|
On January 27 2013 20:02 cohen5250 wrote:
Terran already has more units and composition choices by far than either of the other races. Remove the Reaper (it's a joke unit anyway) and nerf the Widow Mine, then we'll talk.
And this (the extra units and combinations) has - of course - nothing to do with the fact that Terran has the most complicated and non-integrated types of units which do not share the same upgrades for all ground units (like the other races have).
|
Yes and No. Yes because the mech army could use something smaller than a thor, that can support tanks and be a buffer for tanks. Yes you have the battle helion but its not like a golith. No because T has the most units and they should try to even up the unit count.
|
More than a few people seem to perceive Terrans as having the most units. However, if you take a look at: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/game/unit/ it may change some opinions.
According to Blizzard's unit count, seems Protoss have the most units. Of the Zerg list, I personally do not consider Larva and Nydus Worm a unit, but even if that was the case, Terran and Zerg would have even amounts of units, not more. Others may disagree with my opinion and view them as units, but if that is the case, then Terran would actually have the least amount of units...
As for the Warhound, I do think it was a bit premature to remove it so early. In its original form with Haywire Missile, it was not the best designed/balanced unit. But, it was well within Blizzards power to change the function and abilities to find the unit a new role. If they left the WH in the game, they would have had an additional option to shore up Mech weaknesses, instead of trying to transform the widow mine into such an awkward unit and relying on this one unit to fill in the gaps...
|
On January 28 2013 01:50 Duplicate wrote:More than a few people seem to perceive Terrans as having the most units. However, if you take a look at: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/game/unit/ it may change some opinions. According to Blizzard's unit count, seems Protoss have the most units. Of the Zerg list, I personally do not consider Larva and Nydus Worm a unit, but even if that was the case, Terran and Zerg would have even amounts of units, not more. Others may disagree with my opinion and view them as units, but if that is the case, then Terran would actually have the least amount of units... As for the Warhound, I do think it was a bit premature to remove it so early. In its original form with Haywire Missile, it was not the best designed/balanced unit. But, it was well within Blizzards power to change the function and abilities to find the unit a new role. If they left the WH in the game, they would have had an additional option to shore up Mech weaknesses, instead of trying to transform the widow mine into such an awkward unit and relying on this one unit to fill in the gaps...
The WH had no inherent strategic requirement for efficient deployment beyond 1 » A » left click.
Anything else would have made the mech unit seem forced.
Edit:It was already a marauder from the factory with a burst damage ability. Remove Haywire Missile and it becomes a Terran roach, add a anti-air attack it becomes an ugly Goliath, remove all attacks and it becomes a Raven from factory or a High Templar for Terran.
There was literally no way to change the unit without duplicating an existing unit beyond gimping it beyond utility.
|
On January 28 2013 02:07 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:
There was literally no way to change the unit without duplicating an existing unit beyond gimping it beyond utility.
Allow me to disagree there ... because they could have changed the Warhound into a Goliath and thats something which mech could REALLY use. Anti-armored is stupid, because Siege Tank and Thor already do that, but anti-light and some mobile AA is really missing. The Thor isnt really mobile at all, the short range and rather limited speed of the Battle Hellion really makes that a "blocker" instead of a "combat unit" and the Hellion itself doesnt really last that long.
The only thing which stopped them from doing the "sensible thing" was their "we will not recreate a BW unit, even if it is clearly better than our stuff and even if it kills us" top secret design motto.
|
Changing it into a cheap and average mobile mech with good AA guns would have make it so good. 
|
On January 28 2013 03:08 Noocta wrote:Changing it into a cheap and average mobile mech with good AA guns would have make it so good.
Well some people would then have complained "oh you made another version of the Marine there you Blizzard fools and its a-move only without any nifty special skills to click".
Thats the same people who think that something is at a "discount price" in a shop when it has a brightly orange price tag on it without realizing that "if everything is special then nothing is special anymore and you need to set the bar even higher for the next generation of special". Fun and excitement is created by using units well and not by button-pressing-abilities and too many special stuff just overloads the game with stuff to be balanced. + Show Spoiler +An excellent example is the Blink Stalker, which is rather weak because of the ability to blink.
|
I didnt like the warhound for various reasons (hated unit art - very ugly IMO, too powerful, too much of a hard counter to most protoss units), but I dont like the Widow mine much more, and I wouldnt mind seeing a better ground to air mech unit. While thors are ok, theyre too slow and dont deal with current air well enough, especially protoss tempests and carriers. I dont like the idea that you kind of need to go Vikings if you want to deal with aa as terran mech. Id honestly rather have 3 different tech paths open, and let the players decide instead of forcing the T players to do so by limiting the options.
|
On January 28 2013 14:57 vicml21 wrote:
I didnt like the warhound for various reasons (hated unit art - very ugly IMO, too powerful, too much of a hard counter to most protoss units), but I dont like the Widow mine much more, and I wouldnt mind seeing a better ground to air mech unit. While thors are ok, theyre too slow and dont deal with current air well enough, especially protoss tempests and carriers. I dont like the idea that you kind of need to go Vikings if you want to deal with aa as terran mech. Id honestly rather have 3 different tech paths open, and let the players decide instead of forcing the T players to do so by limiting the options.
I agree- a small, relatively fast anti air mechanical unit with a relatively weak ground attack would complement mech well. It would need to stay within the protection of mech units to not die to ground units, but could deal with mass air units well. Bringing back the goliath would work, but there are other solutions that could also fill this role.
|
On January 25 2013 06:27 Sigil2 wrote:We are the TeamLiquid community. We created a thread in protest to the Warhound that (arguably) led to the Warhound being removed within ten days of the thread's creation.
Thank us, now we remember :p
Srsly, I think they know why they removed it, I think forum threads, esp. on TL, are useful for developers, but I do not think they follow them blindly.
Yet I, from my casual pov, would like a unit like the Warhound much more than a Widow Mine. Properly adjust of course.
|
On January 27 2013 20:02 cohen5250 wrote:
Terran already has more units and composition choices by far than either of the other races. Remove the Reaper (it's a joke unit anyway) and nerf the Widow Mine, then we'll talk.
I totally agree with this, we can choose between Marine Marauder Medibac or Medibac Marauder Marine or the less used Marauder Mediback Marine . Well we can choose the supporting units: tanks, vikings, ghost or ravens. And T is imba because they have 3 units specifically designed to kill the T3 deadliest unit: workers.
Jokes aside widowmines new helions and (hopefully) a new supporting unit will make TvP less predictable.
|
On January 28 2013 21:00 papalion wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2013 06:27 Sigil2 wrote:On January 25 2013 05:22 papalion wrote:
Who is "we"? We are the TeamLiquid community. We created a thread in protest to the Warhound that (arguably) led to the Warhound being removed within ten days of the thread's creation. Thank us, now we remember :p Srsly, I think they know why they removed it, I think forum threads, esp. on TL, are useful for developers, but I do not think they follow them blindly. Yet I, from my casual pov, would like a unit like the Warhound much more than a Widow Mine. Properly adjust of course.
Its the "remove after 2 weeks" that is the big confusing part here. They dont do that with the Oracle or the Mothership Core and totally change their skills in opposite directions. So why couldnt they "change" the Warhound and fiddle around with its stats? The only explanation I can come up with is that the only reasonable end result would be a "Goliath Mk 2" and since they have to prove that they are better designers than the BW designers they are 100% set on not recreating that. Addint the Goliath would kinda be like admitting that the Thor is junk ... and that the BW solution is still better than the SC2 one.
|
On January 28 2013 00:42 HeeroFX wrote:
Yes and No. Yes because the mech army could use something smaller than a thor, that can support tanks and be a buffer for tanks. Yes you have the battle helion but its not like a golith. No because T has the most units and they should try to even up the unit count.
T has the most units? Why do you say that? It is not true.
Terran: 16
CC: 2 (Worker Mule)
Rax: 4 (M M R G)
Fact: 5 (H S T BH WM)
Star: 5 (M V B R BC)
Protoss: 17
Nexus: 3 (Worker MSC M)
Gate: 5 (Z S S DT HT)
Robo: 4 (O WP I C)
Stargate: 5 (P O VR T C)
Zerg: 15
Hatch: 4 (Worker Z B R)
Lair ground: 3 (H I SH)
Lair air: 3 (M C V)
Hive: 2 (U BL)
"Free units": 2 (Locust and Broodling)
Protoss has the most units. They have the most while i'm counting the mule and a transforming hellion. I consider both of them units. So no complaining about the warp prism / MSC being a Mothership / etc.
So now that we have cleared out your no. We can conclude that you think that either WH would make a nice addition or Protoss needs units removed so that Zerg and Terran can catch up.
|
i really don't buy this 'sc2 design team is out to prove they're better designers than the bw designers' line of thought. we're talking about a professional game design studio with LOADS of cash invested in this project. i mean say what you want about sc2's design flaws, i probably agree with some and disagree with others, but the fact of the matter is that people waited a very long time for this game, so blizzard made a new game with new features and new units. otherwise what's the point?
there's also the implicit assumption that BW is all there is, and sc2 is a failure essentially because it's less like BW. it's pretty telling that most of these resentful posts don't have any useful ideas except 'that one BW unit, cos nothing could be better than BW, the perfectly designed RTS which will never be surpassed ever.' that doesn't really recommend you as an expert on game design, you know. it strikes me as really childish.
|
Mech will probably never work until tanks get some kind of damage buff. Seriously, mass speedlot trades decently with sieged tanks unless there's like 20+ of them.
|
On January 29 2013 01:52 Doc Daneeka wrote:
i really don't buy this 'sc2 design team is out to prove they're better designers than the bw designers' line of thought. we're talking about a professional game design studio with LOADS of cash invested in this project. i mean say what you want about sc2's design flaws, i probably agree with some and disagree with others, but the fact of the matter is that people waited a very long time for this game, so blizzard made a new game with new features and new units. otherwise what's the point?
there's also the implicit assumption that BW is all there is, and sc2 is a failure essentially because it's less like BW. it's pretty telling that most of these resentful posts don't have any useful ideas except 'that one BW unit, cos nothing could be better than BW, the perfectly designed RTS which will never be surpassed ever.' that doesn't really recommend you as an expert on game design, you know. it strikes me as really childish.
What other possible reason is there to NOT add in a "Goliath mech" and put in an "anti-armored mech" instead and then - after "the community" complains - take it out completely instead of trying to make it work in a different way? They did change other units A LOT, so why the total removal of the Warhound after just a few weeks?
They KNEW they would add in more than one Protoss AIR units and they KNEW that the Thor wouldnt cut it as AA. At the same time they declared they wanted to make mech TvP viable. Add that together and you *should* come to the conclusion that mech needs a small, cheap and somewhat mobile AA unit to be viable. That unit is called GOLIATH in BW and we didnt get it while they were removing a "small two-legged-mech" from the game. If you dont come to the conclusion that they have this urge to not put in BW units then I cant help you, but the facts look exactly like they want to make sure that Terrans can only fight a Protoss army with Vikings and Ravens. That is a terrible concept and the "three unconnected stacks of Terran units" + Show Spoiler +(bio, mech, air ... due to the upgrades and the need to build LOTS of production buildings to get a high number of units of each type)
Pure mech (with a dash of support units) is dead and got replaced by "50/50 mech-air" because the developers want it that way. The reason for that is probably that they dont want to buff the Siege Tank and that they like their mobile deathball gamestyle too much ...
|
United States4883 Posts
On January 29 2013 02:07 achristes wrote:
Mech will probably never work until tanks get some kind of damage buff. Seriously, mass speedlot trades decently with sieged tanks unless there's like 20+ of them.
