EPTReluctance to Re-Introduce BW-Units - Page 18
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
iky43210
United States2099 Posts
| ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On June 18 2012 00:20 iky43210 wrote: why the hell do people want broodwar to come back? do people not realize casual gamers just aren't going to play with no multiple building selections, auto mining, or more than 12 units grouping? Those are more tedious tasks than it is I'm talking about units, not the interface. While I do think MBS etc. detract from the breadth of skill and lower the skill ceiling, I understand that the most important elements are unit, their dynamics, and their spacing. On June 17 2012 20:39 Vindicare605 wrote: The sad reason that Lurkers just cannot exist in SC2 is because of Banelings. That's like saying siege tanks can't exist because hellions do splash too. Banelings are melee suicide units, lurkers are ranged stealth units, completely different roles, and one is more useful and cost efficient later in the game. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
WArped
United Kingdom4845 Posts
On June 17 2012 01:49 DemigodcelpH wrote: So basically you only care about Blizzard's financial success and not the depth of the game itself? People with mindsets like you are the reason SC2 turned out the way it did. No, that isn't my opinion at all, I don't give two shits about their financial success, that is just how they think. I want the best game possible from a spectators point of view, more micro, more strategy that requires more skill to use well. If the new units give me that in some way, I'll be fine with them not adding bw units. | ||
|
Topdoller
United Kingdom3860 Posts
On June 18 2012 00:20 iky43210 wrote: why the hell do people want broodwar to come back? do people not realize casual gamers just aren't going to play with no multiple building selections, auto mining, or more than 12 units grouping? Those are more tedious tasks than it is The OP asked this question "Why is Blizzard so reluctant to bring back some of the units from Brood War?" Hes not a BW die hard, but someone who has stumbled on the game via SC2. SC2 interface is excellent along with the pathing and graphics\ sounds. I think you are missing the point by the OP. Either way this thread should be closed, there is nothing constructive to be had from it | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On June 18 2012 00:32 WArped wrote: No, that isn't my opinion at all, I don't give two shits about their financial success, that is just how they think. I want the best game possible from a spectators point of view, more micro, more strategy that requires more skill to use well. If the new units give me that in some way, I'll be fine with them not adding bw units. More micro and more strategy can only be achieved by taking away some of the awesome new stuff in SC2 compared to BW. The "unlimited unit selection" and the perfect unit movement really kill a lot of the positional strategic play. Siege tanks spread out over a wider area and some bunkers and turrets spread inbetween them is something that is pointless in SC2 due to the overwhelming power of a tight attacking force. To get such a strategic gameplay back you have to cut back on the ease of control which SC2 allows atm. In addition the unit movement has to be changed in such a way that they arent packed as tight as they are right now. This has been sufficiently discussed already a year ago. Sadly Blizzard doesnt listen. More micro and better control requires that the battles dont go so fast and the troops arent controlled as easily. | ||
|
TheAntZ
Israel6248 Posts
| ||
|
Brow23
Germany105 Posts
| ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5623 Posts
On June 18 2012 02:41 Brow23 wrote: No one wants BW Units, new units are always better! All these BW-Kiddies should get comfortable with the fact that BW is D-E-A-D! Like Marauders, Colossi, Mothership, Roaches, Immortals, Hellions, Vikings, really? LOL You can't be serious. It's not like SC2 is gonna be alive for long unless blizzard fixes the game. Currently it's on life support in form of really spaced out expansion packs. Ever since beta people have been saying "wait until the game actually gets released", "wait until that major patch", "wait until HotS". After HotS people will be saying "wait until LotV" (some already are). After LotV gets released and the major issues remain, the game will collapse. It's already lost half of the active player base, has not caught on in Korea and China (I think), while foreign spectators are losing interest due to Korean dominance. Good luck with that kind of a game. ;p | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
On June 18 2012 00:40 Topdoller wrote: The OP asked this question "Why is Blizzard so reluctant to bring back some of the units from Brood War?" Hes not a BW die hard, but someone who has stumbled on the game via SC2. SC2 interface is excellent along with the pathing and graphics\ sounds. I think you are missing the point by the OP. Either way this thread should be closed, there is nothing constructive to be had from it i disagree about sounds, SC2 have the worst sounds between all games made by Blizzard | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On June 18 2012 00:20 iky43210 wrote: why the hell do people want broodwar to come back? do people not realize casual gamers just aren't going to play with no multiple building selections, auto mining, or more than 12 units grouping? Those are more tedious tasks than it is because bw is an exciting game. You can have BW units in sc2 and still have MBS and full groups of units. The game should reward players that can micro and macro better and there are units in sc2 that the ideal doesn't apply. They didn't work on the carrier