Idra and Incontrol address both of these topics. I will give you the highlights: - Is Blizzard making the game easier to casuals: Yes and no, they are trying to put in features that will make the game more accessable for the newest players. However, they are keenly aware that they do not want to go to far are remove that allow high level players to succeed. They are openly discussing the topic with Pro players in a private beta forum. Both Idra and Incontrol both felt Blizzard was focusing on players just getting into the game, but not making it easier for mid or high level players. - Blizzard is arrogant and unwilling to accept feedback on bad units: No. Blizzard is open to all feed back and is taking it in stride. Idra stated they seem very open to making changes and are aware of many of the issues. - Does Blizzard know that the Warhound is crap: Yep. They are focusing on getting it a place in the match up and giving it abilities that make sense. - Does Blizzard know that Protoss got a whole bunch of useless crap: Yep. They are working on that as well and are taking advice on how to change things. People should go watch the episode. It will make you feel a whole lot better about the beta, the maps and that things are going to get better.
This gives me hope. There are a few encouraging posts from Dustin B on the NA forums to.
Now there is a massive difference between saying "i understand, we are looking in to it" and actually doing taking drastic measures.. We will see.
|
AWWWW YEAH ORB.
I agree 100%, too bad it's never going to work itself out, SC2 has had many design flaws (imo) since day1, and a lot of them have stood the test of time to annoy us today.
Really well written piece.
|
they have 1 more expansion after this to make everything right, and i actually think they are holding out on some units and stuff to make people wnat to buy LotV and get hyped about it
|
I agree completely. Thank you, Orb, for finally expressing your opinions publicly about this new unit and in a professional manner  Please listen to him, Blizzard.
|
Orb, you are 100% correct and I wish Blizzard would listen. Unfortunately you can replace "Warhound 2012 beta" with "Colossus 2010 beta" and this article will not miss a beat. Blizzard doesn't care about their game being balanced, challenging or rewarding. They want eye-candy that anyone can pick up and do strategies they see on WCS or MLG to feel good about winning on ladder...and it is really a shame because of the amount of talent and passion people have for what boils down to an inferior product.
|
On September 14 2012 00:04 shindigs wrote:I'd be OK if they decided to remove the collosus now
Even better than removing the Warhound IMO.
|
Hear hear about design philosophy! Totally agree!!
|
On September 14 2012 06:05 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 00:04 shindigs wrote:I'd be OK if they decided to remove the collosus now Even better than removing the Warhound IMO.
Hahaha I could imagine the insanity if they remove the collosus, replaced it with reaver, and kept warhounds as is.
|
Thanks for pointing out all the facts ^_^, i think you're right about a lot of it, especially the reaver part; and I wish there was something like that in Starcraft2 now!
|
Blizz, leave carrier, remove colossus.
|
I would go as far as to say it's too late to remove the warhound or to redesign anything about the game because for one, It's activision-blizzard + bowder's design team who are in charge of th game, and two, that the game is already immersed more in the noob-friendly side of society.
This forum is unfortunately more biased towards the "high-difficulty, more enjoyment" side of gaming because most of us are old-school games who come from BW and other games with similar enjoyability. I have many friends on facebook who are just dazzled at the explosions in SC2 and they think it's already too hard because they can't stop a zergling rush and they have to micro individual groups of units already.
So while I agree wholeheartedly with your opinion on the warhound and the game in general, it's unfortunate that we are only about 20-40% of the sc2 community and Blizzard has to cater towards the majority of gamers.
|
Canada11607 Posts
@Plansix
That's fair enough. I like they have a private forum for the pro's. Hopefully someone's taking up the cause for proper moving shot and a couple other things.
|
On September 14 2012 07:28 Falling wrote:
@Plansix
That's fair enough. I like they have a private forum for the pro's. Hopefully someone's taking up the cause for proper moving shot and a couple other things.
I wish I had read-only access to this forum T_T
It would be so interesting to read 
|
Terran finally gets a-click units, I find it great, I was extremely bored by the amount of skill required to do the same thing with terran while you can easily do it with the other races (and I play random). I don't like the warhound, but only because I find it ugly. Your post is just QQ in advance because you think it will be overpowered (I know you play protoss). You rage in advance to see that terran's micro is now as easy as the other races, meaning that players from your level will beat you.
But I don't want to talk about imbalance, just think about what makes the warhound different than the colossus...
|
On September 14 2012 07:50 Cosmos wrote:
Terran finally gets a-click units, I find it great, I was extremely bored by the amount of skill required to do the same thing with terran while you can easily do it with the other races (and I play random). I don't like the warhound, but only because I find it ugly. Your post is just QQ in advance because you think it will be overpowered (I know you play protoss). You rage in advance to see that terran's micro is now as easy as the other races, meaning that players from your level will beat you.
But I don't want to talk about imbalance, just think about what makes the warhound different than the colossus...
Yep, you sure nailed the point of this thread. Go back to call of duty noob.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
such a good thread
i really would love to see it removed; Terran is already a very complete race, i don't think they need something *major* to make mech viable. what it is that they actually need, i do not know as i am just a shitty zerg player, but i'd love to see pro/semi-pro Terran offer their input on what sort of "interesting" unit mech needs to help it become viable.
|
Lol by reading this thread SC2 professional gaming might die tomorrow. It will be fun to see how many of you will buy Hots day one, or even in the future.
Btw, Sc2 is probably the most carefully developed RTS that is being released, so I wouldn't be so worried about it
|
On September 14 2012 07:30 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On September 14 2012 07:28 Falling wrote:
@Plansix
That's fair enough. I like they have a private forum for the pro's. Hopefully someone's taking up the cause for proper moving shot and a couple other things. I wish I had read-only access to this forum T_T It would be so interesting to read
Although I would love to see the discussion as well, I am glad it is private. Blizzard should really focus on getting feedback from the best and most critical of the professional community, rather than sifting through the masses of non-sense that fill a lot of the forums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
