EPTI dont agree. Im all against any new unit or abillity that limits your opponent's micro. We need more "buff on friendly/cast on terrain" kind of units and abillities, rather than something like "DoT/debuff/slow on enemy".
Developers Update : Heart of the Swarm - Page 82
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
NukeD
Croatia1612 Posts
I dont agree. Im all against any new unit or abillity that limits your opponent's micro. We need more "buff on friendly/cast on terrain" kind of units and abillities, rather than something like "DoT/debuff/slow on enemy". | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3346 Posts
In conjunction with the Thor and Marines, Terran have excellent anti air. Especially if they implement that anti air spider mine, for mineral lines. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10668 Posts
On April 17 2012 20:21 CaptainCrush wrote: I dont understand why they cant keep the shredder in the game for map control and just make it so that it cant be deployed near minerals or gas? Just like a new nexus or CC cant be built next to mins or gas either.... terrans still need a better form of map control, I think they are just going backwards here instead of utilizing novel ideas for the good of the game. Because units that have arbitrary "rules" attached to them are BAD design. A unit that just refuses to work when near other units is just BAD design. I don't see a reason for it no to work near Terran untis anyway, just let it to friendly fire... | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On April 17 2012 19:33 AngryPenguin wrote: Zergs are actually the most "improved" race.. every new unit is cool and well designed, but I think that those units are a little bit copyed by BW, swarm host is like a lurker (not exactly.. but in some ways), you can do a swarm host contain, like on BW a common strategy was a lurker contain  And the viper, omg.. viper is a freaking cool unit, also the wole of upgrades.. "charge ultralisks", "Speed Hydras", "burrowed-mobile Banelings".. so many things that will be discusses, and probably aborted.. but it's cool.I want to focus on the zerg part a bit: How is zerg the most improved? I mean... Swarm Host is bascially just a broodlord, and when broodlords come into play detection is not an issue. So the only thing that this really changes is that if swarm hosts are lower than t3 your opponent needs to get detection sooner, but other than that they work exactly like broodlords, only that they spawn in greater intervalls. The viper is pretty cool, yea, but the reversed dark swarm only works on biological units which makes it only good against terran bio, and really terran bio can EASILY kite out of these while the tanks kill the banelings. After a typical fight it will be leftover tanks(maybe 1-2 realistically) and bio/medivacs vs zerglings/mutas, and thats already the death of zerg. What helps here is the infestor, but if you have the infestor, why get viper in the first place? EDIT: Also in ZvZ, sending out infestors to fungal pre-fight is more effective than getting the viper to reduce the damage. Well, maybe both together, but the infestor is still more useful imho. Also, vs pure pio armies it may be helpful be only if you have terran in a spot where he cannot kite, so it is not only map dependant but you also need time to tech to vipers(and keep in mind that teching to lair early in the game can cost a lot), and then again: why not infestors? They are more reliable and also make dmg. Pulling enemies can be useful, but the only viable option I see for this are colossi. There are 2 situations I can think of: Having corrupters in the back, pulling colossi and sniping them. OR: Having too much shit and want to make fun of your opponent by pulling colossi into your roachball. Speed hydras and banelings that can move are T3, while speed hydras will definitely help against protoss I don't see the baneling upgrade helping at all vs anything except zerg. Terrans will just put turrets everywhere or get a raven and protoss already have observers, zergs are lazy with their detection but with the cheap overseer they will use it more often. The ultralisk upgrade...I don't know, I fear this is only a faster way to die for them. What are they going to charge into? Bioarmies? Tanks? Maybe Protoss Deathballs, but thats all. I'd rather have them crush forcefields for my zerglings. So, I don't see zerg improved that much. Sure, the new units seem cool and could help out but in the end it will be the same kind of "style" zerg has to play with the same kind of units(Infestor/Broodlord), because in direct comparison I'd rather have the broodlord than the swarm host, it's only danger that the swarm host doesn't have are vikings and vikings are relatively easy to deal with. Please don't flame me if you think I'm wrong, this is heavy theorycrafting and I know it. It's just my thoughts I have on this one. | ||
|
mburke05
United States130 Posts
On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote: Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. really good post. echoes my sentiments 100% when i watched stuff like the battle helion and warhound (btw wtf at these names? absolutely awful. reminds me of the dumb names for stuff like the mammoth tank in C&C.) if sc2 has any chance of being alive in 11 years, like its predecessor, it will be finding new people to develop units/and balancing mechanics. because the way it's being done now is awful. | ||
