EPTI also for once agree with everything that TT1 is saying .
SC2 is heading in the wrong direction - Page 33
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
raga4ka
Bulgaria5679 Posts
I also for once agree with everything that TT1 is saying . | ||
|
Belial88
United States5217 Posts
Belial88 I think you need to get off your high horse, just because someone didn't go to blizzcon doesn't mean they don't have a right to talk about it... You do realize all of the content is on the internet right? You think you know better than TT1 just because you went to blizzcon? You have a go at him for arguing about unit stats that will change when that is EXACTLY what you just did. Furthermore, most of the stuff he talked about wasn't even to do with the stats, but to do with the concepts and uses. All you do is rebut his theory craft with equally useless theory craft... No, it's not theorycraft. I actually played the units. Trust me, burrowing baneling under forcefields is the worst idea in the world. Too slow, die immediately to everything. It's like trying to use slowbanes against protoss who doesn't ff, except a million times worse. Yes, I think I know better than TT1 about the new units. Not because I'm better than him, mostly because what he says is outright wrong (things he would know if he really read about them, actually). Arc prism, for example, doesn't damage non-light units like marauders, so drops are fine. The concepts he said were just wrong. Burrow move banes to kill protoss, replicants to stop1-1-1. Also replying to 'our unit variety sucks' with 'you can change races, and the replicant should help with that' shows you have clearly missed the point. Not really. Blizzard explicitly said they aren't trying to change the race core compositions. If you don't like gateway/robo protoss armies, you shouldn't hope for HOTS to change it. Balance and design say they are mostly fine. The replicant is not there for balance or to counter anything. it's just to give protoss that creative edge, kind of like what terran has with 'too many options'. Too many people are taking it to be some combat unit, but in reality it's just a cute thing, like hellion drops or reapers, to give protoss variety. Oracle isn't exactly APM intensive... Yeah you cant A-move it, doesnt mean that a good player will be able to use it any better than your average joe. And what's wrong with discussing stuff now? You said we should wait till a year after the game is out, it's a bit late by then don't you think? We are on a discussion board after all... Discussion is fine. This is more like a witchhunt or pitchfork party. Nothing is near done yet, it isn't even alpha and blizz has said it will at least be another year before beta. There will be more units, they are definitely changing things, and they intentionally let us play with things that weren't balanced and tested yet. God forbid blizz lets us have a little fun on the show floor, we should burn them for not having a balanced HOTS out before alpha is out! Not to mention WOL is only recently balanced. That's why. Talk about balance when HOTS is out for a year. Talk about concepts now, that's fine, but bashing blizz for design problems when you are actually wrong is just ridiculous. No, burrow banes won't be used for combat. No, the swarm host is not a siege unit. No, the replicant is not made to stop 1-1-1. I won't get into this, but I do agree with Toss heading in the wrong direction. It all started with the Colossi. You can't ignore this was a bad move. It just feels to be, Blizzard has an idea in mind for the Protoss, but they just don't seem to be the good ideas. I agree, I think colossi should be removed. ZvP does not need colossi, storm is supposed to be the better unit anyways. | ||
|
KOtical
Germany451 Posts
| ||
|
ZorBa.G
Australia279 Posts
On October 27 2011 15:42 Belial88 wrote: The carrier is fine. The problem is the role. When Terran starts going mass siege tanks in lategame PvT like they did in BW, then you will see carriers. Since that doesn't happen, I'd much rather have the carrier replaced with something useful. Or, they could get rid of the marauder, immortal, and colossi so that protoss PvT becomes BW again. The Swarm Host is not a siege unit at all. You haven't played the new units, you don't know what you are talking about. It's a niche unit. It's only useful when Zerg has a huge fucking lead and the opponent is turtling, and the Zerg has a huge army contain to prevent the opponent from just going to kill the swarm hosts. It puts on mild pressure, but it will do nothing to win or lose games, it just gives Zerg options. At the moment, if the opponent goes 2 base turtle, Zerg can't do anything except expand, even if it's Masters vs Bronze. Different units. You cannot have forcefield, with colossi and storm, right? Viper allows Zerg to attack into entrenched positions, it's not as great in a battle in the open when the opponent can just pull back ITS NOT A SIEGE UNIT! THIS ISN'T SWARM HOST = LURKER!!!! Thread needs to be closed, this thread is horrible. It's a bunch of people bitching about something that isn't even in alpha yet, isn't even coming out in a year, that blizzard has specifically said they made certain units OP on the test floor to prove concept, that more units are still even going to be added, that blizz specifically said was untested because they just wanted feedback first and they wanted to try a lot of new things, more than they had time to balance. On