| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 15 2012 22:36 Stratos_speAr wrote: Blizzard is still responsible for keeping WoL as a Starcraft game; if they scrapped all of the most iconic units, it wouldn't be much of a Starcraft game. The most iconic units are still present. | ||
|
BlitzerSC
Italy8800 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
Terran kept units: Marines, Siege Tank, Battlecruiser, Ghost deleted/replaced units: Medic, Firebat, Vulture, Goliath, Valkyrie, Wraith, Science Vessel Protoss kept units: Zealot, Carrier, Observer, High Templar deleted/replaced units: Dragoon, Reaver, Shuttle, Arbiter, Dark Archon, Scout, (Shield Battery) Zerg kept units: Zergling, Hydralisk, Ultralisk, Overlord deleted/replaced units: Devourer, Guardian, Queen, Lurker, Defiler "Most iconic still in the game"? That should rather be "most built" since the tier 1 basic units of Marine, Zergling and Zealot are still there, but A LOT of other very iconic units are gone. Defiler, Scouts, Vultures, Science Vessels and more are really as iconic as your basic run-of-the-mill Marine/Zergling/Zealot AND they have special abilities and are higher tier units which are EXCITING due to the fact they are rarer than those mass troopers. The units we got instead sometimes dont really perform as well and even though the Raven was fun in the TLOwnage, they seem to be pretty much useless from a progamers point of view. Science Vessels were pretty much necessary for Terrans against Zerg (who were less mobile back then). | ||
|
Taefox
1533 Posts
Iconic units ? We got delifer, lurker, vulture, goliath, reaver arbiter removed already -.-a What the problem with Carriers when it's now useless in any matchups ( people dont even use it after all ) ? i dont get it or too many fanbois of this ? | ||
|
iNfeRnaL
Germany1908 Posts
brining the scout as an iconic unit over the goon doesn't make sense to me, but your general point still remains, they removed lotsa iconic units. just we might have little bit of different ideas which ones were truely iconic and which ones werent. | ||
|
Zoraque
Canada120 Posts
 i mean cmon, carriers so much cooler looking than tempest. The concept is so much more unique too | ||
|
Rammstorm
Germany1434 Posts
On June 25 2012 19:25 Rabiator wrote: Terran kept units: Marines, Siege Tank, Battlecruiser, Ghost deleted/replaced units: Medic, Firebat, Vulture, Goliath, Valkyrie, Wraith, Science Vessel Protoss kept units: Zealot, Carrier, Observer, High Templar deleted/replaced units: Dragoon, Reaver, Shuttle, Arbiter, Dark Archon, Scout, (Shield Battery) Zerg kept units: Zergling, Hydralisk, Ultralisk, Overlord deleted/replaced units: Devourer, Guardian, Queen, Lurker, Defiler "Most iconic still in the game"? That should rather be "most built" since the tier 1 basic units of Marine, Zergling and Zealot are still there, but A LOT of other very iconic units are gone. Defiler, Scouts, Vultures, Science Vessels and more are really as iconic as your basic run-of-the-mill Marine/Zergling/Zealot AND they have special abilities and are higher tier units which are EXCITING due to the fact they are rarer than those mass troopers. The units we got instead sometimes dont really perform as well and even though the Raven was fun in the TLOwnage, they seem to be pretty much useless from a progamers point of view. Science Vessels were pretty much necessary for Terrans against Zerg (who were less mobile back then). Scourge!!!!!!!!!!! | ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On June 25 2012 19:25 Rabiator wrote: "Most iconic still in the game"? That should rather be "most built" since the tier 1 basic units of Marine, Zergling and Zealot are still there, but A LOT of other very iconic units are gone. Defiler, Scouts, Vultures, Science Vessels and more are really as iconic as your basic run-of-the-mill Marine/Zergling/Zealot AND they have special abilities and are higher tier units which are EXCITING due to the fact they are rarer than those mass troopers. On June 25 2012 19:34 iNfeRnaL wrote: most iconic units missing are definitely vultures, dragoons and lurkers imo. OK, seriously, if Dragoons and Scouts are iconic units, then the word means nothing more than "SC1 unit." I mean, look at this list: Defilers, Science Vessels, Dragoons, etc. If you kept them all, there would be no room for anything else, and all we would have is SC1 with better graphics. And while I know that's what some of you want, stop trying to hide your desires behind this "iconic" drivel. If you want SC1 with better graphics, say so. Don't pretend that such a game would be an actual sequel or something. Everyone has their own list of what they consider to be "iconic." Blizzard isn't going to satisfy everyone, especially since there would be many people who would be unsatisfied by "SC1 with better graphics". So they've got to decide on their own what units go and what units stay. | ||