On January 29 2013 03:02 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2013 01:52 Doc Daneeka wrote:
i really don't buy this 'sc2 design team is out to prove they're better designers than the bw designers' line of thought. we're talking about a professional game design studio with LOADS of cash invested in this project. i mean say what you want about sc2's design flaws, i probably agree with some and disagree with others, but the fact of the matter is that people waited a very long time for this game, so blizzard made a new game with new features and new units. otherwise what's the point?
there's also the implicit assumption that BW is all there is, and sc2 is a failure essentially because it's less like BW. it's pretty telling that most of these resentful posts don't have any useful ideas except 'that one BW unit, cos nothing could be better than BW, the perfectly designed RTS which will never be surpassed ever.' that doesn't really recommend you as an expert on game design, you know. it strikes me as really childish. What other possible reason is there to NOT add in a "Goliath mech" and put in an "anti-armored mech" instead and then - after "the community" complains - take it out completely instead of trying to make it work in a different way? They did change other units A LOT, so why the total removal of the Warhound after just a few weeks? They KNEW they would add in more than one Protoss AIR units and they KNEW that the Thor wouldnt cut it as AA. At the same time they declared they wanted to make mech TvP viable. Add that together and you *should* come to the conclusion that mech needs a small, cheap and somewhat mobile AA unit to be viable. That unit is called GOLIATH in BW and we didnt get it while they were removing a "small two-legged-mech" from the game. If you dont come to the conclusion that they have this urge to not put in BW units then I cant help you, but the facts look exactly like they want to make sure that Terrans can only fight a Protoss army with Vikings and Ravens. That is a terrible concept and the "three unconnected stacks of Terran units" + Show Spoiler +(bio, mech, air ... due to the upgrades and the need to build LOTS of production buildings to get a high number of units of each type) - which is one of the defining characteristics of the race - are being demolished by them to make "their vision" work by sacrificing racial style and making Terrans more like the other races. Pure mech (with a dash of support units) is dead and got replaced by "50/50 mech-air" because the developers want it that way. The reason for that is probably that they dont want to buff the Siege Tank and that they like their mobile deathball gamestyle too much ...
Quite honestly, I think Blizzard made a really good move with the recent hellbat changes. It was a really clever way to patch a lot of the problems terran mech was having, particularly the problem of mech posing an ACTUAL midgame threat, and replace the main role of the warhound. Before the patch, terran's mostly had to either be balls to the wall aggressive with 1-1-1 openings or huge widow mine/hellion attacks, etc., or extraordinarily passive, taking bases slowly behind tanks while getting in little banshee/hellion harassments that may or may not have done much damage. With hellions now trading fairly cost effectively with gateway units FOR MINERALS ONLY, mech armies can actually deal with small engagements.
The hellion buff makes hellion/tank a fairly viable midgame option now, even without a tank buff, surprisingly. I would have enjoyed a tank buff, but after seeing the patch in action, I don't think it needs it. The difficulty for mech now lies in scouting the correct tech path and choosing the best response (either vikings or ghosts). With less reliance on mass tanks as well as the gas saved on siege mode research, it's much easier to get starport tech or ghost tech out earlier. Overall, I think this is a good thing, and this is a step in the right direction for mech.
While that's not really addressing the problem of lategame mech and how bad space control is in SC2, I think the fixes that they made to the hellion address the gap that the warhound left. There may still be a bit of a hole in terms of terran GtA, but for now, vikings trade well with just about everything in the air until there are huge balls of void rays and carriers. In my opinion, mech is in a good place now.
|
|
|
Blizz made a mech unit that didn't get hardcountered by zealot/immortal. Community whines, it's removed.
Now community whines that mech gets hardcountered by zealot/immortal--somewhere in his office DB is grinning in glee at how silly the TL community is.
|
On January 29 2013 03:31 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On January 29 2013 02:07 achristes wrote:
Mech will probably never work until tanks get some kind of damage buff. Seriously, mass speedlot trades decently with sieged tanks unless there's like 20+ of them. Show nested quote +On January 29 2013 03:02 Rabiator wrote:On January 29 2013 01:52 Doc Daneeka wrote:
i really don't buy this 'sc2 design team is out to prove they're better designers than the bw designers' line of thought. we're talking about a professional game design studio with LOADS of cash invested in this project. i mean say what you want about sc2's design flaws, i probably agree with some and disagree with others, but the fact of the matter is that people waited a very long time for this game, so blizzard made a new game with new features and new units. otherwise what's the point?