top of that, it seems like no one went to blizzcon (obviously) so people are arguing about units they have no clue about. Only people who were even at blizzcon should be arguing, if at all. People keep thinking the swarm host is like an ACTUAL combat unit - it's not, it fills no army purpose at all! In reality, its a unit that is completely unnecessary - it just means when Zerg is winning, and the opponent is turtling, they can apply pressure. It won't mean anything in an actual close game. Yes, the tempest is OP, that's how it was released. Yes, the replicator is crazy, blizz is well aware it's probably broken as shit. Have a little more faith. I went to blizzcon, and among others who went there, we can tell you that blizzard definitely knew what the fuck they were talking about, often times more knowledgeable and aware than even the community is of issues. Watch the panels at least before judging everything. There isn't even any youtube VOD's of how these units actually play. Well, why would Blizzard regard it as a "siege unit?" From what I've seen, it's what I regard as a SIEGE unit. I really couldn't care less if you went to Blizzcon or not. But I'll tell you now, everyone has a right to put forth their opinion on this game. I didn't pay cash for a game that might turn out like shit. On the subject of infestors, vipers, banelings. Do you have any common sense? Really? Infestors + Vipers will render your WHOLE army useless! Especially the way units tend to clump, this is pathetic. Whilst the infestors and vipers have your army on lockdown, it's not exactly hard just to a move your banelings now is it? What toss meant to do? Mass recall their army ever damn time they push out? Never mind ling runbys. Whats Terran meant to do? Mass ghost and tanks? Geez, that shredder better freaking do shitloads of damage at the least to let Terran expand for that army comp. You may as well just say. OK, late game Zerg... well GG. Don't even bother. I don't mean to deviate away from the topic. From the sounds of your post, it seems like you just wanted to type a whole tldr just to rebut me. What evs, dosn't bother me. This thread is about where SC2 is heading, and simply put...... I don't like. But hey, I'm only 1 person. To blizzard I'm nothing, but it will be a shame if heaps of other people feel the same way I do. | ||
|
Hectic
Australia159 Posts
by the way, why was the carrier never tweaked? it's like they removed it without ever making it more attractive. The BC got buffs, why not the carrier? | ||
|
TheOnlyOne
Germany155 Posts
On October 27 2011 21:43 Hectic wrote: I also hate the idea of the replicant. Whether it's balanced or not, i just hate the idea. by the way, why was the carrier never tweaked? it's like they removed it without ever making it more attractive. The BC got buffs, why not the carrier? Blizzard does not like to mess with units ; while they do for others. Theirs units like the Zealot and the Bunker that are "over-changed", they jump from one change to the other and backwards, no end in sight. For other units, like the Carrier, they really never tryd to change anything , they simply knew its a bad unit and ignored it, as Colossus and Templer were allready strong enough, so its way easier to balance a game if you can totally ignore the "bad" Carrier. Its like the Reaper, if they wanted they could make it work, but they choose to nerf it so much that its just a gimmick unit, and they knew that, as its the easiest way to remove a problem. Then we have Overseer, it could easily be reduced to a "max 1 per Hatch" unit or something like that with a greatly reduced cost, but instead they did not really touch it, till one of the last patches ; which slighty helped, but did not make the cut. Plenty of stuff to talk about, but in the end Blizzard "trys" its best, but in the end too less actual happens. | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
People asked for a cheap, early-game harrass on a main tech path thats relatively expendable and can both harrass and fill the gap in scouting between your initial probe and the observer. Like how Terran can use the reaper (admittedly has problems, but search around for that thread about "why protoss should get the reaper" or something like that, pretty interesting discussion) and (at least for the "scouting" part) how Zerg can just sacrifice an overlord or (for both scouting and harrass) do a quick zergling runby. Instead they've proposed an expensive harrass unit that doesn't actually kill workers (so theres no actual "loss" of minerals, just a delay) and is on Stargate tech, which generally ends up being a dead tech line because you pretty much need the ability to kill infantry fast with something (usually splash damage) to survive against Terran (Marines) or Zerg (everything) and theres nothing on there that gives it with the arguable exception of Carriers. But Carriers come with their own host of problems. People asked for the Carrier to be fixed up in order to make Stargate much more viable as an actual tech choice going into mid-game and late-game. Instead they're looking at removing it entirely in favour of the Tempest. Which doesn't really address the fundamental problems of Protoss air to be frank. People asked for a basic army choice. Something to offer a new dimension to ground armies aside from the same old Colossus/Gateway deathball. Instead we get another gimmicky unit that can copy other units. Which is about as lazy an idea as you can get and frankly seems to indicate they're just out of ideas. And in all honesty I don't play Protoss to copy Terran Siege Tanks. Regardless of whether any of these units are any GOOD they don't actually address the problems that have been raised. On a side note I don't quite get all the "remove Colossus" hating. Personally I just think its badly balanced but that as a unit concept it has potential. Doing something with it to make positioning more important would improve things immeasurably in my opinion. As it stands you CAN do some good things with Colossi positioning, but in general they just get dumped into the ball of death and a-moved. Making that positioning more important would fix deathball syndrome quite a bit I think. | ||
