EPT[I] Dustin Browder, HotS + General Q&A - Page 13
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
DeepBlu2
United States975 Posts
| ||
|
Razith
Canada431 Posts
| ||
|
loadme
171 Posts
On August 02 2011 12:04 genius_man16 wrote: I can't imagine them NOT adding a new unit for Terran, that would just be unfair to 1/3 of the people who play this game. . well, DB made himself very clear about what is fair and what not. my guess is, that terrans will lose one unit, that gets replaced with a fancy unit. but what they wont tell is that the fancy unit has more downsides, than the replaced unit. maybe they are not replacing, but visually updating some existing unit. example: "we are proud to introduce fundamental changes to the raven. it has some new tech that makes it invulnerable for quiet a while, offering better detection in order to use less scans. needless to say, that this tech is so heavy, that they cant fly anymore and are groundunits only now." as a zerg i always felt bored about corruptors and overseers. all in all those are really good news here. corruptors are the most useless unit, once there is no more slow air unit around. | ||
|
wolfe
United States761 Posts
On August 02 2011 12:22 megapants wrote:...TL;DR: Terran's ability to tech while utilizing their transitional tech building is too versatile in relation to the other races. Protoss needs to invest in quite a lot for one-dimensional play, as well as not getting to utilize many of their tech structures past the point of one upgrade. Zerg needs a better mid-game unit, which can be most easily morphed from the Roach, as well as a strong spellcasting late-game unit like the Defiler. That's my input. Thanks again for the info! I appreciate how much effort you put into this post, but I'm going to have to completely disagree with you because you are flat out wrong. Simply because terrans have 3 types of production buildings that can swap add ons does not translate into the sweeping tech switches you seem to claim. Yes, terran units are efficient and versatile, but production flexibility is definitely NOT one of their strengths. Terrans are not able to switch between bio -> mech -> air in any order or combination. TvP's current state makes mech play almost unusable and even if you do, you cannot switch into bio or vice versa. The investment into mech is too great you either win or lose with it. With bio first you cannot transition into mech due to mech's need for critical mass and investment already put into bio. This leaves terrans vulnerable at that key midgame where they have neither enough bio or mech to push out and maintain an equal footing. Mech has its list of problems, but lets avoid that discussion for now. Terran air compositions is gimmicky cheese at best. While we can switch between getting a raven or banshee into reactored medivacs or vikings I would hardly call that as too versatile. The flexible unit composition prize goes to the Zerg, by a wide wide margin. All their production is derived from the hatch / larva requiring only the particular tech building for production. In no way is this imbalanced or whatever, but it's simply an aspect of the game I don't want you confusing yourself on. | ||
|
Condor Hero
United States2931 Posts
this is starcraft, not warcraft; not every unit needs an ability. Look at BW with the dragoon and hydra, they didnt have an ability and that didnt diminish gameplay at all. I do have a problem with blue flame hellions though. Not just because i play protoss and think they can be terribly rewarding for almost no investment, but the upgrade is just really shallow compared to spider mines. the micro and attention needed to handle hellions changes nothing with the upgrade. compared to spider mines, you can actually use the vulture differently post upgrade (like making them cost effective vs dragoons and sieged tanks). | ||
|
wolfe
United States761 Posts
On August 02 2011 17:39 tuestresfat wrote: wow that was a sick read, i agree with a ton of things he said. thank god he's the one behind the balancing desk and not the tl community ^^ lol, quoted for the truth. It seems half the people here want BW 2.0 and the other half wants the game grossly imbalanced in their race's favor. This thread reads like how I suppose fan-fiction would. Overall though, I like the direction Blizzard seems to be heading. I agree that while Terrans are largely complete I would love tweaks across the board. Something to tweak hellions / thors ... well basically mech viability and Terran GtA. Hellions punish way too heavily, just watch MLG if that the future you envisioned for TvT? Though it's obvious the other races need more of a shakeup. | ||
|
Latham
9560 Posts
On a more serious note: As a Z player, I just want a unit that forces my enemy to take another lane to my base. P has forcefields, T has tanks, I have nothing aside from the hit-or-miss blingbombs along the way. I want to control space too. Gief lurker. I don't care if it has to morph from the roach, just gief. I think he is spot on with the overseer and corruptor being meh-ish in terms of gameplay. They are just counters. Nothing more. They add no new possibilities to the Z arsenal. They should really think about adding new upgrades to already existing units that change their functions or gameplay if they don't want to add many new units. Also: deal with the hydra. Currently their only role is to counter mass gateway units, but besides that they are obsolete. | ||
|
Hikari
1914 Posts
roaches are just meat shields: w/o burrow+tunneling claw they are just a pretty straight forward 1a unit. It is not like a marauder that can stim and slow, or a stalker that can blink around. Remember the acid spore debuff from devourers? What if roaches gain something like that (but a weaker version)? | ||
