EPTReluctance to Re-Introduce BW-Units - Page 14
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
TechNoTrance
Canada1007 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 12:57 Nazza wrote: It's not that you need more splash damage, it's that you need more map control. Units that, if the other player attacked into, would be extremely cost inefficient. Siege Tanks up a cliff, for example. The problem with the colossus is that it is really mobile for its damage output. I completely agree my friend. If the colossus stays in the game, it should become slower but do more damage and one shot more things. If not, it should be replaced by something that does. Also, high-ground mechanics will help if re-introduced, as will making detection not a commodity (EG observer building back and making scan cost the terran more). | ||
|
sc14s
United States5052 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:18 TechNoTrance wrote: This isn't BW 2.0. It is a different game, with different units, with different roles. You can't just throw the reaver into the protoss army, because they already have HT and colossi. Nobody's suggesting that the colossus and reaver would coexist. They say that the colossus should become more interesting (eg more extreme strengths/weaknesses) and more legible. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:19 sc14s wrote: honestly this thread has been posted many times before why is this even being talked about still when blizzard has stated many times that it isn't going to happen? Don't you think the discussions here have influenced the units currently proposed for Hots? Do you think they would have considered bastardized implementations of arbiters, defilers, goliaths, and spider mines were it not for our outcry from the initial preview? We have influence, and TLers understand better than anyone the foundational principles behind BW's greatness. Few of us want SC2BW, but there are many who see big holes in SC2 compared to the richness of BW. | ||
|
baubo
China3370 Posts
| ||
|
Witten
United States2094 Posts
On June 17 2012 01:23 lorestarcraft wrote: Have you guys seriously played BW? That game is awful! And it's not even close to the level of balance that SC2 is. They just "balanced" it through maps and even then, 1 race is seriously UP. Dustin Browder's enthusiasm for the game and his team dedication to balance and creative is awesome. Any who say other-wise are talking from their butts. Regardless of whether this is serious or a troll, this is one of the funniest things I've ever read. That being said, I've found a way to separate the games in my mind, BW is the one I play, Sc2 is the one I watch. I'm super sad that the BW pro scene is essentially, but that doesn't mean I still can't enjoy playing BW at the awful skill level that I play it at. | ||
|
sigma_x
Australia285 Posts
| ||
|
jimmydu444
Canada250 Posts
I like how Dustin Browder refuses to acknowledge this and tells us to play BW instead if we want to use BW units and yet is killing off the BW scene. Blizzard has turned into Activision. Blizzard had a gold mine of a franchaise to build on and they decide to do everything in their power to screw it up instead. Now BW pros are turning to League of Legend instead, for shame. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:36 sigma_x wrote: I don't know why the argument that SC2 is a completely different game to BW exists. Obviously they aren't different games, one is the sequel of the other. There really should be no issue about borrowing ideas from BW to use in SC2, given that BW has a decade long tested history of what works and what doesn't. That doesn't mean units have to be copied from BW, it's enough that they take the concepts behind their unit design and adapt them to SC2. Given that Browder has spoken in interviews (especially in the MLG TL interview) on similar terms, and given that units like viper and swarm host do that, i don't really see the issue. Adaptation is fine as long as it isn't done in a band-aid way or a way that directly conflicts with blizzard's own objective to maintain racial distinction. Here are a few disconnects I see with the current HotS unit mix: Oracles cloak costs mana - this should be passive, protoss units never cloak for mana. Buildable suicide units are a zerg thing. Keep widow mines if you want, but give them to a unit (reaper, hellion, warhound, etc) Why not just give the carrier 22 range to appease the fans? Why insist on the tempest? Limiting recalls to be only defensive - why? Limiting dark swarm to only bio? so arbitrary, why? Mothership core too similar to PF and unnecessary Entomb is very abitrary and corner case It's not exciting when you have detection in every tech path. make players make tough choices and take risks. Too many anti-tank units. Why are we so afraid of the siege tank being good? Too many high supply units. | ||
|
SCMothership
United States187 Posts
| ||
|
SCMothership
United States187 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:57 0neder wrote: Adaptation is fine as long as it isn't done in a band-aid way or a way that directly conflicts with blizzard's own objective to maintain racial distinction. Here are a few disconnects I see with the current HotS unit mix: Oracles cloak costs mana - this should be passive, protoss units never cloak for mana. Buildable suicide units are a zerg thing. Keep widow mines if you want, but give them to a unit (reaper, hellion, warhound, etc) Why not just give the carrier 22 range to appease the fans? Why insist on the tempest? Limiting recalls to be only defensive - why? Limiting dark swarm to only bio? so arbitrary, why? Mothership core too similar to PF and unnecessary Entomb is very abitrary and corner case It's not exciting when you have detection in every tech path. make players make tough choices and take risks. Too many anti-tank units. Why are we so afraid of the siege tank being good? Too many high