EPTThis all said, they started with an appeal to our nostalgia with the carrier and have since realized that its better to forgo such sentiments in favor of a better game.
Reluctance to Re-Introduce BW-Units - Page 12
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
This all said, they started with an appeal to our nostalgia with the carrier and have since realized that its better to forgo such sentiments in favor of a better game. | ||
|
polybios
Czech Republic111 Posts
 what if carrier had limit only on producing interceptors and could dock infinite amount of interceptors - orphans of other destroyed carriers | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3249 Posts
In short, the Swarm Host is best when placed in distant, even hidden locations, and harassing your opponent from afar. In direct engagements it is best to have your Swarm Hosts as far away as possible, with a round of locusts at the front of your units. Swarm hosts are a primarily offensive unit, useful for breaking siege lines and other entrenched positions with a slow but steady stream of units to wear down the defenses. Swarm hosts will perform absolutely terribly against masses of bio from Terran. Lurker: has a very powerful line AoE attack. The power and AoE make this a very effective unit against bio, and mean that the lurker scales very well in big engagements. Lurkers are also effective space control, especially on ramps. In short, the lurker is best right in the front lines. It functions better defensively than offensively. It is totally worthless when burrowed in a corner and hidden from your opponent. Lurkers absolutely wreck bio balls from Terran. Warhound: has a strong ground attack that does straight damage (rather than bonus damage to a specific unit type). In addition it has a special attack that auto-targets mechanical units and only mechanical units. Has no air attack. The warhound also has fairly solid hit points. In short, the warhound will work best to kill ground targets, particularly mechanical ones. In TvT it will be useful for breaking tank lines. In TvP it will be useful for killing stalkers and other mechanical targets, as well as tanking zealot damage. Goliath: has a strong, fast ground-to-air attack. Also has a rather weak ground-to-ground attack. Mechanical ground targets died about as slow as any possible target could to goliath fire. No one has ever used goliaths to break siege lines. No one ever will. In short, the goliath was reasonably effective against air targets, and pretty easily killed by ground ones. Can someone please, please explain to me how these units are even mildly similar, besides in unit model? As far as I can tell, the new units are good in exactly opposite situations of the old units. But go ahead and try to control a ramp by placing three swarm hosts at the top of it or use lurkers primarily as an offensive unit. Go ahead and try to take on tanks with a goliath or counter mutalisks with a warhound. Let me know how that goes | ||
|
Cirqueenflex
499 Posts
On June 17 2012 01:09 Kazius wrote: There is a major difference. BW units had less of a micro-limiting aspect to them. The only true micro-limiting features were Stasis and the Queen's ensnare (one of the rarest abilities used by one of the rarest units used). This is a major difference to SC2, where forcefields, broodlings, fungal, vortex and now the swarm hosts and mineral-freeze thing. This has a lot to do with the new pathfinding elements and clumping nature of the game. Where in BW goons wouldn't clump no matter how hard you tried, now units just naturally blob. Lurkers absolutely demolish clumped up units, so instead, we get less damage but a micro limit. These are also necessary to prolong battles, as they tend to be over very quickly (Protoss, I'm looking at you). There seems to be a difference in the game mechanics on a fundamental level requiring a different design attitude (or vice versa). The new units seem to be more in line with BW ideas to allow extra fluidity to the game. funny enough though, every time i watched BW zvz i asked myself: If one of these guys would actually build one Queen and use ensnare on the opponents mutalisk, wouldn't like all his scourges be nearly guaranteed to win? Wouldn't the huge win in mutas justify getting queens? Why no siege tank sniping with Queens? Why not ensnare a group of marines when the spell clearly debuffs them heavily? But then again, most of Brood War looked to me like they guy with faster hands would win most of the time, and rarely the one with the slightly better brain :/ | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On June 17 2012 09:00 ChristianS wrote: Swarm host: the Swarm Host creates small, weak, free units. These are effective for tanking damage, making the Swarm Host useful for putting in the back of pushes and putting infestors or hydralisks behind. They are also effective in absence of any enemy units, making Locusts useful for harass. Swarm Hosts will combine best with Mutas by applying two-pronged pressure, since the opponent will have to defend from both the mutas and the locusts. Because the locusts are free, the swarm host will perform best when only the locusts are at risk of dying, i.e. in offensive engagements. In defensive engagements, the swarm host will be sniped relatively easily and won't contribute all that much to the overall army strength. In short, the Swarm Host is best when placed in distant, even hidden locations, and harassing your opponent from afar. In direct engagements it is best to have your Swarm Hosts as far away as possible, with a round of locusts at the front of your units. Swarm hosts are a primarily offensive unit, useful for breaking siege lines and other entrenched positions with a slow but steady stream of units to wear down the defenses. Swarm hosts will perform absolutely terribly against