|
Okay, my take on things as a random player.
- What 3 units in the game need to go into the redesign list?
1) Colossus --> either remove it and replace it or completely redesign it. In its current state it has too much influence on the game. It is far too good compared to any other AOE alternatives Protoss have available. Yes, HTs are good but their storm requires enery, where colossus can just attack.
2) Roach --> Either scrap it entirely (and remake the hydra to be more general purpose), or give it meaning in the game. Currently it has the same job as the hydra but costs half, and is much more durable. Either make it a glass cannon (strong attack/low health) or a meat shield (what it was supposed to be, a mediocre, cheap unit that has tons of health).
3) Marauder--> like the roach, I feel this unit does not have a place, and is almost too good of an option compared to others. It makes Terran feel off when I play it (compared to SC1 Terran). It is better than tanks in many cases you would use tanks in and can deal a ton of damage while absorbing a ton of damage, which when combined with both its ability to slow units and the fact you can stim it, make it much better than it should be. To fix it I think they should either make it unstimmable, and/or remove slow, and/or make it only good against armoured units. Its ability to slow and be quite microable makes it much too good against enemy armies (Protoss more so than Zerg, though against roaches this applies.). Maybe move it to factory?
- What mechanics do you find needing tweaks? or badly designed.
Force field --> Protoss relies far too much on this currently and it has far too much power in shaping the outcome of the game. I think it is badly designed, in that at times it is far too good, and at other times it is bad. In the early game, one missed force field can often spell the end of the game. When used on the offensive, it can nullify much better armies solely because they can't pass get in range.
Fungal Growth --> Prior to the buff, I had no issue, but its current state feels broken at times. It is incredibly easy for a player to lock down armies much bigger than theirs and completely kill it without the other person being able to do anything about it. To fix it they should either make it akin to plague (damage over time without being locked down) or ensnare (Slow down a ton but not damaged). The current state of fungal feels quite abusable.
Warpgate --> I dislike this mechanic. I hope it either scrapped or adjusted so that you can only warp in at designated locations (within radius of a friendly nexus or something like that).
The Macro Mechanics - I want all 3 removed, as they don't feel rewarding, and their effects on each of the races varies far too much. The MULE is my least favourite, as it feels quite forgiving. Larva inject isn't forgiving enough, and missing it enough can kill you entirely. Chronoboost doesn't really have a role after upgrades are done, unless you are replenishing an army.
- What graphic/misc tweaks do you want to see?
Make it less CPU dependent, and more GPU dependent. Modern GPUs are incredibly powerful and it makes sense to have the GPU do some of the work.
- What type of new units/buildings would you like to see?
Lurker --> The lurker is badass. Either the lurker or some other form of space control. Banelings are okay but a unit dedicated to space management would be awesome.
|
- Spells that need rework/redesign
2. Raven's Seeker Missile - rarely seen in competitive play because of its short casting range and slow movement speed.
Solution(a): Seeker Missile will moves really fast, but will has a countdown timer before it explode. - unit micro (spreading).
|
A note for the Raven's HSM;
You could always give the missile more range and speed, but add a marker that highlights for the the opponent which unit has been targeted.
You'd get the old frantic-sort-through-mutas-to-find-the-one-with-irradiate-on-it going on, except instead of constant slow damage until you work it out, you have a second to get it right before all of your mutas/rines die.
As it is, obviously, HSM is pretty awful both to use and respond to, because if you're watching when it goes off it takes very little finesse to just run your ball away, but if you're unlucky and are looking somewhere else, you can just straight up lose everything you own.
|
What 3 units in the game need to go into the redesign list?
-Roach. A bland unit that is a crutch for many players, buff hydras instead and give roaches a unique role
-Stalker. Too pathetic without blink against the other races options (marauders, zerglings), yet weak and overpriced as it is, its the only unit protoss has that can actually fight earlygame vs roaches marines and marauders (zealots get kited, sentries are weak) This makes protoss extremely vulnerable earlygame and forces them to rely too heavy on forcefields to survive.