|
bgx
Poland6595 Posts
| ||
|
sleepingdog
Austria6145 Posts
So why "not" test cool but questionable stuff NOW, when there's still plenty of time to remove/change it again? To me, it feels like Blizz is far too reluctant when it comes to introducing units with a highly challenging mechanics that might or might not break the game. If it breaks the game, fair enough, remove it or nerf it into obvlion until LotV can clear things up. This is EXACTLY what happened to the reaper. The idea of the unit was really cool, sadly it was abusable to a point where it broke the game. So Blizz just introduced a cruel nerf that basicly removed the unit from competitive play. Why don't they try something like that again? All the units currently presented seem to have very basic functions that offer little to a more versatile playstyle. As far as I can see, the only real risk they are taking is with the protoss harass unit. Even though I'm afraid that it will an epic fail, it is nice to see that Blizz tries to do something about the complete lack of effective protoss harassment options in midgame. TL; DR: Blizz should do much more drastic stuff NOW when there is still time. You can never know which mechanics might turn out perfectly until you actually try and give it a chance. Once LotV is out, it will be too late. HotS is perfect. On the one hand, Blizz can use the experience gained with WoL, on the other hand, there's still LotV to come, so that stuff that didn't work out as intended could be removed/changed again. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 17 2012 21:22 sleepingdog wrote: The one thing that really bothers me is that Blizz seems to be very reluctant to introduce drastic changes. I mean, it's THEIR game so it feels strange to say this as an outsider, but don't they realize that we are playing nothing but a glorified beta for now? Even with HotS, there is still LotV to come, where they will have to change stuff...again. So why "not" test cool but questionable stuff NOW, when there's still plenty of time to remove/change it again? To me, it feels like Blizz is far too reluctant when it comes to introducing units with a highly challenging mechanics that might or might not break the game. If it breaks the game, fair enough, remove it or nerf it into obvlion until LotV can clear things up. This is EXACTLY what happened to the reaper. The idea of the unit was really cool, sadly it was abusable to a point where it broke the game. So Blizz just introduced a cruel nerf that basicly removed the unit from competitive play. Why don't they try something like that again? All the units currently presented seem to have very basic functions that offer little to a more versatile playstyle. As far as I can see, the only real risk they are taking is with the protoss harass unit. Even though I'm afraid that it will an epic fail, it is nice to see that Blizz tries to do something about the complete lack of effective protoss harassment options in midgame. TL; DR: Blizz should do much more drastic stuff NOW when there is still time. You can never know which mechanics might turn out perfectly until you actually try and give it a chance. Once LotV is out, it will be too late. HotS is perfect. On the one hand, Blizz can use the experience gained with WoL, on the other hand, there's still LotV to come, so that stuff that didn't work out as intended could be removed/changed again. doesnt make sense, neither from an economical, nor esports point of view. If they use expansions as a playground, people will probably not buy them, because the game feels unfinished. Esports cant develope, if the game is not stable and most of all, blizzard will lose credibility. After all, WoL is a game on it's own, not just one third of a game. | ||
|
naastyOne
491 Posts
On April 17 2012 13:31 Falling wrote: There's a reason people get excited and cheer over marine and baneling wars. All the preplanning, set up and manuevering in the world is interesting at a cerebral level, but the moments of sheer awesomess in a game come from split second decisions and split second unit control tipping the battle ever so much in the person with better control's favour, and as they continue their superior control, they gain a greater and greater advantage until they gain the victory. If you are in mostly for instantenous moments, why in gods name you look at RTS, not FPS? Also i`m of the oppinion that in RTS strategy&tactics>>control. For the other there are other genres, fps, for example. | ||
|
Egyptian_Head
South Africa508 Posts