masses of bio from Terran. Lurker: has a very powerful line AoE attack. The power and AoE make this a very effective unit against bio, and mean that the lurker scales very well in big engagements. Lurkers are also effective space control, especially on ramps. In short, the lurker is best right in the front lines. It functions better defensively than offensively. It is totally worthless when burrowed in a corner and hidden from your opponent. Lurkers absolutely wreck bio balls from Terran. Warhound: has a strong ground attack that does straight damage (rather than bonus damage to a specific unit type). In addition it has a special attack that auto-targets mechanical units and only mechanical units. Has no air attack. The warhound also has fairly solid hit points. In short, the warhound will work best to kill ground targets, particularly mechanical ones. In TvT it will be useful for breaking tank lines. In TvP it will be useful for killing stalkers and other mechanical targets, as well as tanking zealot damage. Goliath: has a strong, fast ground-to-air attack. Also has a rather weak ground-to-ground attack. Mechanical ground targets died about as slow as any possible target could to goliath fire. No one has ever used goliaths to break siege lines. No one ever will. In short, the goliath was reasonably effective against air targets, and pretty easily killed by ground ones. Can someone please, please explain to me how these units are even mildly similar, besides in unit model? As far as I can tell, the new units are good in exactly opposite situations of the old units. But go ahead and try to control a ramp by placing three swarm hosts at the top of it or use lurkers primarily as an offensive unit. Go ahead and try to take on tanks with a goliath or counter mutalisks with a warhound. Let me know how that goes This is exactly why blizz doesn't want to reintroduce units. Because units can't be modified to change rolls from bw to hots.. and people will complain that this isn't a lurker or this isn't a Goliath. The Goliath looks better than a thor and/or a warhound, the warhound has a new projectile rocket ability that auto targets mechanical units, which could replace what the goliath did which was projectile rockets that hit air. Or alternatively replace the thor instead of having air splash have a goliath that scales and hits air quickly. Just because it was a unit doesn't mean it can't evolve over time to serve the purpose of multiplayer. I think EVERYONE agree's that the warhound and the thor are very bad looking units and a Goliath could easily replace either of them as the model. As far as the lurker, you can easily half replicate the same effect if you make it spawn 2 bling type units. Then it'll be really good at taking out bio units just like in bw, its good for defence and offence. I don't see why people get so butthurt about changing a unit. Alternatively you can have a unit that burrows, does timed attacks but instead of a line of splash damage it'll just attack w.e it comes into contact to. Again units can be modified to fit the roles hots needs, I don't see why they have to keep making transformers, but i guess it safe gaurds them from people complaining about a BW unit being completely destroyed, like the hydra is in WoL. | ||
|
MCXD
Australia2738 Posts
On June 17 2012 07:04 mburke005 wrote: afaik, sc2 was decreasing rapidly # wise, both in stream views, MLG cast #s. This is a myth. Sometimes individual events have less viewers these days, but this is largely because of the sheer number of events, and most of the people in the know seem to agree that the total views across all events have been, if anything, increasing. And the comparison to LoL is fundamentally flawed because LoL has a ten fold larger player base. It does not in fact have anywhere near a ten fold greater viewership. | ||
|
iTzSnypah
United States1738 Posts
| ||
|
Noobity
United States871 Posts
On June 17 2012 05:22 oZii wrote: That locusts from the swarm host can hit AIR, that right there makes it different than the lurker imo completely. It can serve somewhat the role the lurker served in BW but hitting AIR is totally another dynamic that the lurker can't speak to. That was essentially my point. The units fit roles that, while similar to some BW units, aren't the same. These are different games with different units hitting different steps to meet their final goal, which is a decently balanced game. | ||
|
AsymptoticClimax
United Kingdom249 Posts
On June 17 2012 09:21 MCXD wrote: This is a myth. Sometimes individual events have less viewers these days, but this is largely because of the sheer number of events, and most of the people in the know seem to agree that the total views across all events have been, if anything, increasing. And the comparison to LoL is fundamentally flawed, because LoL has a ten fold larger player base. It has nowhere near ten fold viewership. Considering they put up the streams and their client and it has a ridiculous playerbase. Starcraft 2 is squaring up to be doing pretty well when you think of how low the numbers of sc2 copies sold were to LoLs. just goes to show it's a better spectator sport but it just gets over shadowed by LoL's viewership numbers. | ||
|
PH
United States6173 Posts
It's really sad. | ||
|
Spawkuring
United States755 Posts
And it's not like Blizzard isn't doing it right now. They put macro mechanics in because we complained how important macro was to them. HotS is putting in space-controlling and anti-deathball units like the swarm host and widow mine because we complained how SC2 was lacking in such units. If you guys don't want SC2 to be like BW, then you're already too late. It's just that for some reason, Blizzard and SC2 fans have convinced themselves that they're not trying to be BW-esque while simultaneously doing the opposite. | ||
|
Evilmonkey.