-Banelings. Not a very interesting unit to watch, not much micro involved with it, its basically a-moved at the target 90% of the time. It can also decide a game based entirely on luck with player skill irrelevant via landmines. Way too decisive and I always feel cheated out of a real game when a player loses half his army to a lucky landmine. Only good thing about it is watching marine split micro but really people will have to split marines vs any aoe unit, I'd much rather see something more interesting like a lurker or a roach rework.
What mechanics do you find needing tweaks? or badly designed.
-fungal growth. No skill ability at the moment, I'd like to see it reverted to how it was on the PTR, a moving glob that can be dodged. usage is then dependant on player skill nd fun to watch, the speed of the projectile can be adjusted for balance.
-HSM. Pretty much what people above me have said, needs fixing.
-warp-ins. Should come with some sort of penalty for using it the further away you get from a nexus.
-workers only collecting 5 minerals each and 2 geysers per base. Results in smaller army sizes compared to bw as more supply is used on workers which is disappointing to me.
What graphic/misc tweaks do you want to see?
-I'd like blizzard to fixed the low paged pool memory error or atleast give me an option to disable that popup.
-A section for custom games with player chosen titles on bnet 2.0
What type of new units/buildings would you like to see?
-I'd like to see more variety for zerg it feels like they have less units that the other races.
-I want stimmed firebats to replace hellions(tweaked so they function similarly), because the hellion is just a lame toycar while firebats are awesome.
-New units or tweaks to improve the viability of terran mech and protoss heavy air (carrier + mothership)
-I want to be able to combine 5 thors into an odin!!! (this one is not serious)
|
On June 01 2011 16:46 Big J wrote:
one thing I would like to mention in this thread:
if you just want to play BW... play BW!
I am not really happy with everything in SC2 but BW had a-click units too!
And bad unit control options and bad AI are not what I am looking forward to in a 2010 PC game!
and I would like to see new units rather than just having all the BW units back (lurkers, arbiters, reavers, dragoons)
yeah redesign the colossus, make some other changes, but plz DON'T remake the lurker!
No, you should design the sequel to be better than the original but not remove what made the original hard and awesome. Just look at the disses that are different between the games, in bw it was 1a2a3a, in sc2 it's just a move.....
While I don't think that blizz will change the game now that they have the 3 macro mechanics introduced, I really think that the queen spawn larvae mechanic is broken. As a zerg player from bw and sc2 a part of zerg was to swarm and overrun the opponent; But in sc2 you can literally throw 100f after 100f armies at the opponent almost non-stop. Their are some inherent unit flaws to zerg units because if they could mass a stalker replica, the game would be rediculous. If the queen spawn larvae mechanic was removed, you could implement changes to zerg that would benefit the entire game.
|
On June 01 2011 18:34 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On June 01 2011 17:34 PH wrote:On June 01 2011 17:24 Yaotzin wrote:
a) esports != BW. There are other esports, and it would exist without BW.
b) the annoyance is at people who want nothing BUT BW units. Of course it is SC2, of course it should have BW units. But it should also have different units. SC2 would not be anywhere near what it is today without BW. SC2 owes nearly all (not all, but nearly all) of its success to BW. Sorry, but that's just how it is. yeah but you know what: SC2 IS NOT BW if you want to play BW with SC2 graphics, there is an awesome galaxy editor that gives u the option to produce SC1 BW with SC2 graphics. Of course there should be trademark units of SC1 in SC2, else you could just make GalaxyWars1, Scrin vs Human vs SpaceOrcs vs Zombies, but Im really sick of people saying: "remove unit X (new SC2 unit) and bring back unit Y (BW unit)". yeah maybe zerg could use a spacecontroling unit like the lurker... LIKE THE LURKER! lurkers are not the only way to control space! Protoss got sentries, terran has siege tanks and got planetary fortresses, queens were intended to work like that (on the creep). and you know what? I like my units clumped up in 1 or 2 huge control groups. I really don't see the point of only selecting only 12zerglings in SC2. I really don't see the point why I shouldnt be able to select 2casters at once and only cast 1spell. THIS is an advanced game and whatever you want to reply, keep in mind, that people like me, that actually enjoy those IMPROVEMENTS, have already won, because the IMPROVEMENTS are there!
