| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ltortoise
633 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:03 Fa1nT wrote: Please define a computer bug for us, then compare how cleave is related to that word This thread has 960 replies as of now, and just under 4% of them are yours, trying to tell people that this bug isn't a bug. A bug is code behaving in a way that's unintended. Somebody asked on the blizzard forums if it was a bug. Blizzard said yes. Case closed. | ||
|
cykalu
Australia30 Posts
On September 23 2010 04:59 Kinmaul wrote: If you build PF's at all your expansions you don't have many mules to drop. Also you are looking at TvZ without considering how this change effects other matchups. What about PvZ or ZvZ? The Ultra AoE will quickly make work of probes, drones, and larva as well once the ultra(s) start hitting the nexus/hatchery. Is this needed to make ultras viable in those matchups? If PF w/ mass repair is deemed OP by Blizzard they can easily reduce it's power in much more resonable (and logical) ways. Reduce the damage on the PF, reduce/remove the AoE from the PF's attack, cap the number of scvs that can repair a PF, reduce the rate of repair, lower the armor on the PF. All of these changes focus on the problem of the PF being too strong and reduce its power. Claiming that this kind of AoE, which has been stated by Blizzard to be an unintended side effect of the ram removal, is "needed" because PF's are too strong is ridiculous. If you can read back on my first few posts, I actually stand on fixing this current issue that the Ultralisk present, the abnormally large AoE attack. Also, I already looked at the issue at which Terran's Repair Mechanism needs to be addressed, this was a few pages back. I'm a Zerg player. Yet I would not even think about building PFs in every expansion, which would not be economical and can set you back a lot of resources. I was giving an example of how "balanced" in terms of cost effectiveness at which a Terran can harass his opponents as opposed to even thinking about a Ultralisk drop which i responded to. If you can see, its far more cost effective for Terran to abuse/harass their enemy, compared to a Zerg getting Drop upgrade + speed upgrade + ultralisk tech + a ultralisk and one overlord for each ultralisk to be transported. Terran can do such a good drop especially on LE LOOOOONNNNGGGGG before a Zerg even gets his Ultralisk Caverns up, which btw, is EASILY scoutable for T. I DID NOT claim that this specific (rather, Imba) large area of attack from the Ultralisk is needed, although Blizzard intents to give the Ultralisk a Cleave type damage on building, but so it happens that their modifier was out of line. I merely want to state that giving unit/building/entity something OP to "counter"/"address" something else is not unheard of in other context. Hence why I used DotA as an example. IF only Blizzard had used Soon™, rather disappointed that they said "in future patch". | ||
|
Fa1nT
United States3423 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:06 ltortoise wrote: Please define a computer bug for us, then compare how cleave is related to that word This thread has 960 replies as of now, and just under 4% of them are yours, trying to tell people that this bug isn't a bug. A bug is code behaving in a way that's unintended. Somebody asked on the blizzard forums if it was a bug. Blizzard said yes. Case closed. [/QUOTE] They changed the intention the instant they allowed cleave to hit buildings. And blizzard didn't even test their own patch, you trust them still? I highly suggest you never play WoW during a patchy era. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:00 MegaBUD wrote: Its a bug and its gonna be fix soon... like the replay and some other issue... You don't know what a bug is. 2 Blues said the same thing We are currently aware of this issue and hope to have it resolved in a future patch. Future patch does not equal hotfix unless they change their mind. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:06 ltortoise wrote: A bug is code behaving in a way that's unintended. Somebody asked on the blizzard forums if it was a bug. Blizzard said yes. Case closed. How about a link. | ||
|
HunterX11
United States1048 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980105 | ||
|
cykalu
Australia30 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980105 "BLIZZARD, CONFIRMATION PLEASE? BUG OR NOT?" "We are currently aware of this issue and hope to have it resolved in a future patch. " Avoiding the use of the word "bug", replied with "issue". Therefore, intentional, Blizzard had want to make this type of attack, but something needs to be addressed for it. | ||
|
blgdinger
2 Posts
On September 23 2010 04:43 Fa1nT wrote: Terran logic - It doesn't look realistic, and kills ma fortress and scvs. MUST BE A BUG, SINCE ZERG CAN'T NORMALLY DO THAT. I logged in to say that you're a complete dumbass. god it must suck to be you. User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
HellButterfly
7 Posts
On September 23 2010 04:52 DooMDash wrote: Yes but Zerg isn't intended to have a PF, and they would have other units with that hatch. 250/150 extra in the bank as well compared to a PF. You don't have to upgrade it to a planetary fortress. You can keep it as a normal cc, just like how zerg keeps theirs as a normal hatchery. You pay extra for that defense. | ||
|
Grond
599 Posts
Future patch may not even be the next patch, my guess would be it will be fixed when they do something about repair. I have no problem with them changing it. The current mechanic is clunky, it should be a static value not based on target size. | ||
|
MythicalMage
1360 Posts
| ||
|
dEphria