|
k10forgotten
Brazil260 Posts
On October 27 2011 22:29 Lightspeaker wrote: On a side note I don't quite get all the "remove Colossus" hating. Personally I just think its badly balanced but that as a unit concept it has potential. Doing something with it to make positioning more important would improve things immeasurably in my opinion. As it stands you CAN do some good things with Colossi positioning, but in general they just get dumped into the ball of death and a-moved. Making that positioning more important would fix deathball syndrome quite a bit I think. People hate colossus because it's a unit that you can just a-move. There's no micro, no special ability, no nothing. A-move, that's it. It's uninteresting, since you have warp-prism (two modes), high templar (feedback and storm), you can lift units with phoenix... Even the carrier requires you to focus fire, to have maximum DPS. And it is the most important unit in the Protoss composition - since it deals AoE damage (I always read "Age of Empires damage" first T_T). If, I don't know, it was more fragile (than it already is) it would require a warp prism babysitting it (like reavers and shuttles)... But it can be attacked by air and ground... So.. removing the "armored" type also to prevent vikings to huge damage? Then what about corruptors and void rays? I don't know. It seems like it doesn't have anything they could do to fix the colossus besides removing it (or taking a long time to see what could be done to make the colossus interesting). Which they can't, since it became "iconic" and there are many players that would go crazy. "Y U REMOVED COLOSSUS" blah blah blah | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
edit : its the same story over and over again, while we were crying our eyes out before release about macro, they just secretly fucked micro down | ||
|
BileHazard
United States8 Posts
| ||
|
Xalorian
Canada433 Posts
Maybe they didn't showed us any "super duber cool toss units" at the HoTS pannel simply because some changes are planned BEFORE HoTS in a regular WoL patch? | ||
|
BurningSera
Ireland19621 Posts
The major difference between current and old blizzard design team is that the old team didnt try to 'control' the current metagame (just compare the scbw and sc2 changelog) - they let the players play out the game naturally. and i believe the business model of releasing sc2 plays a big role too, WoL is focusing mainly on Terran seems like unavoidable, pretty much hinders the development process for toss/zerg and thus the 'broken' feeling of each race atm. WoL is not even a half product of SC2 lol | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On October 27 2011 22:45 k10forgotten wrote: People hate colossus because it's a unit that you can just a-move. There's no micro, no special ability, no nothing. A-move, that's it. It's uninteresting, since you have warp-prism (two modes), high templar (feedback and storm), you can lift units with phoenix... Even the carrier requires you to focus fire, to have maximum DPS. And it is the most important unit in the Protoss composition - since it deals AoE damage (I always read "Age of Empires damage" first T_T). If, I don't know, it was more fragile (than it already is) it would require a warp prism babysitting it (like reavers and shuttles)... But it can be attacked by air and ground... So.. removing the "armored" type also to prevent vikings to huge damage? Then what about corruptors and void rays? I don't know. It seems like it doesn't have anything they could do to fix the colossus besides removing it (or taking a long time to see what could be done to make the colossus interesting). Which they can't, since it became "iconic" and there are many players that would go crazy. "Y U REMOVED COLOSSUS" blah blah blah Yeah, I get all that but what I mean is that I honestly think its workable as an idea, its just horrendously executed. But without it Protoss would be kinda crippled as it is currently set up so its incredibly hard to remove. I'm not saying its going to be a small change that'll fix it. It'd have to be something drastic, a combination of things to ensure its a potent weapon but that more micro is needed to keep it alive. As a hesitant guess a combination of tweaks to range, HP, tags and speed might work but I'm not a game designer so I couldn't say exactly what tweaks would be needed. I just think people are too quick to flat out call for removal; especially given that removal is unlikely unless they seriously rework most of how Protoss is set up. It'd be a much better use of everyone's time to try and brainstorm some ideas that someone important might pick up on. | ||
|
Dfgj
Singapore5922 Posts