|
flyingbangus
United States121 Posts
1) 10sec deduction on the Spine Crawler's build time to match a Photon Cannon. Sure a crawler can be repositioned, but it does not detect or shoot air. There's also the drone and lost mining time. 2) Overseer upgrade, please reduce to 50/50. 100 gas at lair tech is very hard to swallow when you've got so many upgrades to do at this stage - roach, baneling, and ovie speed, infestor tech (and energy upgrade). If the reaver makes a comeback, I'll pick up another account just to play Protoss. Terran changes? No clue. I'm just another rambling diamond newb, though. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
I also want to see what they add to battle.net. Personally, I would like to be able to show my love of e-sports in the game. Even if it was as simple as a badge on my Nexus that said I was a fan of TL, EG or IM. Hell, if I could pay those teams through B.net(like in LoL with skins), that would be even better. | ||
|
Icekommander
Canada483 Posts
On August 03 2011 02:38 Hikari wrote: As much as I love playing zerg I find a lot of their units to be pretty uninteresting: roaches are just meat shields: w/o burrow+tunneling claw they are just a pretty straight forward 1a unit. It is not like a marauder that can stim and slow, or a stalker that can blink around. Remember the acid spore debuff from devourers? What if roaches gain something like that (but a weaker version)? Funny story. Did you know that stim, slow, and blink are all upgrades too? They come at different times, but before the upgrades come in, they are all pretty straightforward. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 02 2011 11:10 whatthefat wrote: It's an interesting interview, and as others said in the closed thread it shows that the Blizzard team has a better understanding of the game than they are reputed to have. Nonetheless, I have to take issue with this comment: In my opinion, the main purpose of the Lurker is neither of the above. Rather, it is the ability to zone the map (in the same way that siege tanks can). That ability, which is currently achieved somewhat clumsily by mass spine crawlers, would add a lot of tactical possibilities, as it did in Broodwar. Burrowed banelings don't quite work the same way due to their lack of ranged attack. It doesn't necessarily have to be the Lurker, but I would be interested to see a unit that fills that role. Sorry, I just read this and have to react. The Zerg currently have (to some extent) a zoning tool. And that is creep. The fact is Terrans and Toss don't want to go onto creep because all Zerg units get so much scarier on creep and that effectively zones them out. It isn't as hard a contain as tanks put down but then again toss doesn't have much except voids (which are worse than mutas for it) or dts (which ends as soon as detection comes out). I would really like to see something more on the creep mechanic. The overlord creep drop is currently underused and tumors could be spread better (except that one Bel'Shir Beach game by ... whoever that was a couple weeks ago in GSTL I believe, someone link that please). Now I am not sure how to set that up. The biggest issue with creep is that most ideas I think of to enhance it would be obscene at stopping expands while being fine for zoning purposes ... Maybe a Lair upgrade to have Zergs automatically detect and have vision on creep ? The detect would be late enough to allow some dt rushes still and the vision would only really matter when an OL or tumor gets destroyed while the creep recedes. Alternatively if Nydus gets removed (speaking of lame and underused) they could add some Zerg unit (or give to Hydras) the ability to teleport to a creep location while burrowed with say a 2 second animation. So the hydras are burrowed and you do their "underground blink" to a creep area and they appear there 2 seconds later. It couldn't be used like blink micro with that animation but it would make overlord and creep control of paramount importance to Toss and Terran. Obviously there would need to be some distinction of ally and enemy creep or that becomes stupid ZvZ. Note that I said hydra but it could be some new unit. It would effectively give Zergs an equivalent of cliff abuse (toss have blink and colossi, Terrans have reapers and the best drop). I believe creep could be used as part of the zoning and be more interesting from a tactical perspective than a tank/lurker unit which just sits there and shoots. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Did you Seriously Just compare Creep.. To Siege Tanks... Also, Sixes, Zerg does have vision where creep is. No need to "upgrade" it to do something it already does. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 03 2011 00:44 Zuxo wrote: As a protoss please make Zerg more "swarmy". Like seriously fix the Roach. It should be 1 supply and weaker instead of the fucking beast unit it is now. IMO ofc  Edit: Also make it so that P can harass with a unit that isn't countered by 1 building, early-mid game. The Colossi could also use a change (maybe a red laser coming from it that does no damage like the HSM for a few seconds and then if fires with higher dam and lower attack speed) ,the same goes for the Raven, Corrupter, Hellion, Marauder and the Roach as I said above. The big issue with making Zerg "Swarmy" is that it makes Zerg more and more vulnerable to splash damage and choke points. Let's make a quick list of units Zerg complained about: tanks, thors, colossi, forcefields ... they all annihilate swarms. Now I agree that Zergs need to be more swarmy but then you can't have solutions that are as simple as 3 forcefields on a choke or "I sieged 3 tanks" or "I have a couple thors, bye bye 15 mutas". The reason why Zerg players don't use 150 lings to destroy things is really map architecture. Take Shakuras for example. No way you can get a surround unless a Terra/Toss is sitting right on your front door because the whole map is a hallway with less width than tank range. A swarm is cool but if the units just block each other and get mowed down like the Zerg from the WoL campaign, people won't play that way. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
