EPTBlizzard just doesn't care about its fans feelings on the franchise...
We Must Fight For The Carrier - Page 24
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Affluenza
United Kingdom214 Posts
Blizzard just doesn't care about its fans feelings on the franchise... | ||
|
Ventor
United States336 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:39 Affluenza wrote: If Lurker couldn't make it into the game based on iconic-ness I don't see what chance the Carrier has based on the same nostalgia and iconic representations. Blizzard just doesn't care about its fans feelings on the franchise... Do you realize how quick the game would die if all the nostalgic units were put into the game and balance was not their concern? People are so selfish these days and can't see past their own desires. | ||
|
MichaelDonovan
United States1453 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:18 frozenrb wrote: I had to check on google how they look, that often they are used. You could have just played the game. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
| ||
|
JiYan
United States3668 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:45 Ventor wrote: Do you realize how quick the game would die if all the nostalgic units were put into the game and balance was not their concern? People are so selfish these days and can't see past their own desires. Balance can always be tweaked, but the existence of units cannot. The carrier is one of the most iconic units in the game following probably the zergling, hydralisk, zealot, and siege tank. | ||
|
Affluenza
United Kingdom214 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:45 Ventor wrote: Do you realize how quick the game would die if all the nostalgic units were put into the game and balance was not their concern? People are so selfish these days and can't see past their own desires. Riiight... Blizzard announced the Swarm Host which is essentially a Lurker but shitter in many respects... The Viper is essentially the Defiler but with more casting abilities... Blizzard has gone out of its way to pretend they don't wanna go down the bw route but they introduce new units very similar to bw units just under a new name and and try to tell us differently. | ||
|
a176
Canada6688 Posts
On March 05 2012 04:37 Forikorder wrote: sure for some BW peeps who havent gotten it through there heads this isnt BW2 the carrier is a cool unit that is the entire point of this discussion. blizzard could either A) actually try to fix their game and include the carrier, a staple of the starcraft universe, or B) take the easy (read: dumb) way out and introduce new units as a quickfix bandaid for their broken game | ||
|
frozenrb
Poland389 Posts
Yea I didn't play game for a loooooong time. Maybe I should, but at my lvl of play where people copy pro's and try do tournament things, builds I saw Carrier maybe once in three months. edit. Don't you thing that unit witch isn't used since beta no matter other units patch changes, should be removed ? I feel like many units from BW aren't as good like there were in BW. Hydras... even scv's :D | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
Icons. I hate icons, in games, comics, etc. Wherever they are, they always make things worse. Blizzard had a potentially interesting unit in the Tempest (no, not the HotS Tempest, the original one). It's shields didn't work on air attacks, which focused it into a GtA role, and probably meant that it wasn't very expensive. But no, fan outcry said, "We want Carriers!" So they converted a potentially good unit into Carriers. SC2 needs to be its own game, with its own iconography. It needs to stand on its own, not ride the coatails of something else. I would have loved to see Zerglings, Hydras, Mutalisks, Zealots, Siege Tanks, Marines, and yes Carriers all get the axe. No returning units except workers. A new dynamic for a new game. They could have taken each race back to first principles and shown us how those concepts worked with a different tech tree and a different set of units. But no, Blizzard wanted "iconography." So they kept Siege Tanks, when Thors offered an interesting alternative (again, pre-alpha Thors, not the crap we got in beta and release). They kept Hydras despite the Zerg having a completely different dynamic from SC1 that left Hydras in a wierd place. And so forth. So what we have is a horrible half-state. The old units keep getting in the way of different ideas, while the new units are constantly railed against for not being ones that were removed. As for the Carrier's "iconic" status, I don't see it. My abiding memories of SC1 Protoss matches are, in order: 1. Shuttle/Reaver micro murdering workers 2. Dragoon micro around mines 3. Sexy Arbiter usage 4. Storm blankets These are the things that I consider "iconic" about Protoss in SC1. That's what I think of when I think SC1 Protoss. Carriers and Carrier micro were always "meh" to me. They always felt like a gimmicky strategy, something you use on the few maps that allow it. Not something solid or standard. | ||