Queens are horrible vs ground units on or off creep... like seriously, for a GIANT unit called the "Queen" you would think it would be able to take a zealot or 4 lings or 2 marines.
|
For those who complain about the colossus: it's designed to compensate for the weakness of gateway units, which are weak to compensate for the warp gate mechanic. So replacing colos with either a weaker unit or one that takes more attention/skill would completely throw off the whole design of protoss. It's not feasible without drastic chances, and I don't know that Blizz has that in mind for HOTS.
|
Remember the WC3 to TFT changes?
TFT was basically a totally new game that used the same graphics as WC3...
|
There's some good ideas in here, and some terrible ones. I feel like the most consistent complaint is the collosus though, which I'd have to agree with. It's interesting cliff-walking ability only gets used to pack more dps into a smaller area by walking on top of other units, which looks dumb, and functions dumb.
Personally though, I'd like to see forcefields go. There can be some pretty cool moments when someone makes a clutch forcefield, but more often it gets used to cut the opponents army in half and then demolish it, which is just frustrating to play against and frustrating to watch.
|
On June 03 2011 19:13 AndAgain wrote:
replacing colos with either a weaker unit or one that takes more attention/skill would completely throw off the whole design of protoss. It's not feasible without drastic chances, and I don't know that Blizz has that in mind for HOTS.
You're probably right on the first point (a weaker unit), but the second (a more micro intensive unit) is a bit of a non sequitur. It would definitely make the race harder to play, which may or may not be desirable, but I don't see how a few more key presses would necessitate drastic changes.
|
On June 03 2011 19:38 Rococo wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2011 19:13 AndAgain wrote:
replacing colos with either a weaker unit or one that takes more attention/skill would completely throw off the whole design of protoss. It's not feasible without drastic chances, and I don't know that Blizz has that in mind for HOTS. You're probably right on the first point (a weaker unit), but the second (a more micro intensive unit) is a bit of a non sequitur. It would definitely make the race harder to play, which may or may not be desirable, but I don't see how a few more key presses would necessitate drastic changes.
There is no point arguing about the colossus, as long as roaches and marauders are in the game.
|
On June 03 2011 19:57 IVN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2011 19:38 Rococo wrote:On June 03 2011 19:13 AndAgain wrote:
replacing colos with either a weaker unit or one that takes more attention/skill would completely throw off the whole design of protoss. It's not feasible without drastic chances, and I don't know that Blizz has that in mind for HOTS. You're probably right on the first point (a weaker unit), but the second (a more micro intensive unit) is a bit of a non sequitur. It would definitely make the race harder to play, which may or may not be desirable, but I don't see how a few more key presses would necessitate drastic changes. There is no point arguing about the colossus, as long as roaches and marauders are in the game.
Please explain.
|
The warp gate must be changed. In my opinion you should have to choose whether or not you really want your gates to be warp gates. Increase the cooldown of warp-in so that you produce units faster from regular gateways but instead have to live with rally points. I could see a lategame where you have half your gates as warpgate for harrassment and quick defense of expansion and half your gates for building your main army.
|
|
|
I would slap my hands with glee if the Colossus and Roach were outright removed. Awful, boring, terrible units. Marauders are not in the same ballpark, but shares some of the problem the Roach has as well.
Reapers, Motherships, and to a lesser extent, Overseers, are also tremendous failures on Blizzard's part.
|
Results in smaller army sizes compared to bw as more supply is used on workers which is disappointing to me.
I was never that good at brood war but i always made 30-40 probes per base, which is way more than in starcraft 2
|
some ppl say SC2 Isnt BW .... we all agree that SC2 Isnt BW ... but there is problem in game mechaniks that all RTS games should have...