|
[F_]aths
Germany3947 Posts
On June 25 2012 19:25 Rabiator wrote: Terran kept units: Marines, Siege Tank, Battlecruiser, Ghost deleted/replaced units: Medic, Firebat, Vulture, Goliath, Valkyrie, Wraith, Science Vessel Protoss kept units: Zealot, Carrier, Observer, High Templar deleted/replaced units: Dragoon, Reaver, Shuttle, Arbiter, Dark Archon, Scout, (Shield Battery) Zerg kept units: Zergling, Hydralisk, Ultralisk, Overlord deleted/replaced units: Devourer, Guardian, Queen, Lurker, Defiler "Most iconic still in the game"? That should rather be "most built" since the tier 1 basic units of Marine, Zergling and Zealot are still there, but A LOT of other very iconic units are gone. Defiler, Scouts, Vultures, Science Vessels and more are really as iconic as your basic run-of-the-mill Marine/Zergling/Zealot AND they have special abilities and are higher tier units which are EXCITING due to the fact they are rarer than those mass troopers. The units we got instead sometimes dont really perform as well and even though the Raven was fun in the TLOwnage, they seem to be pretty much useless from a progamers point of view. Science Vessels were pretty much necessary for Terrans against Zerg (who were less mobile back then). Since SC2 is a new game and not BW in high-res, one can expect new units. The most iconic units are still present, though. SC2 will hopefully establish new higher-tier iconic units for each race. It's understandable that long-time SC1 players/viewers are attached to their old units, but it's also understandable that SC2 doesn't consider itself an SC1 remake. | ||
|
willoc
Canada1530 Posts
On June 25 2012 19:25 Rabiator wrote: Terran kept units: Marines, Siege Tank, Battlecruiser, Ghost deleted/replaced units: Medic, Firebat, Vulture, Goliath, Valkyrie, Wraith, Science Vessel Protoss kept units: Zealot, Carrier, Observer, High Templar deleted/replaced units: Dragoon, Reaver, Shuttle, Arbiter, Dark Archon, Scout, (Shield Battery) Zerg kept units: Zergling, Hydralisk, Ultralisk, Overlord deleted/replaced units: Devourer, Guardian, Queen, Lurker, Defiler "Most iconic still in the game"? That should rather be "most built" since the tier 1 basic units of Marine, Zergling and Zealot are still there, but A LOT of other very iconic units are gone. Defiler, Scouts, Vultures, Science Vessels and more are really as iconic as your basic run-of-the-mill Marine/Zergling/Zealot AND they have special abilities and are higher tier units which are EXCITING due to the fact they are rarer than those mass troopers. The units we got instead sometimes dont really perform as well and even though the Raven was fun in the TLOwnage, they seem to be pretty much useless from a progamers point of view. Science Vessels were pretty much necessary for Terrans against Zerg (who were less mobile back then). I seriously doubt you understand the definition of iconic when you bring the scout into this argument... | ||
|
Mozzery
United States140 Posts
Reasoning: Raynor drove a vulture a lot, Fenix came back as a dragoon, lurkers because F yeah lurkers | ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 05 2012 04:52 Mozzery wrote: Yeah, the iconic units gone I'd say are dragoons, vultures, and lurkers, MAYBE the wraith because it was the fricking icon for BW. Reasoning: Raynor drove a vulture a lot, Fenix came back as a dragoon, lurkers because F yeah lurkers I think the wraith was pretty iconic, despite it's lack of use. As far as the whole iconism of major franchise units thing is concerned, I don't really care. I liked seeing all the old BW units in the single-player campaign, and am still happy to see all the new units in multiplayer because it keeps the gameplay fresh. I don't think the carrier should be kept around because it's iconic, if that was the only reason I would say keep it for the LotV single player campaign, but as it currently stands, the carrier occupies a rather obscure but incredibly important niche in the Protoss arsenal. The tempest is an absolutely terrible replacement that will only make things worse, and without the carrier as the late game transition, stargate play, fragile as it already is, will completely fall apart as a style. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
Which role should the carrier fulfill? This is the question we have to answer. If we can, they might change their minds about buffing the carrier and keeping it instead of removing it. Blizzard is not completely open for reason, we have to answer it on their terms. If we don't, they'll just cover their ears and put the tempest in the game. Even though I think the tempest has a pretty cool model and is a nice concept (not saying it's going to be good or w/e I just like the model with the lightning ball and the fact that it has 22 range is pretty cool in one way). In my eyes the carrier is good in besieging bases from places unaccessable to ground units. It can be great at putting pressure on a player and forcing the player to attack under not ideal terms or suffer immense damage to bases/units. Right now toss doesn't have such a unit besides collussi, but they get picked off too easily by infestors/corruptors/... if you don't pay attention for one millisecond. Whereas the addition of more airspace (but not ground, I mean cliffs which are unaccessable to ground units) behind expansions and in key center places of the map, could reallly give the carrier a nice besieging role. Pushing the enemy back through constant interceptor fire. Now all we need is to get some buffs on the carrier so it can fulfill this role decently imo. If you think the carrier has a different reason please type it out. I listened to the interview of browder and from what I made up from it, this is the only way we can change their mind. | ||
|
SharkBait
United States36 Posts
| ||
|
dvorakftw
681 Posts
On July 05 2012 06:45 wcr.4fun wrote: browders has already said, they are inclined to keep the carrier if someone can come with an argument of why they should keep the carrier besides 'it's a cool unit'. So you have to find enemy unit compositions that require the carrier to counter, something like 50 marauders and a dozen medivacs or 100+ lings that would do too much damage to your base in the time it would take a ground army to stop. | ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 05 2012 06:45 wcr.4fun wrote: browders has already said, they are inclined to keep the carrier if someone can come with an argument of why they should keep the carrier besides 'it's a cool unit'. Which role should the carrier fulfill? This is the question we have to answer. If we can, they might change their minds about buffing the carrier and keeping it instead of removing it. Blizzard is not completely open for reason, we have to answer it on their terms. If we don't, they'll just cover their ears and put the tempest in the game. Even though I think the tempest has a pretty cool model and is a nice concept (not saying it's going to be good or w/e I just like the model with the lightning ball and the fact that it has 22 range is pretty cool in one way). In my eyes the carrier is good in besieging bases from places unaccessable to ground units. It can be great at putting pressure on a player and forcing the player to attack under not ideal terms or suffer immense damage to bases/units. Right now toss doesn't have such a unit besides collussi, but they get picked off too easily by infestors/corruptors/... if you don't pay attention for one millisecond. Whereas the addition of more airspace (but not ground, I mean cliffs which are unaccessable to ground units) behind expansions and in key center places of the map, could reallly give the carrier a nice besieging role. Pushing the enemy back through constant interceptor fire. Now all we need is to get some buffs on the carrier so it can fulfill this role decently imo. If you think the carrier has a different reason please type it out. I listened to the interview of browder and from what I made up from it, this is the only way we can change their mind. Haha, you want a