EPTI want better bnet
I want replay resume for ladder/custom
Then MAYBE I'll be ok with no LAN
Maaaaaybe.
GameSpot interviews Blizzard on HotS and LAN - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
lichter
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
I want better bnet I want replay resume for ladder/custom Then MAYBE I'll be ok with no LAN Maaaaaybe. | ||
|
Lizarb
Denmark307 Posts
 | ||
|
Josh_rakoons
United Kingdom1158 Posts
User was warned for this post | ||
|
Veritas
United Kingdom106 Posts
I feel like when the expansion rolls out we'll be in the same position that Terrans find themselves in. Win in the first 8 minutes or face disadvantage in the late game. What exactly am I supposed to be building in the late game now that Terran will crush mass Zealot? Mass Sentry/Cannon/Tempest? This race depresses me. Fucking Tempest. What a shitty unit. I wish they'd try balancing the race around useful units instead of shitty art concepts. Fucking Colossus. What a shitty unit. | ||
|
NeWeNiyaLord
Norway2474 Posts
On June 22 2012 14:02 JinXsc wrote: I agree with you 100%. To me cutting the carrier seemed like a quick decision that wasn't thought through thoroughly. I would rather see the carrier revamped and back in action. Like for example increasing the range of the carrier? could work tbh | ||
|
sekritzzz
1515 Posts
On June 22 2012 19:06 NeWeNiyaLord wrote: Like for example increasing the range of the carrier? could work tbh or.... make it an actual carrier and have it build 4 mini-ships which are indivudually micro-able as their own unit! That'd be so sick! Of course replenishable but at a higher cost obviously. | ||
|
Garmer
1286 Posts
| ||
|
Seiniyta
Belgium1815 Posts
On June 22 2012 19:23 sekritzzz wrote: or.... make it an actual carrier and have it build 4 mini-ships which are indivudually micro-able as their own unit! That'd be so sick! Of course replenishable but at a higher cost obviously. So, just making the interceptors more durable and able to control them directly? | ||
|
Gladiator6
Sweden7024 Posts
On June 22 2012 14:05 _Search_ wrote: I already know what Bronze to Platinum HOTS will be: 1 observer + 42 Tempests + a-click Then you will die to every timing there is as protoss. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
And I think his claim that B.net 2.0 is "complex" may actually be a reasonable answer. Whatever databases or backend systems that they built from scratch for SC2 is obviously much harder to work with compared to what they had for WC3 and BW, and this combined with possibly a late start to B.net 2.0's development may be the culprits to the lack of features that we saw at release and how slow they are at adding those missing features. | ||
|
Antylamon
United States1981 Posts
On June 22 2012 18:11 Veritas wrote: I really don't enjoy the new Protoss units. I feel like we struggle to break even in engagements as it is. The other races are getting solid units and we're getting more gimmicky crap. I feel like when the expansion rolls out we'll be in the same position that Terrans find themselves in. Win in the first 8 minutes or face disadvantage in the late game. What exactly am I supposed to be building in the late game now that Terran will crush mass Zealot? Mass Sentry/Cannon/Tempest? This race depresses me. Fucking Tempest. What a shitty unit. I wish they'd try balancing the race around useful units instead of shitty art concepts. Fucking Colossus. What a shitty unit. While your first arguments are relatively valid, the complaints about Toss I disagree with. The colo is actually a unit idea I liked from the beginning. Did you expect a Reaver? They would be ridiculously op in SC2 because of unit clumping. Tempest is not a "shitty art concept", it's a shitty unit concept. The idea of the unit was to allow Toss to control how an engagement begins. Carrier with a slight buff could do this just fine. I really got annoyed at your incredibly pessimistic attitude, though. | ||
|
Thug[ro]
Romania340 Posts
| ||
|
frostalgia
United States178 Posts
Queen being the most recent example. I would be alright with Oracle entomb requiring individual clicks on mineral fields, as long as you can shift-click. As for the Tempest, I much preferred it to have air-splash against mutas.. Maybe this could be a Fleet Beacon upgrade? