|
On January 05 2013 21:36 MockHamill wrote:
No. Nerf immortal shields, Tempest Hp and Void Ray DPS and mech will become viable. There is no need for another unit.
if you nerf immortal shields then stephano style roach-ling attack will only get stronger. how is toss supposed to counter mass roach in mid game if immortals tank less damage? tempests are already weak as shit so make them even weaker so a few terran players can finally play happy mech? why do terrans suddenly want to play mech vs toss?
|
On January 05 2013 21:59 SCguineapig wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 21:36 MockHamill wrote:
No. Nerf immortal shields, Tempest Hp and Void Ray DPS and mech will become viable. There is no need for another unit. if you nerf immortal shields then stephano style roach-ling attack will only get stronger. how is toss supposed to counter mass roach in mid game if immortals tank less damage? tempests are already weak as shit so make them even weaker so a few terran players can finally play happy mech? why do terrans suddenly want to play mech vs toss?
Its not that we don't want to play mech against protoss its that we would like the option to. Right now they only viable tech path is bio. That doesn't make much sense. You do have a point that it might make zergs stronger against toss but the other way that people have been suggesting is buffing tank damage but that might make zerg to weak against tank then. It's all about balance and right now terran mech doesn't have that.
|
The biggest problem with the warhound removal is that we expected it to be replaced and it never was.
|
Simple and short answer:
WE didnt make a mistake, Blizzard did. Terran mech needs a CHEAP GOLIATH with good anti air and useful anti-infantry attacks more than yet another ground-specialized walker.
|
The only mistake we did was assuming blizzard would introduce a new mech unit (I would have been happy with the old Warhound (Goliath 2.0))
Removing the warhound at the time was the right choice, but widow mine + hellbat isn't enough to make mech viable.
Now it's less then 3 months to release T_T
|
On January 05 2013 22:28 aksfjh wrote:
The biggest problem with the warhound removal is that we expected it to be replaced and it never was.
Yeah, I completely agree. I was 100% sure that blizzard would add a substitute to the warhound, not remove that slot completely. I'm sure that the majority of the people that wanted the warhound gone thought that a substitute was going to be introduced.
|
United Kingdom20274 Posts
On January 06 2013 00:20 Zorgaz wrote:
The only mistake we did was assuming blizzard would introduce a new mech unit (I would have been happy with the old Warhound (Goliath 2.0))
Removing the warhound at the time was the right choice, but widow mine + hellbat isn't enough to make mech viable.
Now it's less then 3 months to release T_T
Less than 3 months?
Its 2 months and a couple days
|
On January 06 2013 00:20 Millet wrote:
I'm sure that the majority of the people that wanted the warhound gone thought that a substitute was going to be introduced.
That's funny because nobody voiced any problem with the lack of replacement at the time.
It was immediately made very clear that warhound and it's 'slot' are gone for good.
This is just scapegoating Blizzard for community lack of thought.
On January 05 2013 19:55 SCguineapig wrote:
i do not think that we should be whining about balance to much.
This is a retrospection thread and not about balance.
HotS will go gold in less than 2 months and if Blizzard has any sense they will spend half of that time on fine tuning.
There is not enough time left to properly tackle mech TvP let alone toy around introducing/reintroducing units.
|
Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 00:20 Millet wrote:
I'm sure that the majority of the people that wanted the warhound gone thought that a substitute was going to be introduced. That's funny because nobody voiced any problem with the lack of replacement at the time. It was immediately made very clear that warhound and it's 'slot' are gone for good. This is just scapegoating Blizzard for community lack of thought.
No it wasn't immediately made clear that the warhound was not going to get a replacement. It took 4 days until browder said this, and this was made clear in a stand-alone thread, no huge announcement. I'm sure that the majority of people never even knew about this response.
Sources:
[14-9-2012] http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6571787498
[18-9-2012] http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6572359151#11
|
On January 06 2013 00:45 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 00:20 Zorgaz wrote:
The only mistake we did was assuming blizzard would introduce a new mech unit (I would have been happy with the old Warhound (Goliath 2.0))
Removing the warhound at the time was the right choice, but widow mine + hellbat isn't enough to make mech viable.
Now it's less then 3 months to release T_T Less than 3 months? Its 2 months and a couple days
Really, that's what you have to say? 2 months and a couple days is less then 3 months..... Yeah i could have been more exact but did i really need to?
|
On January 05 2013 21:36 MockHamill wrote:
No. Nerf immortal shields, Tempest Hp and Void Ray DPS and mech will become viable. There is no need for another unit.
No need to nerf the Immortals shield if they seriously buff the damage of the tank (to 70 flat damage without any bonus damage). You will kill the non-Immortals easier that way and then your "rest of the army" can deal with the Immortals.
In TvZ the Siege Tank doesnt deal enough damage now to be really a good unit AND Zerg get their Viper with the abduct to directly counter the sieged up tank, so a boost isnt going to imbalance the matchup. Killing Zerglings only with the primary splash radius - as it is now - is frankly ridiculous and something needs to be done anyways.
|
United Kingdom20274 Posts
On January 06 2013 01:28 Zorgaz wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 00:45 Cyro wrote:On January 06 2013 00:20 Zorgaz wrote:
The only mistake we did was assuming blizzard would introduce a new mech unit (I would have been happy with the old Warhound (Goliath 2.0))
Removing the warhound at the time was the right choice, but widow mine + hellbat isn't enough to make mech viable.
Now it's less then 3 months to release T_T Less than 3 months? Its 2 months and a couple days Really, that's what you have to say? 2 months and a couple days is less then 3 months..... Yeah i could have been more exact but did i really need to?
No, i just find it funny that people default to thinking as a march release to 3 months, when in reality it is only 65 days
|
its not our fault that blizzard came up with a unit that was so ugly that it had to be cut on aesthetic grounds alone
and its not our fault that they failed to come up with a replacement
cutting the warhound was the best change in the whole beta, easily
|
United States4883 Posts
On January 05 2013 19:55 SCguineapig wrote:i do not think that we should be whining about balance to much. people probably think that broodwar was amazing and perfect. and that may be true but do you guys realize how long it took for broodwar to be a bit balanced? it took blizzard 5 years to end game breaking gltiches and balance issues. instead of whining so much about balance you should realize that this is a BETA. and beta's are meant to be for things like bugs and balance issues. i believe that if the ones with beta keys just play the game and send balance feedback to blizzard(which should be possible considering this is a beta) then in the end it should all turn out fine right? i believe if we all have some faith in blizzard HOTS could turn out to be a great game. and it has issues yes but didnt WOL have those too (and still has some). removing the warhound may have been a mistake. me (as protoss player) found it to be an interesting unit. but in the end it fulfilled the wrong role. it served as a mid game cheap and cost effective thor which was not supposed to be that way. they should at least consider giving the warhound a different role. before i end this post and people saying that mech isn't viable against protoss. back in broodwar bio would get raped by protoss just as mech now gets destroyed by protoss. people back then were fine with it so why whine now. the things i have stated here may not be 100% true. people who think different feel free to correct me  . have a nice time on ladder SCguineapig.
....So what do you think of the warhound?
On January 05 2013 20:05 rEalGuapo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 09:40 SC2John wrote:
[i]Introduction: With the recent buffs for MsC, reapers, and the inherent buffs to protoss early game, the terran early game is becoming harder and harder to pull off, especially for meching players. In addition, although the midgame of mech has improved greatly with widow mines and hellbats, the mech army still has trouble moving out on the map at any point before 160 supply without the danger of engaging cost-inefficiently. In addition, most players playing mech complain that a single mistake (i.e. a misplaced tank, getting caught unsieged, not having mines in place in time, etc) will cost you the game with no chance to claw your way back with micro or clever tactics. While mech players are still having success with gas openings that kill a lot of workers or slow, creeping mech compositions, there is no room for error or allowance for success, particularly in the early and mid-game. Quite honestly, a lot of what mech needs is a mid-tier all-purpose unit to counter the really tricky units like immortals, blink stalkers, or archons and allow mech to secure map control more safely.
A mech army should always have trouble moving out before 160 Supply,that's just the way it is if you go for a beefy lategame army. Protoss going for a strong composition will also start moving out at 150 160 Supply. A single misplaced tank will not lose you the game. If it does it is a really high level game since both players seemed to have the same mechanics so that the loss of one unit actually makes the difference. If that's the case, well, you made a mistake and paid for it. "Getting caught unsieged" means that you messed up big time. Having no idea of where your opponents army is, is a single mistake but it is probably the biggest you can make when moving out with a mech army. Same goes for the Mines in place. So you cannot make errors in the early game to get to a powerful army? That is unfair? You should never play Protoss. Also I see so many Terrans complain about Immortals. I don't get that at all. Once Terran got enough Tanks, infinite Immortals won't kill them. Plus, just getting Ghosts for EMP and Nukes is sooooooo good in mech. I know it is a lot of gas but it is so worth it.
I DO play protoss. And there is actually nothing preventing protoss from moving out on the map before 160 supply in any of the matchups. IF you're going for an upgrade-heavy, macro-oriented style like Squirtle or Creator, it's quite possible that you'll just be sitting at home, getting up 3 expansions and all your tech for a maxed out push. However, you definitely have the option of doing blink stalker harass, warp gate pushes, immortal pushes, stargate harass, warp prism harass, etc. Mech really only can be aggressive with hellion runbys, widow mine drops, and harassing banshees, all of which are shut down fairly easily by a prepared opponent (we can talk about Mvp's failure to do damage vs. Life in GSL finals with his BFH opening TWICE; because he didn't do any damage with his hellion opening, Life was able to roll his advantage all the way to the lategame).
Mass tanks is terrible against immortals, actually. The best ground mech composition is 7-8 tanks, about 30 BFH, 4-5 fully charged ghosts, and a few vikings in case of colossus or stargate. Maybe with the addition of mines, a few burrowed in front of your army wouldn't hurt either.
On January 05 2013 21:32 rpgalon wrote:
I think making vikings a light unit can help mech more than reviving the warhound...
the biggest changes I can think:
TvT -
Viking vs Viking fights are going to last 2x more.
Thors are going to destroy vikings.
TvZ -
Fungal is going to deal less damage.
TvP -
Vikings are going to take less damage from stalkers.
Phoenix are going to destroy Vikings but since Vikings have a 9 range they can stay near the main army for protection.
Vikings are going to destroy Void-rays
Vikings are going to take only 20 damage from Immortals if you land then.
there is probably more, but I can't see it now.
I've seen this here and there and I think it's possible that it could give vikings a more reliable role in anti-ground mech. However, I think the machine gun attack needs to be buffed A LOT if it's going to keep up with gateway units.
On January 06 2013 02:08 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 01:28 Zorgaz wrote:On January 06 2013 00:45 Cyro wrote:On January 06 2013 00:20 Zorgaz wrote:
The only mistake we did was assuming blizzard would introduce a new mech unit (I would have been happy with the old Warhound (Goliath 2.0))
Removing the warhound at the time was the right choice, but widow mine + hellbat isn't enough to make mech viable.
Now it's less then 3 months to release T_T Less than 3 months? Its 2 months and a couple days Really, that's what you have to say? 2 months and a couple days is less then 3 months..... Yeah i could have been more exact but did i really need to? No, i just find it funny that people default to thinking as a march release to 3 months, when in reality it is only 65 days
Take deep breaths, keep OCD under control. ("LESS THAN 3 months" = any number LESS THAN 3 months. For example, 65 days is LESS THAN 3 months).
|
United States4883 Posts
On January 06 2013 01:20 Millet wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2013 00:20 Millet wrote:
I'm sure that the majority of the people that wanted the warhound gone thought that a substitute was going to be introduced. That's funny because nobody voiced any problem with the lack of replacement at the time. It was immediately made very clear that warhound and it's 'slot' are gone for good. This is just scapegoating Blizzard for community lack of thought. No it wasn't immediately made clear that the warhound was not going to get a replacement. It took 4 days until browder said this, and this was made clear in a stand-alone thread, no huge announcement. I'm sure that the majority of people never even knew about this response. Sources: [14-9-2012] http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6571787498[18-9-2012] http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6572359151#11
It is definitely a shame that warhound never got a replacement. I don't really think it's fair to blame either side; I know this thread is called "Did WE make a mistake?", but I don't mean to incriminate the community or say that Blizzard had no blame in it or whatever. One thing is for sure though: if the release isn't drastically different from how things are now, a lot of terran players are going to be incredibly disappointed. Terran has gotten 1.5 units and no new playstyles or midgames. While it might be interesting to play against different playstyles (roach/hyrdra or an aggressive protoss with recall), it still won't change the fact that terran players will still be playing pretty much the same way. And that's painful to think about.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
Personally I would love to see tank numbers tweaked, the features such as isolated cliffs that made the tank unbelievably op are gone and tanks are incredibly weak in small numbers. by tweaking damage you would allow positional tanks to be more effective (+turret/mines) and space could properly be controlled.
I don't think we need the Warhound back, but stronger tanks, someone said earlier that by buffing tank damage you could kill the rest of the protoss army more easily leaving just the immortals to kill with your other units, I had never thought of this but if it could be made to work that would be awesome and hopefully not game breaking.
|
On January 05 2013 10:13 SC2John wrote:Show nested quote +On January 05 2013 10:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 05 2013 09:40 SC2John wrote:The main arguments about the warhound originally were:1) It is a "1a unit", meaning that it has no real skill attached to it. It attacks into mechanical units, auto-casts Haywire Missiles, and crushes them. No amount of tweaking numbers will fix that the warhound has no real micro potential aside from pulling back weakened units.Counterargument: + Show Spoiler +Certainly the warhounds needed some huge nerfing, but an all-around unit like the roach, marine, or stalker that relies primarily on splits, positioning, and concaves has never been a bad thing for the game. If any particular change could be made, Haywire Missiles could be given a longer range and require manual activation (much like the old 250mm Strike Cannons), which would encourage players to have to spend extra APM to use and then reposition correctly. It might take some playing around with the damage of Haywire Missiles (as a manual cast could encourage mass sniping of immortals or something). Counter Counterargument: "All-around" units like the Roach, Marine and Stalker you mention have lots of micro involved. The Warhound doesn't require the same micro, is about the same as Thor or Immortal, which is move into range and hope you do are stronger than your opponent. Furthermore, Mech play is traditionally based around positioning and it is exciting because it is different. Knowing where and when you siege your tanks takes skill and is a different than stutter stepping, Blink micro ect... To allow the Warhounds to be microed like those other "all-around" units would mean that Factory play is no longer based on when and where you position your siege tanks, but how well you can stutter step ect... That reduces the variation of the game, and it is bad. Although I haven't always had this viewpoint and I may not have it for very long.... I think positional mech in SC2 may just be...impossible? Maybe it's best that we have some kind of a mobile way to play mech, where we control space with packs of units covered by siege tanks and mines, than to try to focus on having perfect positioning in order to play. All of the other strategies of all other matchups have this in common. The only thing that doesn't allow for micro or tactical genius to pull through is terran mech. In addition, maybe we could MAKE warhound interesting instead of just dismissing it as kind of a beefy unit with an anti-mech attack? And to those that say Immortals are not microed at all: let's go watch some PartinG games on Ohana and then let's talk about this truthfully. (Not at all comparing warhounds to immortals here, I'm just point out that Immortals can definitely be interesting).
The biggest problem with bringing back the Warhound to cover for up lackluster Mech units, is that Mech without Tanks is just another deathball, and i think a lot of people would rather see Mech as unviable than a deathball. Right now in WoL Terran is the only race that does not benefit from sitting back and maxing out, and it would be such a shame to see HotS turn into a turtle fest into a clash of 200/200 armies, where the player to come out ahead of the fight has basicly won the game.
|
with the warhound gone, the only real answer is a buff to seigetanks.
AS it stands they are very hard to use, take al ong while to get in "the right" spot, and honestly are underwhelming once you have them there.
Tanks need buffs, or we need a goliath.
|
It was basically the perfect unit that mech needed, anti armour anti immortal shield, we all said WAHHH WE DONT WANT IT BECAUSE ITS LIKE A METALLIC ROACH and it's gone for good. It's not coming back. Lets all QQ in this thread, we will feel better later I'm sure.
|
The Warhound from early beta was one of the worst units Blizzard ever made,so no mistake there.
The mistake however, is that Blizzard brings units from BW but in an inferior design that fucks everything up. Mines at 2 supply are worhtless in late game, Thors are no where near as good anti air as Goliaths and Tanks are so damn sad. So the mistake is that they don't fix the problems they intentionally created (to be original...).
If they just can't be creative enough and bring new great units in to the game, then bring the old ones in their original form. How bad is it that after 2 years of development we can look at the "new" units as a Firebat,a worse Spider Mine and an interpretation of an existing unit (marauder) that has a "mech" description? That campaign better be the most amazing thing ever seen in a video game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