there's also the implicit assumption that BW is all there is, and sc2 is a failure essentially because it's less like BW. it's pretty telling that most of these resentful posts don't have any useful ideas except 'that one BW unit, cos nothing could be better than BW, the perfectly designed RTS which will never be surpassed ever.' that doesn't really recommend you as an expert on game design, you know. it strikes me as really childish. What other possible reason is there to NOT add in a "Goliath mech" and put in an "anti-armored mech" instead and then - after "the community" complains - take it out completely instead of trying to make it work in a different way? They did change other units A LOT, so why the total removal of the Warhound after just a few weeks? They KNEW they would add in more than one Protoss AIR units and they KNEW that the Thor wouldnt cut it as AA. At the same time they declared they wanted to make mech TvP viable. Add that together and you *should* come to the conclusion that mech needs a small, cheap and somewhat mobile AA unit to be viable. That unit is called GOLIATH in BW and we didnt get it while they were removing a "small two-legged-mech" from the game. If you dont come to the conclusion that they have this urge to not put in BW units then I cant help you, but the facts look exactly like they want to make sure that Terrans can only fight a Protoss army with Vikings and Ravens. That is a terrible concept and the "three unconnected stacks of Terran units" + Show Spoiler +(bio, mech, air ... due to the upgrades and the need to build LOTS of production buildings to get a high number of units of each type) - which is one of the defining characteristics of the race - are being demolished by them to make "their vision" work by sacrificing racial style and making Terrans more like the other races. Pure mech (with a dash of support units) is dead and got replaced by "50/50 mech-air" because the developers want it that way. The reason for that is probably that they dont want to buff the Siege Tank and that they like their mobile deathball gamestyle too much ... Quite honestly, I think Blizzard made a really good move with the recent hellbat changes. It was a really clever way to patch a lot of the problems terran mech was having, particularly the problem of mech posing an ACTUAL midgame threat, and replace the main role of the warhound. Before the patch, terran's mostly had to either be balls to the wall aggressive with 1-1-1 openings or huge widow mine/hellion attacks, etc., or extraordinarily passive, taking bases slowly behind tanks while getting in little banshee/hellion harassments that may or may not have done much damage. With hellions now trading fairly cost effectively with gateway units FOR MINERALS ONLY, mech armies can actually deal with small engagements. The hellion buff makes hellion/tank a fairly viable midgame option now, even without a tank buff, surprisingly. I would have enjoyed a tank buff, but after seeing the patch in action, I don't think it needs it. The difficulty for mech now lies in scouting the correct tech path and choosing the best response (either vikings or ghosts). With less reliance on mass tanks as well as the gas saved on siege mode research, it's much easier to get starport tech or ghost tech out earlier. Overall, I think this is a good thing, and this is a step in the right direction for mech. While that's not really addressing the problem of lategame mech and how bad space control is in SC2, I think the fixes that they made to the hellion address the gap that the warhound left. There may still be a bit of a hole in terms of terran GtA, but for now, vikings trade well with just about everything in the air until there are huge balls of void rays and carriers. In my opinion, mech is in a good place now.
The Battle Hellion is a nice unit, BUT it is only a combat unit if the opponent wants to fight it. That is a serious design flaw and a mobile but not so strong unit would be a better addition IMO. The Achilles heel of mech is the immobility and mech needs something to make up for that somewhat.
In BW the Vulture (plus the Spider Mines) did a lot of that, but the Hellion is less useful, because it is only strong against light armored units - which excludes a lot of infantry units already - while the Vulture was strong against all "small size" units - which included most infantry units except Dragoon and Hydralisk - plus the Spider Mine again, which is good against large size units. So the Vulture is a good allround damage unit AND it is fast and the Hellion is really rather limited in its utility. Due to the Space Control of the Spider Mines the versatility of the Vulture is MUCH greater than the Hellion ...
So the only solution for SC2 would be to add that versatility in another unit than the Hellion and since the air defense is severely lacking it would be a form of the Goliath. The Widow Mine is a total waste and should be removed from the game and replaced by a relatively potent AA Goliath with a machinegun ground attack without bonus damage, while the Hellion loses its transformation and gets a "napalm mine" (creates an area of burning on the floor for a few seconds) instead. It has zero synergy with a mech army and while it is nice to have something to cover bases with additional AA it doesnt really work as an "army unit" and thus only really helps against timings. Once people have learned how to deal with Widow Mines I expect them to become rather useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