at all, they just said its not working in the build no one is using it lets just throw it away. But it has potential and is WAY more interesting than a unit that just snipes shit from far away. There are ways to not have ugly dumb units like the thor or the warhound and work the lore to say "OH WE UPGRADED THE GOLIATH NOW IT FUCKING SPLASHES AIR UNITS!" and instead of a big clunky unit we get a small sleek unit that looks better and probably functions better and promotes micro because you can do a bit more than shrug your shoulders when muta magic box your army. Of if they clump together you target fire them with your goliaths with air aoe but then if they magic box you make them attack more area so that way all the muta take damage and not just 1 or 2. Blizz can rework old units into new units. But I don't get why this thread is still going on because, its been in like 2 or 3 interviews already. Blizz doesn't rework old units because the people from BW will hate what they've done with the units. Sort of like how bw players hate sc2 hydras. Its easier to set a new bar rather than having to compete with their old units because regardless people will complain. If you look back 2 years ago when WoL came out the same arguments came out when people seen how bad hydra are or, how bad tanks are compared to BW. There is a lot I hate about what I'm reading for HOTS considering they can just bring back an arbitor and give it the oracle spells, or bring back a lurker and change it a bit so that its more of an offensive unit, Or fix the carrier instead of removing it and putting in a less interesting banana-looking unit. The warhound doesn't even look like it belongs in any army of terran and it should be a 2 legged walker instead of a japanese theme'd mecha unit. I really like the ability for hellion to transform and it's sort of a tip of the hat to a firebat the only problem I have with it is that hellion are already really good thusly they should either nerf how good a battle hellion is [sort of like how vikings are worse on the ground than in the air] or nerf how good a normal hellion is. Which I've got faith in how they'll balance it regardless. The direction that sc2 and hots are going in is to get RID of micro. With slows/pulls/snares/and forcefields this reduces the amount the PLAYER can do to react to it. Instead of a viper being able to pull a unit maybe they should be able to put a DOT on mechanical or on any type of unit Call it RUST or something that way you're still able to break positioning on encampments you are otherwise not able to break, instead of giving them a pull that removes the ability for a terran player to micro. Or fungal that stops SPELLS/MOVEMENT. It's just kind of the wrong direction that I want to see because now its harder to see the best player moving forward when 1 fungal and 2 bling hitting your army changes the outcome of the game in so many key moments, or how stale PvZ endgame is. Guess I'll end my rant there I suppose unless someone has an interesting comment.  | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On June 18 2012 02:56 maybenexttime wrote: Like Marauders, Colossi, Mothership, Roaches, Immortals, Hellions, Vikings, really? LOL You can't be serious. It's not like SC2 is gonna be alive for long unless blizzard fixes the game. Currently it's on life support in form of really spaced out expansion packs. Ever since beta people have been saying "wait until the game actually gets released", "wait until that major patch", "wait until HotS". After HotS people will be saying "wait until LotV" (some already are). After LotV gets released and the major issues remain, the game will collapse. It's already lost half of the active player base, has not caught on in Korea and China (I think), while foreign spectators are losing interest due to Korean dominance. Good luck with that kind of a game. ;p I disagree completely, with kespa finally swapping over and OSL ending, Korean spectation and the level of player is going to increase drastically in the near future. losing half your player base after 2 years is pretty good for a game that doesn't take any level grind. SC2 is a tedious game that takes a lot of meticulous practice. I mean if you look at other games such as COD they lose like 95% of their player base every 6 month per game they make and I'm pretty sure that if they just stopped making cod's they wouldn't have HALF of their player base 2 years later. The game is good, it just doesn't mean it should have the level of balance that the pro's want or the balance that would make spectating even really good. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On June 18 2012 03:06 D u o wrote: I disagree completely, with kespa finally swapping over and OSL ending, Korean spectation and the level of player is going to increase drastically in the near future. losing half your player base after 2 years is pretty good for a game that doesn't take any level grind. SC2 is a tedious game that takes a lot of meticulous practice. I mean if you look at other games such as COD they lose like 95% of their player base every 6 month per game they make and I'm pretty sure that if they just stopped making cod's they wouldn't have HALF of their player base 2 years later. The game is good, it just doesn't mean it should have the level of balance that the pro's want or the balance that would make spectating even really good. But they want it to have the balance the pros want and the balance that will keep spectators interested. It's what's going to keep the game alive 2-3 years after LoV is finally released when all of the casual players move on. | ||
|
maybenexttime
Poland5623 Posts
Speedlots are much more versatile than Chargelots because their speed upgrade is not limited to engagements. Lings are weaker mainly due to SC2's pathing. Tanks got stats-nerfed due to unit clumping and stupid no overkill engine. Mutas are practically devoid of micro becuase blizzard is clueless when it comes to understanding what actually constitutes Muta micro. Hydras were stats-nerfed for some reason. HT's Storm got nerfed due to unit clumping (see a pattern?). Ultras got stats-nerfed (again, decreasing a unit's speed). DTs warn the player even if one-hit killing enemy units (that was one of the stupidest changes; one-hitting units without alarming the enemy made them incredibly unique and emphasized their ninja theme). Are those not objectively worse than their BW counterparts? But there are some units that did benefit from the transition: Marines, Ghosts, Broodlords and Stalkers (I'm going to ignore the ones that are not really inspired by any BW units/got heavily overhauled, like Ravens; or units that simply had their roles altered, like Medivacs). Out of those, Marine is the best example. It proves that SC2 does allow for units not only to match BW's level, but also to improve them. But blizzard seems pretty clueless and Marines were an accident, something they they almost nerfed to death like Reapers because people were whining they're extremely OP (aka reward micro). To sum up, BW players are not driven by nostalgia, they are not going to dislike units ported from BW out of principle. We are willing to admit some units that got ported to SC2 got improved. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On June 18 2012 04:05 maybenexttime wrote: Out of those, Marine is the best example. It proves that SC2 does allow for units not only to match BW's level, but also to improve them. But blizzard seems pretty clueless and Marines were an accident, something they they almost nerfed to death like Reapers because people were whining they're extremely OP (aka reward micro). Part of why marines are so good is their clumping, the same reason most other units had to be nerfed for their AoE. | ||
|
D u o
Canada381 Posts
On June 18 2012 04:05 maybenexttime wrote: D u o, I disagree. Saying that if blizzard implements BW units people will complain no matter what is wrong. That's actually not the case. It's just that most BW units that made the cut are objectively worse: Tanks, Zerglings, Battlecruisers, Carriers, Zealots, HTs, DTs, Mutas, Hydras and Ultras. They simply are. Do I have to give reasons for every one of them? Because I can. Speedlots are much more versatile than Chargelots because their speed upgrade is not limited to engagements. Lings are weaker mainly due to SC2's pathing. Tanks got stats-nerfed due to unit clumping and stupid no overkill engine. Mutas are practically devoid of micro becuase blizzard is clueless when it comes to understanding what actually constitutes Muta micro. Hydras were stats-nerfed for some reason. HT's Storm got nerfed due to unit clumping (see a pattern?). Ultras got stats-nerfed (again, decreasing a unit's speed). DTs warn the player even if one-hit killing enemy units (that was one of the stupidest changes; one-hitting units without alarming the enemy made them incredibly unique and emphasized their ninja theme). Are those not objectively worse than their BW counterparts? But there are some units that did benefit from the transition: Marines, Ghosts, Broodlords and Stalkers (I'm going to ignore the ones that are not really inspired by any BW units/got heavily overhauled, like Ravens; or units that simply had their roles altered, like Medivacs). Out of those, Marine is the best example. It proves that SC2 does allow for units not only to match BW's level, but also to improve them. But blizzard seems pretty clueless and Marines were an accident, something they they almost nerfed to death like Reapers because people were whining they're extremely OP (aka reward micro). To sum up, BW players are not driven by nostalgia, they are not going to dislike units ported from BW out of principle. We are willing to admit some units that got ported to SC2 got improved. I'm not disagreeing at all. I'm saying that in interviews has said that is why they haven't remade a lot of these other units because they'd be limited based off of players opinions on them. For example if they modified the lurker to instead of creating a line of AoE damage they just spawned two bling, people would complain that these units are worse and that they ruined the unit. A Stalker isn't from BW, a Dragoon is, even though it has the same role, its the main ranged unit from BW it doesn't have the same feel as the BW counterpart and thus not part of WoL multiplayer. Zealots are relatively the same, they have an ability that [technically] makes them faster. It's not the fact that the units became stronger or worse but more or less ruined because they'd have to change the actual unit mechanics because of the role they'd have to fill in sc2 is different than the role they fill in BW. Like a tank in sc2 still functions like a bw tank, the damage and ect have to change but a dt is still a fast cloaking unit that attacks things and deals a shit tonne of upfront damage, but they're reluctant to change units that are already in BW and fuck around with their entire ability set. Example: Its like creating a HT that doesn't storm but cloaks things instead just because it would work better in the current sc2 engine/metagame/build. Instead of stealing that unit and reworking it for the purposes of sc2 they would rather just recreate a new unit. On June 18 2012 03:43 Tyrant0 wrote: But they want it to have the balance the pros want and the balance that will keep spectators interested. It's what's going to keep the game alive 2-3 years after LoV is finally released when all of the casual players move on. They'll watch just like people did and do in BW............. LMAO If you don't like sc2 then don't play it and if you don't like watching it then don't but as long as there is enough spectators companies will pay for advertisments and people will still play it competitively and kespa is really good at keeping games alive, as shown via bw. Games have already shown that they don't need a casual group of people playing but a group of spectators is good enough. And actually having a casual scene of people probably ruins the game for the competitive scene because blizz is patching for lower level play which affect higher level play quite a bit more. I don't play hockey but I watch it. | ||