|
frozenrb
Poland389 Posts
Very good post! NicolBolas, comics are great example here. | ||
|
DreamChaser
1649 Posts
Personally blizzard should keep the carrier in imo, its a unit that is rarely seen. If anybody ever tries to go carriers you know everybody in the crowd is getting excited. Even if they lose it was like when people thought the mothership sucked. HuK tried to mothership rush and it worked once in an MLG game. Never had i seen Day9 and the crowd so excited, thats what the carrier brings. Its not a "winning" strategy but its something that is just exciting and fun to watch no matter how bad the unit is. Video + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Ventor
United States336 Posts
On March 05 2012 06:02 Affluenza wrote: Riiight... Blizzard announced the Swarm Host which is essentially a Lurker but shitter in many respects... The Viper is essentially the Defiler but with more casting abilities... Blizzard has gone out of its way to pretend they don't wanna go down the bw route but they introduce new units very similar to bw units just under a new name and and try to tell us differently. What's your point? The units you stated serve specific rolls like siege and casting. They are only similar in the roll they provide, the way they go about is completely different. | ||
|
Ventor
United States336 Posts
On March 05 2012 05:56 JiYan wrote: Balance can always be tweaked, but the existence of units cannot. The carrier is one of the most iconic units in the game following probably the zergling, hydralisk, zealot, and siege tank. Would people be complaining if they didn't have the carrier at WoL release? No. Just like people aren't bitching about how firebats aren't in the game. Blizzard obviously didn't really feel the carrier fit and that's why they havent buffed or changed it. So let it go and stop being children whining when you don't get what you want. | ||
|
frozenrb
Poland389 Posts
On March 05 2012 06:14 DreamChaser wrote: Will i now need new outrageous builds for when i team? No more carrier rushes? Personally blizzard should keep the carrier in imo, its a unit that is rarely seen. If anybody ever tries to go carriers you know everybody in the crowd is getting excited. Even if they lose it was like when people thought the mothership sucked. HuK tried to mothership rush and it worked once in an MLG game. Never had i seen Day9 and the crowd so excited, thats what the carrier brings. Its not a "winning" strategy but its something that is just exciting and fun to watch no matter how bad the unit is. People get excited because carrier usage is so much risk, that it isn't funny. People don't think " o shit BW unit... carrier so good so rarely seen", people think... " he can't be serious, if that works I will eat my shirt", they are hoping carrier to work for the same reasons that many people want to have it in Hots... it's just a symbol. | ||
|
Clbull
United Kingdom1439 Posts
| ||
|
Footler
United States560 Posts
| ||
|
frozenrb
Poland389 Posts
On March 05 2012 06:19 Footler wrote: Call me crazy but couldn't Blizzard just leave the Carrier in the game as is for no other reason than the fact that it is iconic for the protoss? It's not like it is (currently) affecting balance in any way. It's unused place on hard-drive, the same reason people want to drive electric cars. It's bad for ecology. | ||
|
Fealthas
607 Posts
| ||
|
Affluenza
United Kingdom214 Posts
On March 05 2012 06:15 Ventor wrote: What's your point? The units you stated serve specific rolls like siege and casting. They are only similar in the roll they provide, the way they go about is completely different. Haha hilarious... Ok so its not the roles that units play its the way they go about that is imba? Riiiight...you have absolutely idea what you are talking about and need to stop Brown nosing. | ||
|
Ventor
United States336 Posts
On March 05 2012 06:23 Affluenza wrote: Haha hilarious... Ok so its not the roles that units play its the way they go about that is imba? Riiiight...you have absolutely idea what you are talking about and need to stop Brown nosing. When did I say they were imba? You're just pulling shit out of your ass and I have no idea what you're trying to argue. You really should gather your ideas before spewing nonsense all over these forums. And by the way, laughing at me doesn't strengthen your 'argument'. | ||
| ||