United States1628 Posts
On June 17 2012 09:08 Cirqueenflex wrote: funny enough though, every time i watched BW zvz i asked myself: If one of these guys would actually build one Queen and use ensnare on the opponents mutalisk, wouldn't like all his scourges be nearly guaranteed to win? Wouldn't the huge win in mutas justify getting queens? Why no siege tank sniping with Queens? Why not ensnare a group of marines when the spell clearly debuffs them heavily? But then again, most of Brood War looked to me like they guy with faster hands would win most of the time, and rarely the one with the slightly better brain :/ If you ever actually played BW you would know all of those answers. Queens have been used to do all of those things, but at the end of the day they just aren't justifiable in most cases. Queens were incredibly cost inefficient and required an extreme amount of micro on top of everything else you had to do. Not to mention, defilers and ultralisks were what you needed to put your gas into. It had nothing to do with the brains of those playing. If you really think you understood BW better than pros who have played the game for over a decade, you're a fool. Please keep this trash out of this discussion. | ||
|
Veldril
Thailand1817 Posts
On June 17 2012 09:42 PH wrote: New generation players don't seem to like admitting BW's superiority in nearly every regard. The designers seem to be reciprocating this, trying to make the most fundamental aspects of the game as different from BW as possible while still riding on its legacy. It's really sad. Or they just don't like it. Different opinions and generation gap I would say. | ||
|
Norada
China482 Posts
Fuck for money they could have just did what valve does, after each game you get a chance for an item drop or some chest drop that you can use so your marine/scv gets some nice hat or some nice gun(could even have it so these items cant be used for tournies/ladder). Would be so easy to add things to the game to justify the cost of it. But if the balance was just kept the same I am sure many people would be super happy, you can already see them scratch off everything they tried to made, and at the people saying "if you like the bw units then go play bw" I am sure most of the units you like and see as the best are BW units. | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
On June 17 2012 10:05 Evilmonkey. wrote: If you ever actually played BW you would know all of those answers. Queens have been used to do all of those things, but at the end of the day they just aren't justifiable in most cases. Queens were incredibly cost inefficient and required an extreme amount of micro on top of everything else you had to do. Not to mention, defilers and ultralisks were what you needed to put your gas into. It had nothing to do with the brains of those playing. If you really think you understood BW better than pros who have played the game for over a decade, you're a fool. Please keep this trash out of this discussion. Not to mention that the best player in history doesn't even have fast hands by progamer standards, Flash is godly because of his brain first and foremost. | ||
|
Masvidal
Korea (South)213 Posts
| ||
|
canikizu
4860 Posts
On June 17 2012 09:42 PH wrote: New generation players don't seem to like admitting BW's superiority in nearly every regard. The designers seem to be reciprocating this, trying to make the most fundamental aspects of the game as different from BW as possible while still riding on its legacy. It's really sad. Yeah, I agree, it makes me sad too. It's like, how dare they makes cellphones have other functions other than calling, isn't that why we call it a phone in the first place, how dare they try to change it. I mean, in the old day, those Nokia bricks was the beast, good signals, hard to break, rarely drop calls. Nowadays, all those smartphones have unneeded functions, easy to break, and drop call all the time. How dare they try to make my fundamental aspect of my phone as different as the old day while still riding on its legacy, they should be ashamed of calling it cellphone. I miss my old phone. | ||
|
green2000
Peru79 Posts
On June 17 2012 10:20 canikizu wrote: Yeah, I agree, it makes me sad too. It's like, how dare they makes cellphones have other functions other than calling, isn't that why we call it a phone in the first place, how dare they try to change it. I mean, in the old day, those Nokia bricks was the beast, good signals, hard to break, rarely drop calls. Nowadays, all those smartphones have unneeded functions, easy to break, and drop call all the time. How dare they try to make my fundamental aspect of my phone as different as the old day while still riding on its legacy, they should be ashamed of calling it cellphone. I miss my old phone. Are you joking right? | ||
|
B.I.G.
3251 Posts
| ||
|
LastDance
New Zealand510 Posts
i hate that they brought in a Command and Conquer developer to lead SC2. | ||
| ||
