|
On June 14 2012 00:42 Swords wrote:
Some of David Kim's answers were very good, but the stuff about the Terran "A-moving Protoss-esque deathball" option seemed terrible. One of the main problems I see in WoL is the 200/200 massed-up no-micro deathball, and adding another deathball option is only going to make this worse. It isn't fun to watch. It isn't fun to play against. It's just as effective and takes less skill (not as much multi-tasking, positioning, etc).
And this may not be the right place for it, but the Warhound seems like the epitome of a deathball, a-move unit. If I'm right about this (and tell me if I'm not), it has an auto-cast ability that auto-attacks mechanical units? Meaning it essentially target-fires without even being told what to target. To me, that just seems terrible - are we really going to have units that take basic target firing micro out of the game?
Actually I see the warhound as a hit and run unit like the hellion as it is reasonably fast and has frontloaded dmg with high cooldown.
|
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim. On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it. Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED. Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way.... Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades. So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar . Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for  . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
That's another really good point - Battle Hellion/Marauder will be insane unless Hellions need to be upgraded first.
|
On June 13 2012 23:01 Blasterion wrote:Happy Birthday Despite of all the complaint we make against Browder and Kim and etc. The interviews always make me think they're doing a great job.
I wouldn't say that "we want a terran a-move deathball option" is doing a good job.
|
On June 14 2012 00:45 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 00:42 Swords wrote:
Some of David Kim's answers were very good, but the stuff about the Terran "A-moving Protoss-esque deathball" option seemed terrible. One of the main problems I see in WoL is the 200/200 massed-up no-micro deathball, and adding another deathball option is only going to make this worse. It isn't fun to watch. It isn't fun to play against. It's just as effective and takes less skill (not as much multi-tasking, positioning, etc).
And this may not be the right place for it, but the Warhound seems like the epitome of a deathball, a-move unit. If I'm right about this (and tell me if I'm not), it has an auto-cast ability that auto-attacks mechanical units? Meaning it essentially target-fires without even being told what to target. To me, that just seems terrible - are we really going to have units that take basic target firing micro out of the game? Actually I see the warhound as a hit and run unit like the hellion as it is reasonably fast and has frontloaded dmg with high cooldown.
That's a reasonable point. I really shouldn't talk about units specifically anyways, since the game isn't out yet and we have no idea of how they'll work.
I'll just stick with the point that David Kim's attitude that Terran needs more a-move, deathball options seems like the wrong direction to go in. Hell, I'd love it if Protoss less a-move/deathball options.
|
On June 13 2012 22:22 AzureD wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 14:06 FabledIntegral wrote:On June 13 2012 13:52 AzureD wrote:Why does almost no one use Banelings + Infested Terrans to counter Archon toilets? I don't understand this. On June 13 2012 13:47 ktimekiller wrote:
ROFL Dustin is not aware of the Mothership in ZvP
Freaking pathetic awareness of his own game hes designing (ruining) Here we have an example of hearing what you want to hear. People want to find faults in people to justify their prejudices. IT can be good but the issue is that you'll still lose all your BL to archons, then toss just sacks his archons. Now what? You have no energy on your infestors - they're taking up supply, and if toss remaxes on something you're boned. You have to be careful with teh energy, and it's not like Toss throws their entire army into the toilet. It's meant to get the Zerg army coupled with Toss archons, and some blink stalkers. That's it. Which is also why banes, which are fickle due to storm and colossi being in play, are also not used. You going to throw in banes to do splash dmg to archons? It' snot like the banes get to hit every unit in the toilet - archons only work because they're so good vs the air. Also, vortex is used to phase out certain units from a battle as well, not just for the toilet. 40 Banes will destroy the vast majority of a Protoss army if he puts it in his toilet. Besides the Protoss tends to not do this at all. If a Toss does do this and it does not kill the Archons instantly he will have traded his entire army for the Zerg army inside the Vortex. If the Toss only puts in Archons and a small handeful of units then you only need a few infested terrans to cleanup what the Banes do not one shot.