supply units. Whoops hit submit way too soon, but I think the idea of a range increase to the carrier would be kinda kook, but may take away any chance of micro if it is too large of an increase, like 22. Also the mother ship core is nothing like a pf. One, you cannot repair, two the attack doesn't do splash, and three, it can be transported to different nexuses. As far as the oracle goes, the core has an ability that can give a unit full energy, basically making the cloaking ability free right at the start, but to be permanent and free is too much for a unit that can be built rather quickly. Lastly, the mother ship still has the ability to cloak offensively you just have defensive capabilities early, which allow the protoss to move out with ease of mind knowing they can retreat easily, actually making it facilitate offense | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On June 17 2012 01:00 jalstar wrote: It's lose-lose for Blizzard. If they bring back exact copies they get flamed for lacking creativity. If they add new units they get flamed because there was nothing wrong with BW units, so why change them? The problem is that SC2 has changed core mechanics for the three races (MULE+Reactor, larva inject+larva stockpiling, Chronoboost+Warp Gate) and this makes it necessary to change units. In BW you could produce Marines at the same rate as tanks ... 1 per production building ... but SC2 changed that and I dont think it was for the better, because it makes the game more volatile and thus harder to balance. In BW you didnt have Zerg's unlimited reproductive ability which they have in SC2, no stockpiling of larvae from injects, and thus you had to be kinda careful with your units until you had enough hatcheries. Now its just a question of resources. Thus in BW the defiler cloud was ok, but for SC2 the Viper cloud it is extremely dangerous and imbalanced. There have to be adjustments when it comes to copying BW units and one of the most mishandled examples is the Carrier. It got into SC2 by being an iconic unit, but the new situation on the battlefield (stimmed marines in a perfectly tight ball in "unlimited numbers") render it useless very fast. This *could* be fixed in a lot of ways, but Blizzard is doing nothing instead. Maybe it is delayed to the Protoss expansion, but that would be such a shame. Blizzard really should have added a BW mod for the fans. | ||
|
redviper
Pakistan2333 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:57 0neder wrote: More variety isn't bad. Infact were there buildable suicide units for Zerg in BW?Buildable suicide units are a zerg thing. Keep widow mines if you want, but give them to a unit (reaper, hellion, warhound, etc) Why not just give the carrier 22 range to appease the fans? Why insist on the tempest? Because variety is a good thing. 22 range with interceptors? It won't be fun to watch. Limiting recalls to be only defensive - why? Because offensive recalls are fucking ridiculously overpowered with the clumping and in particular slow terran armies. Limiting dark swarm to only bio? so arbitrary, why? Its not dark swarm. I have no idea why people think its dark swarm. And no fungal isn't dark swarm either. Mothership core too similar to PF and unnecessary Since no more KA its hard to defend protoss basis. Something like PF is necessary. Actually I think Zerg needs something like that also. If swarm hosts cost less supply it would be great. Meanwhile zerg will lose bases but do get the chance to counter quickly. Entomb is very abitrary and corner case Entomb is one hell of a cool ability. Its really unique because it can be done quickly, continuously with little risk (oracles seem hella fast). The damage isn't overwhelming and it requires awareness for the players. I can't wait to see what pro players do with the oracle. It's not exciting when you have detection in every tech path. make players make tough choices and take risks. Too many anti-tank units. Why are we so afraid of the siege tank being good? Too many high supply units. Seige tanks are too good. They are good because they can be brought out early, 1 shot lings, large upgrade bonus, large numeric bonus and great positional power. A lot of the new units seem to be designed to hurt them. Tempest with long range, oracle with cheap cloak, viper with abduct and the locusts having 2 range. Honestly the new units look awesome. Even the little things like burrow charge and hydra speed will make the games fun to watch. I don't know what the past metagame of BW was but watching zergs play today is dull (in BW). Maybe its just because I haven't seen a lot of great games of Zergs but I really hope SC2 doesn't turn into BW. edit: Ah the scourge was a suicide unit for Zerg. My apologies. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:57 0neder wrote: Oracles cloak costs mana - this should be passive, protoss units never cloak for mana. Buildable suicide units are a zerg thing. Keep widow mines if you want, but give them to a unit (reaper, hellion, warhound, etc) Why not just give the carrier 22 range to appease the fans? Why insist on the tempest? Limiting recalls to be only defensive - why? Limiting dark swarm to only bio? so arbitrary, why? Mothership core too similar to PF and unnecessary Entomb is very abitrary and corner case It's not exciting when you have detection in every tech path. make players make tough choices and take risks. Too many anti-tank units. Why are we so afraid of the siege tank being good? Too many high supply units. 1. You cant have mass cloak for Protoss on a broad scale because Overlords arent detectors anymore and EMP is on the Ghost now instead of the detecting Science Vessel. 2. Well Spider Mines were added on the terran bikes and the reaver had to pay for its shots too. Also the broodlings from broodlords are free. The widow mines is a mix of spider mine and irradiate plus the ability to attach itself to a flying unit (how and why I dont really know). 3. Adding the shot from the tempest to the carrier is one way of fixing that unit ... but only with the old BW carrier graphics.  4. Recalls arent limited to defense ... because you can still build your mothership and use it offensively. 5. This "reduce range to 1" cloud is totally IMBA anyways because SC2 has MUCH tighter armies and thus it will be more effective. The only way to balance it is to reduce the radius to a "why bother with it?" radius ... 6. Yeah ... I can already see the Mothership Core rush in copper league. You are right in that it is very similar to the PF. 7. Entomb is OP and stupid. Its such an "anti-MULE" ability and totally not creative. 8. "Too many anti-tank units" is really a good summary of a problem, especially since the tank is the one unit with several HUGE drawbacks. No other unit has friendly fire and no other unit has to lock itself into place to activate its true potential. 9. High supply units give a wider range to "play with abilities" because you cant really mass them. The true racially different style cant be kept up in low supply units, because there isnt that much need for high variety. Summing this all up I am highly doubtful the release date for this expansion makes sense. How long did the beta for WoL last? And how long afterwards did we have drastic changes to unit balance? Many of the new unit abilities are so imbalanced in their design that they cant be fixed (all of the Viper abilities, entomb, yet another "free wall/siege unit" for zerg from the swarm host). Common sense shows sooo many problems with the new stuff if you add it on top of the old, that it should have told them NOT to go public with it yet. ----- One thing which annoys me somewhat is the commentary in the HotS battle report. It is in the same "our viewers are babys and thus we talk to them in an appropriate way" style which we had for the first part, but commentary has evolved since then and they even had Day(9) in it. What a disappointment. | ||
|
TechNoTrance
Canada1007 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:20 0neder wrote: Nobody's suggesting that the colossus and reaver would coexist. They say that the colossus should become more interesting (eg more extreme strengths/weaknesses) and more legible. I know that. It was an example... My point being that there is no point reintroducing units that have no role in this game. If they wanted to make BW with better graphics they could have, but they didn't. They made a new game. | ||
|
Doc Daneeka
United States577 Posts
i mean they modeled most of these new units after brood war units, how much closer do you think they can get without literally just saying "we're scrubbing starcraft 2, go back to brood war"? | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 14:45 TechNoTrance wrote: I know that. It was an example... My point being that there is no point reintroducing units that have no role in this game. If they wanted to make BW with better graphics they could have, but they didn't. They made a new game. There would be a point because it would increase legibility. Colossi are bad for spectating legibility. Obviously if the colossus was replaced, its replacement would replace its role, so there would be a point. Notice I didn't say put the reaver in. I don't care if the reaver returns, but the colossus as a unit should be replaced for legibility and interest if it isn't at least improved for excitement. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 17 2012 14:46 Doc Daneeka wrote: if all the units they introduce in the expansions are just the brood war units that were cut from wings of liberty, i would feel pretty ripped off. they're trying to fill those roles with new game mechanics. if it doesn't work out and sc2 fails as an e-sport and blah blah blah, so be it. This is where we disagree. I think SC2 is a blast to play (i'm silver), but it sucks to watch. But I don't want to play it, I want to watch a great RTS e-sport. I understand if you have the opposite opinion. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16121 Posts
On June 17 2012 13:09 0neder wrote: My friend, with all due respect how familiar are you with BW? It was based around a handful of ridiculously overpowered splash units: Tanks, lurkers, corsairs, psionic storm, plague, and what players did to abuse them and overcome them. If you take the most exciting moments in BW gameplay, almost all of them involve splash damage. What made GGaemo's mouth drop open? OP Splash Damage. What made people wonder how Jangbi had the superhuman ability to manually cast all these storms? OP Splash Damage. What rewarded one of the best microers in the world with killing 10-16 supply with only 2 zealots? OP Splash Damage. What made this imbalanced reaver so exciting, even at the expense of low level players? OP Splash damage. What does OP Splash Damage like Lurkers do? It promotes ridiculous micro skill development (wouldn't you like to see more opportunities for SC2 careers to take off like marineking's? then put in more splash damage) Please tell me objectively why reducing splash damage is better for spectating excitement or players. Because objectively, we know that 'terrible terrible splash damage' is what makes SC exciting and is one of the main reasons it survived for so long. The more splash, the more risk, the more excitement. We can debate about units, but please don't say that reducing splash damage does not objectively hurt SC2's excitement for fans. Why? Simple. Because Splash damage in general is 10 times as good as it ever was in Brood War because of everything's tendency in Starcraft 2 to clump together by default. In Brood War, you could only control 12 units at a time and the AI by default would have your guys default to walking in single file, making splash damage as good as it was far less effective than weaker damage being done to a far more clumped up group of units. | ||
| ||
