EPTWhy the Warhound should NOT be balanced - Page 34
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
slytown
Korea (South)1411 Posts
| ||
|
SheaR619
United States2399 Posts
Immortal can be counter by ghost, which is rare, but they can be overwhelmed by just massing hellion as meat shield and hellion do fairly well against them in small numbers. They are strong vs mech, but I dont think they were insanely to powerful and was the reason mech isnt viable. Regarding collosus, the tank counter them fairly well if you just use your tank to focus fire the collosus down. | ||
|
Hattori_Hanzo
Singapore1229 Posts
On September 23 2012 16:02 SheaR619 wrote: Immoral wasnt the issue....it was the chargelots. I dont understand why people keep complaining about immortal it was teh chargelots. There was nothing in mech composition that counter chargelots. Hellion? No, hellion are only good in hit and run situtation but if they are force to fight head on, they get owned. Also, during direct confrontation, hellion splash are not as effective, and without splash and the ability to hit and run against zealot, they get destroy. Also the splash on your own unit from the tank destroy them. That why the battle hellion was added. Immortal can be counter by ghost, which is rare, but they can be overwhelmed by just massing hellion as meat shield and hellion do fairly well against them in small numbers. They are strong vs mech, but I dont think they were insanely to powerful and was the reason mech isnt viable. Regarding collosus, the tank counter them fairly well if you just use your tank to focus fire the collosus down. That's why conical AOE aka firebat was reintroduced in a CHEAPER (100m vs. 75m 25g) and VERSATILE version as battle hellion and ppl are bitching about "sense". BH are now are direct counter to mass chargelots remaxed army. Switching factory out to Reactors will allow HOTS Terrans to effectively remax to deal with any kind of remaxed 3/3 T1 army (zealot/ling) all in late game counter-rush. | ||
|
Carnate
United States62 Posts
| ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
On September 10 2012 15:51 yanot wrote: Agree completely. I didn't really like the "easy to learn, hard to master" way of designing. Sports, piano, guitar, are all hard to learn and hard to master. And they have a lot of depth. And I never understood that "casual" is associated as "easy" in the developer mind. One can play 1 hour a day and still want challenge, difficults things to overcome in a video game. Ya I agree completely as well. At first SC2 was fun becuase I too had "AMAZING" force fields but it just got boring pretty quickly. Meanwhile, in BW, I could just spend all day only practicing muta-micro and never get bored. | ||
|
ezAction
United States12 Posts
 User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
Also, I don't think you'll find many Protosses who are in favor of the Colossus either (not on this forum at any rate). And most who are only want it because if it weren't replaced with something their race would lose. | ||
|
Fragile51
Netherlands15767 Posts
On September 19 2012 02:25 Rabiator wrote: Most of the "basic changes" made to the core mechanics have been made to make the game easier to play for newbies and thus the core design concept of Blizzard is to make an accessible game rather than a challenging game. Macroing boost mechanics, production speed boost mechanics, the unlimited unit selection and the "perfectly tight" unit movement AI are all together things which make it a lot easier to play SC2 compared to BW. Thus it is highly unlikely that the Warhound will be taken out and it doesnt make sense to start the process of making SC2 challenging at the expansion when it should be started at the beginning and at those things I mentioned above. Those are the real culprits which make the boring deathball possible and which remove any strategic positional play. Eh, yeah...no. The perfectly tight unit movement is what makes this game harder to play then bw, as you need to constantly keep attention on your army and spread it out properly every single time you move it, otherwise you will get wrecked by banelings, storms, fungal growth, siege fire, and other AoE that rips apart your army in mere seconds. Also you don't change core mechanics of a game in an expansion. Especially when it's a game that people make a living out of. You simply cannot do that. | ||
|
sighsigh
Australia40 Posts
On September 23 2012 18:12 Carnate wrote: Should change the thor 250mm to a aoe barrage. Something to make it different from just firing normal, and also make it seem worht while that you mayu need ghosts to protect its energy. I like the aoe idea on the thor, right now 250mm cannon is pretty much a useless upgrade.But the aoe, in my opinion, needs to hit friendly units like the seige tank otherwise it will be too powerful. Also the aoe range should be a bit further than normal thor range and have an animation delay like the beams of collossus or else muta balls just disappear. | ||
|
IPS.Blue
Germany309 Posts
On September 10 2012 15:39 -orb- wrote: ... Since their AoE attack was clearly ridiculously overpowered, it was balanced out not by reducing the damage or some other boring stat change to make every unit equally powerful (which almost seems to be Blizzard's intention with SC2), but instead by making it hopelessly immobile and by making the ammunition cost resources and take time to build. ... True that. Suspected this since I saw those videos in which Blizzard was letting certain unit compositions attack each other time after time ... I too miss reavers (and shield batteries ;P) ... | ||
| ||