And then Zerg is behind. You're going to put in forty banes to kill like 4 archons, that still manage to take out the BL's? (or at least, half their health, if only 2-3 archons)? It's not a good move, to invest so much gas in banes, not to mention they are so incredibly fragile to storm.
|
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim. On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it. Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED. Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way.... Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades. So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar . Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
no firebat were good against zealot, if supported by medic of course, the problem with bio in BW were reavers and storm, not zealots...
|
On June 14 2012 00:50 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 22:22 AzureD wrote:On June 13 2012 14:06 FabledIntegral wrote:On June 13 2012 13:52 AzureD wrote:Why does almost no one use Banelings + Infested Terrans to counter Archon toilets? I don't understand this. On June 13 2012 13:47 ktimekiller wrote:
ROFL Dustin is not aware of the Mothership in ZvP
Freaking pathetic awareness of his own game hes designing (ruining) Here we have an example of hearing what you want to hear. People want to find faults in people to justify their prejudices. IT can be good but the issue is that you'll still lose all your BL to archons, then toss just sacks his archons. Now what? You have no energy on your infestors - they're taking up supply, and if toss remaxes on something you're boned. You have to be careful with teh energy, and it's not like Toss throws their entire army into the toilet. It's meant to get the Zerg army coupled with Toss archons, and some blink stalkers. That's it. Which is also why banes, which are fickle due to storm and colossi being in play, are also not used. You going to throw in banes to do splash dmg to archons? It' snot like the banes get to hit every unit in the toilet - archons only work because they're so good vs the air. Also, vortex is used to phase out certain units from a battle as well, not just for the toilet. 40 Banes will destroy the vast majority of a Protoss army if he puts it in his toilet. Besides the Protoss tends to not do this at all. If a Toss does do this and it does not kill the Archons instantly he will have traded his entire army for the Zerg army inside the Vortex. If the Toss only puts in Archons and a small handeful of units then you only need a few infested terrans to cleanup what the Banes do not one shot. And then Zerg is behind. You're going to put in forty banes to kill like 4 archons, that still manage to take out the BL's? (or at least, half their health, if only 2-3 archons)? It's not a good move, to invest so much gas in banes, not to mention they are so incredibly fragile to storm.
To be fair, being behind is better than instantly losing.
|
On June 14 2012 00:42 Swords wrote:
Some of David Kim's answers were very good, but the stuff about the Terran "A-moving Protoss-esque deathball" option seemed terrible. One of the main problems I see in WoL is the 200/200 massed-up no-micro deathball, and adding another deathball option is only going to make this worse. It isn't fun to watch. It isn't fun to play against. It's just as effective and takes less skill (not as much multi-tasking, positioning, etc).
To be fair to DK, he did reject the idea of introducing a new death ball. He said less micro, and this hopefuly means "true" mech play. Mech is still very hard to play, maybe harder then bio, but indeed, it's not as micro intensive.
And this may not be the right place for it, but the Warhound seems like the epitome of a deathball, a-move unit. If I'm right about this (and tell me if I'm not), it has an auto-cast ability that auto-attacks mechanical units? Meaning it essentially target-fires without even being told what to target. To me, that just seems terrible - are we really going to have units that take basic target firing micro out of the game?
This is my fear to. If it pushes the siege tank out, it becomes a silly death ball. Hopefully they will make siege tanks atractive enough that you'll only build warhounds for some added mobility instead of massing them.
|
Great interviews!
I hope they won't remove the Carrier.
|
On June 13 2012 23:01 Blasterion wrote:
Despite of all the complaint we make against Browder and Kim and etc. The interviews always make me think they're doing a great job.
They talk a good game, but they have a fundamental myopia with regard to game design of SC2. I'd rather they have horrible PR and do a better job with the game design.
|
The Protoss "death ball" is effective BECAUSE Terran can't build an army of similar strength. The purpose of BH and WH is to even the ground a bit, so Terran doesn't get steamrolled by an army they CAN'T beat.