76 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:24 cykalu wrote: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980105 "BLIZZARD, CONFIRMATION PLEASE? BUG OR NOT?" "We are currently aware of this issue and hope to have it resolved in a future patch. " Avoiding the use of the word "bug", replied with "issue". Therefore, intentional, Blizzard had want to make this type of attack, but something needs to be addressed for it. Blizzard using the word "issue" instead of "bug" in all their answers smells like an euphemism. Just check their answers to other "obvious" bugs: -Score Screen Build Order Bug "Hi all, Thank you for the reports. We have corrected this issue and all future games played will have correct build orders listed in the score screen." -Mineral Boosting "Hey guys, We've seen many threads on this issue and I wanted to let you know that we are aware of the reports and hope to have this resolved in the future." -Known Issues Here is a list of known issues being reported in Patch 1.0.3: • Mouse buttons cannot be set for Push to Talk. • Thor CE is not being displayed when the player has the proper flags. • Campaign Achievement completion stops at 99%. ... Really just stop getting hung up over the term "issue" not being a bug. Even if the code is working as intended the result is not. Take a small example to make it a bit more clear: I want to give broodlords better ability to kill PFs and other buildings getting repaired and decide to give their broodlings a small aoe splash to kill off workers. So i change the code for broodlings. Unfortunately I dont realize that also gives the broodlings coming out of destroyed zerg buildings the aoe damage which annihilates any attackers in early stages of the game already even though I only wanted a tier3 unit to profit. That might help balance and the code I changed works as intended but the result is not... so I'd call it an "issue" that will get changed in a future patch. | ||
|
SpaceYeti
United States723 Posts
| ||
|
ltortoise
633 Posts
Rule #1: Never use the word "bug," EVER. Only use the word "issue." etc | ||
|
Ordained
United States779 Posts
| ||
|
csfield
United States206 Posts
On September 23 2010 04:53 DooMDash wrote: You can transfusion. Cost nothing, great spell. one transfusion costs 8 larva which is 8 drones which is thousands of minerals | ||
|
throttled
United States382 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:51 dEphria wrote: Blizzard using the word "issue" instead of "bug" in all their answers smells like an euphemism. Just check their answers to other "obvious" bugs: -Score Screen Build Order Bug "Hi all, Thank you for the reports. We have corrected this issue and all future games played will have correct build orders listed in the score screen." -Mineral Boosting "Hey guys, We've seen many threads on this issue and I wanted to let you know that we are aware of the reports and hope to have this resolved in the future." -Known Issues Here is a list of known issues being reported in Patch 1.0.3: • Mouse buttons cannot be set for Push to Talk. • Thor CE is not being displayed when the player has the proper flags. • Campaign Achievement completion stops at 99%. • The hotkey for Surrender is inconsistent. ... Really just stop getting hung up over the term "issue" not being a bug. Even if the code is working as intended the result is not. So let me get this straight. You honestly believe, in your heart of hearts, that blizzard is so fucking retarded they don't even understand how their own game mechanics work? Seriously? Moreover, that they didn't test it at all in the months they've had to test it? That is what you're implying if you didn't realize. Incredibly naive. There is no way this is unintentional, however it is retarded and needs to be fixed for balance, along with a lot of other things in this game. All with same priority (including fucking marauder drops.) Saying it isn't intentional when it works exactly how the game is coded for it to work just makes you look dumb. | ||
|
csfield
United States206 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:03 DooMDash wrote: Dude Blizzard says its a bug. Did you not read thier post? liar | ||
|
Ordained
United States779 Posts
On September 23 2010 05:58 csfield wrote: one transfusion costs 8 larva which is 8 drones which is thousands of minerals People act like Transfusion is amazing but it is one of the least cost effective spells. 150 to one unit is not that good since it will just get re-targeted down anyway. It works well early game but falls of the map later on. Maybe if you wanted to go with cheese like mass queen but then all someone needs to do is make Archons or ghosts and the Zerg is S O L. Transfusion has saved me a few times vs fast Voidrays but that is about all it can do these days. Any way you cut it I would rather have a 2 creep tumors or 8 larvae instead of 150 life on a unit that will die seconds later anyway. | ||
|
ltortoise
633 Posts
Check out the bug report forums and look at blue posts. Try to find a SINGLE ONE where they use the word "bug." You won't. They only ever refer to things as "issues." Here is a link to a bunch of Kragg's posts, a frequent Blizzard poster in the Bug Report forum: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/search?f=post&a=Kragg&s=time issue, issue, issue, issue, issue...... | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  24629Calm  2143Shuttle 506Horang2 327Rush  273BeSt 264actioN 227firebathero 137Soulkey 131EffOrt 130[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
IntoTheTV X SOOP
Reynor vs Zoun
Neeb vs Rogue
OSC
FEL
Patches Events
AI Arena Tournament
FEL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
WardiTV Weekly
IntoTheTV X SOOP
ByuN vs Lambo
MaxPax vs Bunny
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
! Especially those 5x AoE denial combo ^_^ ES, Tide, Void, etc. But there was always a way to take them down. Singling them out. Or in this case, avoid repairing/camping next to your buildings.