reason? Setting aside all of the late-game PvZ "how do I kill infestor/BL/spine wall?" discussion and some radical new PvP stuff that's neither here nor there in the context of current meta-game, here's the best reason I can give: mech. HotS is going to make mech hugely more viable in TvP (which is excellent, imo, breaks the stale "always bio" nature of current TvP meta-game), and playing Protoss is going to be terrible with no carrier to combat mech. The carrier currently could never be used in PvT, because marines are way too good against them. But the same thing happened in BW when Terrans figured out the dragoons were pretty good against bio, eventually the carrier found use as the anti-mech when meta-game shifted towards mech-heavy play in TvP. I'd write an open letter to Browder detailing exactly how Terran's new HotS units are going to change TvP meta-game and necessitate that the carrier be left in, but it would fall on deaf ears. Blizz and Browder are biased against the carrier, they're not going to let it live. Sucks, but that's the way it is. On July 06 2012 04:59 SharkBait wrote: How am I going to go Skytoss against zerg now? Especially Brood Lord-Infestor? Void Rays? Fungaled. Phoenixes? Fungaled and/or killed by Corruptors. The Tempest? As it is pre-beta, it'll take five years before it does any damage. By that time the rest of my army will be gone and my bases destroyed. At the very least Carriers can siege Brood Lords withought getting fungaled and can be decently protected from Corropters with Void Rays. They just take so damn long to build. Quick tip: building more stargates negates the build time disadvantage. Building more at a time allows you to get sufficient numbers out in time and doesn't adversely affect your economy (carrier income cost is actually incredibly low, because of said build time). | ||
|
Xiphos
Canada7507 Posts
On July 06 2012 08:05 HelioSeven wrote: Haha, you want a reason? Setting aside all of the late-game PvZ "how do I kill infestor/BL/spine wall?" discussion and some radical new PvP stuff that's neither here nor there in the context of current meta-game, here's the best reason I can give: mech. HotS is going to make mech hugely more viable in TvP (which is excellent, imo, breaks the stale "always bio" nature of current TvP meta-game), and playing Protoss is going to be terrible with no carrier to combat mech. The carrier currently could never be used in PvT, because marines are way too good against them. But the same thing happened in BW when Terrans figured out the dragoons were pretty good against bio, eventually the carrier found use as the anti-mech when meta-game shifted towards mech-heavy play in TvP. I'd write an open letter to Browder detailing exactly how Terran's new HotS units are going to change TvP meta-game and necessitate that the carrier be left in, but it would fall on deaf ears. Blizz and Browder are biased against the carrier, they're not going to let it live. Sucks, but that's the way it is. Quick tip: building more stargates negates the build time disadvantage. Building more at a time allows you to get sufficient numbers out in time and doesn't adversely affect your economy (carrier income cost is actually incredibly low, because of said build time). Lol yeah I don't think you got that part right. | ||
|
HelioSeven
United States193 Posts
On July 06 2012 08:36 Xiphos wrote: Lol yeah I don't think you got that part right. Should always read everything twice before you post.Reavers. Reavers are pretty good against bio. Not sure what dragoons have to do with anything regarding BW mech except their role against vultures. -_- | ||
|
hitpoint
United States1511 Posts
| ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War GuemChi Dota 2 5312Calm  4679Jaedong 2477Sea  2301EffOrt 1312Soma 684HiyA 590Light 398Stork 388Snow 344[ Show more ] Counter-Strike Other Games singsing2679 B2W.Neo951 hiko914 Lowko362 DeMusliM324 crisheroes299 XaKoH  144QueenE58 Livibee24 ZerO(Twitch)17 Organizations StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
Replay Cast
Escore
INu's Battles
Classic vs ByuN
SHIN vs ByuN
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
RSL Revival
Classic vs GgMaChine
Rogue vs Maru
WardiTV Invitational
IPSL
Ret vs Art_Of_Turtle
Radley vs TBD
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