Terran gets something that can viably hold ground against a death ball, but loses out on the high speed of his bio play. Protoss gets better options to harass and deal quick damage, but loses out on the death ball. It could potentially turn the entire matchup upside down, which is a good thing(TM).
|
i had a good laugh
if the game goes into late game it has ALWAYS been about archon toilet vs NP the mothership (or NP HT for Feedback) to not die to the archon toilet (and win the game) in Europe for at least more than a year
great job observing all the trends world-wide if you really think this is a joke, Dusty.
|
I don't know if this was just me, but I felt that David Kim's interviewer seemed a little rude.
|
On June 14 2012 01:19 Cirqueenflex wrote:
i had a good laugh
if the game goes into late game it has ALWAYS been about archon toilet vs NP the mothership (or NP HT for Feedback) to not die to the archon toilet (and win the game) in Europe for at least more than a year
great job observing all the trends world-wide if you really think this is a joke, Dusty.
I was aghast that Dustin Browder never considered the NP on the Mothership and vortex. I mean, that's sort of a potentiality that could occur. If anyone should be knowledgeable about these issues, it should be him. I also don't like how he didn't mention the extreme TvZ win rate in Korea in May. it doesn't matter to me if win rates are nearly 50% for all servers and leagues.I only care about the highest levels as well as GM and master league.
|
On June 13 2012 12:17 destian wrote:
i've never seen neural parasite on a mothership. can someone please link a pro game where this happened?
There were plenty. But he asked the wrong question, he should've asked about the good vortex being the only way to win as protoss against late game zerg, therefore neural on the mothership = win as zerg.
Either way, it shows that Browder has no clue about metagames problems...
|
So many complaints about the Terran 1-A units, but all of them completely ignoring David Kim's reasoning, instead of showing why his reasoning is wrong.
|
On June 14 2012 01:35 An2quamaraN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 12:17 destian wrote:
i've never seen neural parasite on a mothership. can someone please link a pro game where this happened? There were plenty. But he asked the wrong question, he should've asked about the good vortex being the only way to win as protoss against late game zerg, therefore neural on the mothership = win as zerg. Either way, it shows that Browder has no clue about metagames problems...
Of course Browder doesn't have a clue about metagame problems, he's not the balance designer. That's DK's territory.
|
On June 14 2012 01:35 An2quamaraN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2012 12:17 destian wrote:
i've never seen neural parasite on a mothership. can someone please link a pro game where this happened? There were plenty. But he asked the wrong question, he should've asked about the good vortex being the only way to win as protoss against late game zerg, therefore neural on the mothership = win as zerg. Either way, it shows that Browder has no clue about metagames problems...
well although it is true that with good spine crawler positioning and infestor support (and mass corruptor if necessary) protoss can hardly do anything but vortex, on the other hand one archon toilet can basically kill thousands of minerals and gas just for some energy (and insta-win the game where the zerg was incredible far ahead)
on the other hand, one good NP or Feedback and the Mothership is gone, leaving the Protoss with little to no option (since baserace is really hard vs 20+ spine crawler plus buildings all over the map and huge ressource pool)
so the mothership has way too much influence over the entire PvZ lategame, and it is of course natural that players will try everything to push that edge into their favour. Not knowing that makes him look really stupid in my eyes (and really sad for the development of the game) 
|
On June 14 2012 01:48 Fragile51 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 01:35 An2quamaraN wrote:On June 13 2012 12:17 destian wrote:
i've never seen neural parasite on a mothership. can someone please link a pro game where this happened? There were plenty. But he asked the wrong question, he should've asked about the good vortex being the only way to win as protoss against late game zerg, therefore neural on the mothership = win as zerg. Either way, it shows that Browder has no clue about metagames problems... Of course Browder doesn't have a clue about metagame problems, he's not the balance designer. That's DK's territory.
Browder watches pro matches, he's not braindead and he is aware of dynamics like vortex/broodlords. He just answered an awkward question in an awkward way, it doesn't say anything about his level of awareness. Stop trying to find fault with him at all costs, it's people like that who are responsible for the fact Blizzard has barely any transparency about their design process.
|
David Kim is a smart guy. People need to give him more credit. Balancing an RTS is near impossible, we all sit back and act like we know excatly how to to it. Pro's especially act like they have all the answers, which they don't. Blizzard does a great job with all their data.
Dustin is full of passion and excitment, and I think that is more important when tackling such a difficult task. Fans of both these men of this industry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