Micro and macro are part of RTS games no mether if they are coled SC2 or WC3 or SC1BW...or....
but in sc2 we have thing coled Force feald (i am toss player) and Fungel grouth = they are instantly kill micro and skill usage in gameplay...
whay Force feald kill micro ... i as toss player spamm Force feald and other side cant do enything abouth it....
exemple of micro i have 2 zealots u have 2 zealots and one of as can win a bettle... if i move my zealots better then you=you lose... that is great gameplay that is what is mising in SC2...
also colloss you cant dodge colloss ATC...also if you mass colloss there is no graund army that can kill em....=no skill involved...
also stim maraders marines and (banglings) = whatewer i do with my stalkers and zealots i cant kill stmed maraders marines...(who do A move) blink suraund(with zealots) i cant do nothing...a move hit and run is bad gameplay to me.... 
|
On June 03 2011 23:25 DARKHYDRA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2011 19:57 IVN wrote:On June 03 2011 19:38 Rococo wrote:On June 03 2011 19:13 AndAgain wrote:
replacing colos with either a weaker unit or one that takes more attention/skill would completely throw off the whole design of protoss. It's not feasible without drastic chances, and I don't know that Blizz has that in mind for HOTS. You're probably right on the first point (a weaker unit), but the second (a more micro intensive unit) is a bit of a non sequitur. It would definitely make the race harder to play, which may or may not be desirable, but I don't see how a few more key presses would necessitate drastic changes. There is no point arguing about the colossus, as long as roaches and marauders are in the game. Please explain.
Well those two are the "problem units" for protoss, which necessitate an AOE monster in the protoss arsenal. Its simple:
- ultra cheap, ultra effective units for T/Z + Colossus = balanced game
- ultra cheap, ultra effective units for T/Z w/o Colossus = protoss are absurdly UP
|
On June 04 2011 00:05 cekkmt wrote:Show nested quote +Results in smaller army sizes compared to bw as more supply is used on workers which is disappointing to me. I was never that good at brood war but i always made 30-40 probes per base, which is way more than in starcraft 2
units in SC2 are not supply efficient
Zerg
The lurker takes up 2 supply, the roach takes up 2(overall better than roach))
the defiler took 2 supply(overall better than the infestor)
the ultra took 4 rather than 6 supply(also better in broodwar)
hydras took 1 supply(arguably, the hydra is more powerful in sc2, but not enough to take up double the supply)
corrupter take 2 supply ( scourge took 1, you got 2 of them, and were arguably better)
protoss
immortals take 4(arguably the reaver at 4 was alot better)
colossus are one of the few units that are supply efficient, possibly more so than reavers, but that's possibly a stretch
zealots were arguably better in broodwar(same supply)
dragoons are arguablly better than stalkers(same supply)
High Templar were better(same supply)
Terran
Tank= 3 supply (2 in broodwar, and better)
marauder= 2 supply( vulture 2 in broodwar, cheaper, and arguably better)
hellion= 2 supply(vulture 2 in broodwar, cheaper, and better)
thor = 6 supply(goliath only took 2, probably more supply efficient)
raven =2 supply (science vessel 2 supply, arguably better)
banshee= 3 supply( probably overall better unit, its just after you have the tools to deal with them, the supply isn't what is keeping the unit back)
gas is also more hurtful on your economy due the the double gas system, not only in slowing tech down, but requiring double the SCVs to get the same gas in late game.
things in broodwar are cheaper
vulture versus marauder in relative price for supply
baneling versus lurkers in relative price for supply
tanks versus tanks in price per supply are all good examples
so basically, units are extremely expensive for what they are, so they require more supply in workers to support an arguably weaker army than in broodwar. The Gas mechanic requires a greater supply of workers to support an economy. And in addition, units cost more supply overall while costing a lot of money.
So that's why we have small armies, because armies in SC2 are EXPENSIVE, and you need a huge supply investment of an economy to support less units.
thats why we cap out at 200 supply so fast in addition to the accelerated economy.
in other words
100 supply in econ in sc2 is worse than 100 supply in econ in BW
100 supply of army in sc2 is worse and more expensive than 100 supply of army in BW
|
I see a lot of complaints about the infestor, but really I just think that people are not getting the appropriate response of either HT's or ghosts. If a toss gets colossi, I will get corrupter or infestor as my response, and I would never expect to win with pure roach or lings against a well-made toss army. Point being, even if the spell seems a bit strong because it locks units in place, there are many ways to mitigate the effects of the spell, and once the infestor enters the battlefield, it *should* force a response in many ways that others units like colossi or HT do. So I don't really see anything wrong with fungal growth, and I actually feel like the infestor is the best unit that blizzard thought up for zerg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