On October 27 2011 16:47 raga4ka wrote: I already gave up on protoss . The race in WoL felt like playing a mixture of WC3 and C&C and with HOTS coming it's only geting worse , but i guess the WC3 players seem to like it so whatever as long as blizzard doesn't mess with Terran and Zerg i could live with enjoying playing and watching only 2 races . It's sad really , but what can you do ... at this point Blizzard needs to scrap a hell of a lot of work to safe this sinking ship . If they want to save protoss they should take only the fundamentals and redesign everything from scratch and i don't see it happening . I also for once agree with everything that TT1 is saying . I know a fair few former WC3 players that were top SEA GM tosses that quit because they couldn't stand issues with the race. | ||
|
Silidons
United States2813 Posts
On October 27 2011 23:07 Xalorian wrote: I kinda feel, for one, that we really don't know anything that is planned at all. Maybe they didn't showed us any "super duber cool toss units" at the HoTS pannel simply because some changes are planned BEFORE HoTS in a regular WoL patch? this is blizzard. do you think this is EA? | ||
|
MorroW
Sweden3522 Posts
you talk about easying up the game, thats a concern for me too. i want this game to be really difficult and i think they are starting to find a good balance for it but im not 100% satisfied in an ideal world, but ill get to that later. i dont want that at all. why i said ur statement was wrong is because i still wanna upgrade drops with zerg because it gives more speed and a 200hp "shield" to my banes, plus i can drop them in the center of the toss army dealing more splash, where as burrowed banes moving towards toss army would probably just get melted by storm you talk about basic mechanics. how melee and range units interact with each other. you want this if i understand you correctly to be a masterpiece genius micro control like it was in broodwar. when you had a few dragoons (kinda like a stalker) a shuttle (warp prism) and a reaver (aoe support unit, sort of like a colossus if u compare the games). anyhow if u had a battle like that in pvp it was a master peice to be able to micro that. you dodged dragoon projectiles with the shuttle, you helped the reaver drop in and out to avoid getting targeted in the battle. you backed off with units that were hurt somewhat, and you focus fired enemy units. like everything was just so complicated and really really hard to micro with just a few basic units, even a mirror composition that was like the avarage pvp looked like this. now if i move this thought to sc2. sure sc2 has amazing micro in some cases. but i cant help to think there are too many basic unit scenarios where micro is just not as significant or complicated, or as dynamic. something i really love tho is marine micro against zerg in general. and how the siege tank works vs zerg too. but when i look at something like roach vs roach, i dont really see how i can overcome a bigger army with micro superiority. pvp colossus gateway unit was is kinda eh compared to the pvp micro in sc1. im not saying sc2 doesnt have micro at all, its actually really much micro in there that people havent mastered yet and its pretty cool. but sc1 was just like this, amazing reward for better micro. if you actually a-moved with marines into zerglings in sc1 they would react slower to start attacking compared to if i a-moved and a-moved once more when they were in range on the exact. this is an example of the the flawed engine made units more "stupid" but still allowing units to move exactly how you wanted them to if your micro was godlike. i think the main point im trying to drive at here is that sc1 micro just had this amazing gap between terrible micro and really good micro, where as in sc2 units kinda work how you want them to without telling them. you dont really use a warp prism to dodge stalker attacks cause the projectile of the stalker is so fast for example. and this can be improved by blizzard. they can make units more microable for example by making emp a projectile so as toss u can dodge the emp if your really fast. and if your even better terran you can predict toss movements to hit the emp perfectly etc. this is how emp worked in sc1. in sc2 you just put down a emp and your done with it. again im not saying sc2 is worse than sc1 (although its true that sc1 is harder/better esports game on some parts). and im not saying they should make sc2 like sc1. i think sc2 is a really amazing game. but i for sure understand what ur talking about the new spell arc shield i already talked about so ill just sum it up. theres a big risk this spell just becomes like supply drop, you dont really wanna do it but you do it sometimes because you fucked up. and this spell is here to help people who fucked up. it has a strategic reason which sounds good if everything works out but most likely its just gonna end up like supply drop has my opinion on tempest. no i dont think this unit will just be good vs mass mutalisk like blizzard says. (usually what blizzard says about a unit is extremely basic to make casual players understand). i think tempest can be used in tvp to deal with vikings, i think it will deal with broodlord corruptor aswell. the unit does seem kind of harcounter-like and straight forward tho that you cant really micro so i think that is something they need to improve upon this unit. it seems uninteresting but i dont think its as "make this guy if they make this stuff" kinda unit the oracle seems to be