|
MugenXBanksy
United States479 Posts
On June 17 2012 21:47 toiletCAT wrote: I agree. The attack speed of the Tempest makes up for the range and its damage. It's a surgical (though not very agile), artillery figther, not an a-move unit you make 5-10 of. The Tempest will create room for more entertaining, strategic options. I think it's cool. Furthermore it'll encourage Spire tech in ZvP more often. Heart of the Swarm to me sounds like an era in which the dominant force is a mix of flying casters, Hydralisks and Corrupters. If only Blizzard gave the Corrupter a secondary purpose. I find it sad that there are units like the Corrupter which only purpose is to eliminate air units. Same goes for the Hellion in Wings of Liberty, although with the new Battle Mode (or whatever it's called) the Hellion will make room for additional ways to approach enemy compositions. That's what I want to see. Uhh...... Zergs already go spire tech most of the time as you are aware ultras are a joke pvz assuming you dont want to lose as making ultralisks 80%+ of the time is a bad idea Herp a fucking Derp. | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On June 18 2012 02:56 maybenexttime wrote: Like Marauders, Colossi, Mothership, Roaches, Immortals, Hellions, Vikings, really? LOL You can't be serious. It's not like SC2 is gonna be alive for long unless blizzard fixes the game. Currently it's on life support in form of really spaced out expansion packs. Ever since beta people have been saying "wait until the game actually gets released", "wait until that major patch", "wait until HotS". After HotS people will be saying "wait until LotV" (some already are). After LotV gets released and the major issues remain, the game will collapse. It's already lost half of the active player base, has not caught on in Korea and China (I think), while foreign spectators are losing interest due to Korean dominance. Good luck with that kind of a game. ;p Quite sad how putting "BW" in the thread title will bring on all these "SC2 sucks and is doomed!"-types. | ||
|
rd
United States2586 Posts
On June 18 2012 04:28 D u o wrote: They'll watch just like people did and do in BW............. LMAO If you don't like sc2 then don't play it and if you don't like watching it then don't but as long as there is enough spectators companies will pay for advertisments and people will still play it competitively and kespa is really good at keeping games alive, as shown via bw. Games have already shown that they don't need a casual group of people playing but a group of spectators is good enough. And actually having a casual scene of people probably ruins the game for the competitive scene because blizz is patching for lower level play which affect higher level play quite a bit more. I don't play hockey but I watch it. You sure like to draw a ton of assumptions. Almost everything you said agrees with my quote. | ||
Falling
Canada11363 Posts
On June 18 2012 04:22 Tyrant0 wrote: Part of why marines are so good is their clumping, the same reason most other units had to be nerfed for their AoE. Not really. That just effects how much AoE will get nerfed. What makes Marines amazing in SC2 is their microbility. In fact, I'm pretty sure their stutter step is superior to their BW counterpart. What's that? Something SC2 did better? But unfortunately very few other units received that sort capability. I don't think you need to downgrade the engine to get the sort control you had in BW. Unit clumping is hailed as modern progression of unit ai, but to me it seems only a partial solution. A far more superior solution would be to fix the stupid behaviours of dynamic movment rather than implementing unit clumping. The difference is night and day and if done properly, it becomes a much more spectator friendly sport, plus splash is allowed to be more powerful. Aka good for newbs and pro's alike. EXAMPLE + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/e8R18.jpg) ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/flehG.jpg) From this thread. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223889 I just wish we could see something more viewable. Because once healthbars go up, that's all you can see. There have been some improvements to unit ai in SC2, but a lot has been lost in the process. The crazy thing is if Blizzard properly understood vulture/muta/wraith micro... that micro could go on any unit they designed and make it awesome. They could literally go as crazy as they wanted and get rid of almost every single BW unit, but if it had the BW-like unit control, I don't actually think many people would care. They don't even need a special ability on every single unit- I actually really like early game marine vs stalker micro much better than when concussive shell marauders and blink stalkers come out. More of the marine vs stalker type unit interaction would be awesome. Rarely do I want to see BW unit re-introduced so much as a re-introduction of the control I had. And you don't need a-move designed units. Vultures could a-move if you didn't have time, but you could also micro them like crazy if you did. Both/and for microbility (unless it's a spellcaster like a ht), not either/or. | ||
| ||