2840 Posts
| ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
Yes, creep wins fights. And it's a hell of a sexy way to have map control. But while it does boost the potential of Zerg it sure as hell never wins the fight alone. Siege tanks on the other hand.. lol | ||
|
Gheizen64
Italy2077 Posts
On the Lurker imho it need to evolve from the roach. It just make too much sense. Their aspect is similar, they both shot only ground and they are both good undeground. Hydra was good when the only other option was the ling, but now roach feel the bill better. As for the boring units... Terran feel pretty much perfect, but i'd toy a little with Hellion and Reapers. A bit too overlapping in roles. Fast scout + worker killers. Maybe make hellion do more to biological instead of light? Give mines to reapers? Dunno. Zerg has a shitload of boring units. Overseer are stupid. Corruptors are super one-dimensional with an even more one-dimensional ability (Scourge is just so perfect for zerg, bring it back). Roaches are a bit boring, but if they could morph into Lurkers they'd feel so much more interesting. And Ultras really need to move Zergling aside automatically when they move. It look so stupid to see ultras wandering behind a line of Zerglings. Protoss have Mothership that's terrible, then dunno . If there's a thing i don't like from protoss is the fact that almost all ground units have the same speed. Make the balls so much worse to see, especially with Colossi over everything else. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 03 2011 03:39 Probe1 wrote: Did you seriously just compare creep to siege tanks? My entire response was just derailed by reading that. Did you Seriously Just compare Creep.. To Siege Tanks... Also, Sixes, Zerg does have vision where creep is. No need to "upgrade" it to do something it already does. I meant vision on creep regardless of the overlord or tumor still being there. A Terran/Toss can do a quick advance killing tumors and end up on creep that you don't have vision on. And a massive ling surround on creep can be extremely destructive and is effectively a zoning tool. I never claimed it was as effective as tanks. Quite frankly I think tanks should be taken out of the bleeding game just like hydras but they are iconic of BW and consequently are kept. Anything that has a tactical description that reads "if it's there you can't ever attack cost effectively" seems rather silly. I would like to see something that makes creep more resilient and a better zoning tool, now how to do that is up for debate, I just see it as an existing foundation that seems like it could be expanded upon. It is also much more interesting than just adding a unit like the siege tank/lurker/colossus which just sits there and does obscene damage without any micro or control required. Creep requires consistent spreading and has a very high skill (or APM I guess) cap. Instead of a siege unit I'd prefer a zergling "leap" (as they seem to have added to the single player) which could actually get the swarm into combat. now if that leap had range 6 off creep and range 12 on creep, you have a crazy zoning tool that would make opponents very careful about attacking on creep. If the leap just allowed to skip cliffs in the downwards direction it could be a lot of fun (so lings can't jump up into main bases but they can swarm down onto lower ones or out of a base after a drop or they can swarm an army from a cliff-top). Come to think of it there is also no way to reduce larvae cost ... what about an upgrade (at Hive?) to make lings be 100 minerals for 4 from 1 larvae? This would make them a much more valid late game unit. Anyways, I'm just throwing out ideas which don't involve drastic overhauls or porting in a BW unit while hopefully feeling swarmy (and avoiding the downsides of chokes and splash to some extent). | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
For a very long time I've thought that if they were to add in the lurker it would be completely screwed up. You can't build the tech structure until Lair.. Then you build the structure, make the units and evolve lurker aspect all at the same time? .. nah But Lurker from Roach actually sounds like the perfect solution Gheizen. Edit: Sixes I have no response that isn't a flame on your knowledge of playing starcraft so let me say I completely disagree with either what you're saying or how your saying it. However I would rather remain silent on then fight about something where nothing is to gain. | ||
|
Sixes
Canada1123 Posts
On August 03 2011 03:42 Probe1 wrote: ^See that is an educated opinion on creep^ Yes, creep wins fights. And it's a hell of a sexy way to have map control. But while it does boost the potential of Zerg it sure as hell never wins the fight alone. Siege tanks on the other hand.. lol Yes I did mention making creep more resilient. The issue with that is how to make creep not recede or be destroyed as fast while avoiding huge problems where the Zerg just gooped up the 3rd and it can't be taken for 10 minutes. | ||
| ||