On April 17 2012 21:22 sleepingdog wrote: The one thing that really bothers me is that Blizz seems to be very reluctant to introduce drastic changes. I mean, it's THEIR game so it feels strange to say this as an outsider, but don't they realize that we are playing nothing but a glorified beta for now? Even with HotS, there is still LotV to come, where they will have to change stuff...again. So why "not" test cool but questionable stuff NOW, when there's still plenty of time to remove/change it again? To me, it feels like Blizz is far too reluctant when it comes to introducing units with a highly challenging mechanics that might or might not break the game. If it breaks the game, fair enough, remove it or nerf it into obvlion until LotV can clear things up. This is EXACTLY what happened to the reaper. The idea of the unit was really cool, sadly it was abusable to a point where it broke the game. So Blizz just introduced a cruel nerf that basicly removed the unit from competitive play. Why don't they try something like that again? All the units currently presented seem to have very basic functions that offer little to a more versatile playstyle. As far as I can see, the only real risk they are taking is with the protoss harass unit. Even though I'm afraid that it will an epic fail, it is nice to see that Blizz tries to do something about the complete lack of effective protoss harassment options in midgame. TL; DR: Blizz should do much more drastic stuff NOW when there is still time. You can never know which mechanics might turn out perfectly until you actually try and give it a chance. Once LotV is out, it will be too late. HotS is perfect. On the one hand, Blizz can use the experience gained with WoL, on the other hand, there's still LotV to come, so that stuff that didn't work out as intended could be removed/changed again. I see where you are coming from but each expansion must be able to stand on its own as a good game and balanced. Rather in the beta I would be happy for them to throw out a ton of units (crazy and reasonable) and weed them out as irreversible problems are found, replace WoL with more exciting HoTS units if they come up with better versions etc. The beta might need to be twice as long but for a better game I could take that. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 18 2012 01:52 Egyptian_Head wrote: I see where you are coming from but each expansion must be able to stand on its own as a good game and balanced. Rather in the beta I would be happy for them to throw out a ton of units (crazy and reasonable) and weed them out as irreversible problems are found, replace WoL with more exciting HoTS units if they come up with better versions etc. The beta might need to be twice as long but for a better game I could take that. Isn't that what they are doing right now, just not in a beta but in an alpha stage? | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 18 2012 01:53 Big J wrote: Isn't that what they are doing right now, just not in a beta but in an alpha stage? As they are still dropping units and changing the focus of others, they not content locked yet. Once they have their content locked in, that is when it moves to beta. Also, it is pretty amazing Blizzard is even telling people about the process. I can't think of another game that has told people about units in the alpha stage. | ||
|
Egyptian_Head
South Africa508 Posts
On April 18 2012 01:53 Big J wrote: Isn't that what they are doing right now, just not in a beta but in an alpha stage? Yes but I think it would be better if the community had a more active role is this part. | ||
|
QuickFast
Canada46 Posts
The tempest is currently a very long-ranged aerial siege weapon that can strike both air and ground targets. This gives the protoss army some real reach to force an engagement on their terms in the end-game. As if the Protoss death ball wasn't deadly enough... | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 18 2012 03:16 QuickFast wrote: As if the Protoss death ball wasn't deadly enough... If it turns out to be a unit that protoss can use to deal with colossi without getting more colossi, I will take it. | ||
|
Cyanocyst
2222 Posts
On April 17 2012 20:36 KeksX wrote: I want to focus on the zerg part a bit: How is zerg the most improved? I mean... Swarm Host is bascially just a broodlord, and when broodlords come into play detection is not an issue. So the only thing that this really changes is that if swarm hosts are lower than t3 your opponent needs to get detection sooner, but other than that they work exactly like broodlords, only that they spawn in greater intervalls. The viper is pretty cool, yea, but the reversed dark swarm only works on biological units which makes it only good against terran bio, and really terran bio can EASILY kite out of these while the tanks kill the banelings. After a typical fight it will be leftover tanks(maybe 1-2 realistically) and bio/medivacs vs zerglings/mutas, and thats already the death of zerg. What helps here is the infestor, but if you have the infestor, why get viper in the first place? EDIT: Also in ZvZ, sending out infestors to fungal pre-fight is more effective than getting the viper to reduce the damage. Well, maybe both together, but the infestor is still more useful imho. Also, vs pure pio armies it may be helpful be only if you have terran in a spot where he cannot kite, so it is not only map dependant but you also need time to tech to vipers(and keep in mind that teching to lair early in the game can cost a lot), and then again: why not infestors? They are more reliable and also make dmg. Pulling enemies can be useful, but the only viable option I see for this are colossi. There are 2 situations I can think of: Having corrupters in the back, pulling colossi and sniping them. OR: Having too much shit and want to make fun of your opponent by pulling colossi into your roachball. Speed hydras and banelings that can move are T3, while speed hydras will definitely help against protoss I don't see the baneling upgrade helping at all vs anything except zerg. Terrans will just put turrets