something that just fits into the standard game, just have it around and be annoying with it, like warp prism harass. sure the oracle has a role (like they said its not meant to fight in battles) but i still think the oracle has a huge wide of range that it can help. i think it can be useful perhaps from early game to late late game, vs terran and zerg. the replicant is a unit im not sure of. it seems abit silly. and i do agree its not starcraft-like. the reason i think its silly is because i dont like the idea of a unit that just turns into another unit without anything between there to make it interesting. the dark archon was much cooler and dynamic with its mind control. you had to get close to your target, then you take over that unit permanently and in return it destroyed the dark archon shield to make it really fragile. its just alot more interesting than a unit that just says "i wanna be a siege tank" and then becomes one without any spice to it the viper to me just seems like amazing unit design in overall. perhaps its even too good and too versatile (maybe same problem as infestor imo). swarm host however i think its gonna be really complicated. i dont think anyone will just throw in a couple of swarm hosts into ur comp and make it worthwhile like the infestor is. i believe swarm host is gonna be really situational but i do love this unit however to sum up my general opinion. i think hots is making a big leap forward and i think its gonna make the game harder, better, more dynamic and cooler. there are however a few concerns that some of their ideas wont be used as much for strategical or calculated moves (which ideally they would be) as much as just flat out making stuff too forgiving (arc shield for example if your out of position or get surprised by a drop or so because lack of scouting and knowledge. or using mass recall to get home just because you entered a battle where you fucked up). i do love the idea of making core things about the game harder, more complicated and better designed to promote skill and as i said before making stuff emp a projectile would help with that. making just basic scenarios take more skill (for example roach vs roach) is an idea i like but i dont know how to actually make it better without dumming up the ai in some way. | ||
|
MisterFred
United States2033 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
On October 27 2011 21:43 Hectic wrote: I also hate the idea of the replicant. Whether it's balanced or not, i just hate the idea. by the way, why was the carrier never tweaked? it's like they removed it without ever making it more attractive. The BC got buffs, why not the carrier? It got changed a little, but since it never got used, they will only have what their testers found out and it seems to work for them ;o . I actually liked the change, while most others hated it. As a gamedeveloper you really need a thick skin, (luckily good payment helps there). But those forum rants really make you wanna drop the project. I mean they never intended to change multiplayer at all. And now they are going to balance three games, just for the qqers. Guess if you give em something they will want more. I don't mind really pro gaming will have 3 versions to choose from so to say. And for me the expansion looks like broodwar, that unit owns in sc1, add something to fight against it. That unit sucks, lets add something to support it and now lets throw in a few more spells. Lets see beyond the dark portal was similar and frozen throne as well. And every expansion rocked, i guess they know what they are doing (- listening to the community that posts on the forums  ).The only sad thing is, people hate this unit and never going to use it because of the forum trolls, we can remove it rather then letting it stay ingame like the scout. | ||
|
pezit
Sweden302 Posts
On October 27 2011 23:12 Lightspeaker wrote: Yeah, I get all that but what I mean is that I honestly think its workable as an idea, its just horrendously executed. But without it Protoss would be kinda crippled as it is currently set up so its incredibly hard to remove. I'm not saying its going to be a small change that'll fix it. It'd have to be something drastic, a combination of things to ensure its a potent weapon but that more micro is needed to keep it alive. As a hesitant guess a combination of tweaks to range, HP, tags and speed might work but I'm not a game designer so I couldn't say exactly what tweaks would be needed. I just think people are too quick to flat out call for removal; especially given that removal is unlikely unless they seriously rework most of how Protoss is set up. It'd be a much better use of everyone's time to try and brainstorm some ideas that someone important might pick up on. The colossus is unsalvageable because it is bad design from the ground up. We have this deathball problem and here's this unit that cannot act alone, it walks on top of other units, it's just an a-move unit and it overlaps with stargate units because it's countered by AA. But no, let's remove the carrier instead because the colossus fills its role so much better  | ||
|
JediGamer
United States656 Posts
This is the exact same thing that happenned when SC2 was released. All random people making threads saying how SC2 was going to kill esports , and not be fun to view, and no skill and such. Then they all moved to SC2 once they realized it was just as fun and now the unit changes in the release restarted the cycle. | ||
| ||