everywhere or get a raven and protoss already have observers, zergs are lazy with their detection but with the cheap overseer they will use it more often. The ultralisk upgrade...I don't know, I fear this is only a faster way to die for them. What are they going to charge into? Bioarmies? Tanks? Maybe Protoss Deathballs, but thats all. I'd rather have them crush forcefields for my zerglings. So, I don't see zerg improved that much. Sure, the new units seem cool and could help out but in the end it will be the same kind of "style" zerg has to play with the same kind of units(Infestor/Broodlord), because in direct comparison I'd rather have the broodlord than the swarm host, it's only danger that the swarm host doesn't have are vikings and vikings are relatively easy to deal with. Please don't flame me if you think I'm wrong, this is heavy theorycrafting and I know it. It's just my thoughts I have on this one. Your thinking about the "Reverse Dark Swarm" the wrong way. Instead of thinking what happens to Bio if you place the Aoe on the front of the army. Think what happens if you place it on the back half of the bio. The Back half effectively won't be fighting. So if the terran just stands to fight, their only really fighting with half of the marines. If he Kites and backs up the majority his units will have to pass through the Aoe, meaning your ling/bane, should be more efficient than had the spell not been used. Last option is the Terran could aggressively move forward, however i would argue this is still better (for Zerg) seeing as you have much more likely chance of a few cost effective banes. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On April 18 2012 03:10 Egyptian_Head wrote: Yes but I think it would be better if the community had a more active role is this part. Considering every other community for every other RTS does not get any role at all, I am happy we get to know what we do. I don't know how "active" a role we can exect in a multi-million dollar expansion. | ||
|
Adreme
United States5574 Posts
On April 18 2012 02:09 Plansix wrote: As they are still dropping units and changing the focus of others, they not content locked yet. Once they have their content locked in, that is when it moves to beta. Also, it is pretty amazing Blizzard is even telling people about the process. I can't think of another game that has told people about units in the alpha stage. Beta in no way means content is locked in. They could very easily just delete a unit mid beta or delete various abilities that units have mid beta. | ||
|
StoRm_res
Switzerland891 Posts
On April 15 2012 19:41 VoO wrote: Everyone who hates argues that "SC2 should be more like Broodwar" and the opposite "Then play Broodwar, this is SC2" arguments are stupid. StarCraft 2 should have been the evolution of Broodwar. Now it's more like a bad C&C crossover which basically was verified by recycled ideas of Browder during the HotS presentation. Races were designed which much less hard mechanics to appeal to the mainstream, but which will 100% backfire since the watchability of deathballs are not as exciting as, e.g. good marine micro (one of the few examples of old fashioned BW hard mechanics in SC2). Conclusion is that C&C style units don't work for a game like SC and if Browder won't stop to implement the units from his past games, SC2 will be ruined in the long run for highest level players, i.e. we won't see any long-term consistency in player base and a decline of interest within the viewership at least for certain matchups. word. Watching the game is boring because there is almost no micro because the armies get too big too fast (zerg can max at the 12 min mark, wtf). There was a thread on TL a few weeks ago about reducing the number of mineral patches. I think this really should be the way to go, new units most likely won't make a big difference how the game plays out, because you will be able to mass them as well. Also force fields and fungal need to go, since they are not exciting to see most of the and nullify micro even more. Also ZvP is fucking boring, in the good case there will be a mass roach ling all in, in the shitty case both players turtle and build their deathball, if the vortex is good protoss wins, if the broodlord spread is good zerg wins. All these points is why we lost to LoL in my opinion. Of course I will give blizzard the benefit of the doubt because up until now, they nailed every add on for their games, and I think it will be awesome. Just fire browder and the guy who designed bnet 0.2 =) | ||
Falling
Canada11347 Posts
On April 18 2012 01:19 naastyOne wrote: If you are in mostly for instantenous moments, why in gods name you look at RTS, not FPS? Also i`m of the oppinion that in RTS strategy&tactics>>control. For the other there are other genres, fps, for example. Because I don't like FPS at all? To me control is part of tactics. I want to be able to be in control of my armies and be the deciding factor in swinging the battles to victory. The best way for me to apply my strategies is for the units to have very precise response times so I'm not waiting for it to sluggishly turn around. If I want to play all strategy and no control, I'll play a board game or a turn based game. I enjoy building and fighting with large armies, but I don't like to fight against modern unit mechanics to accomplish my strategies. | ||
| ||
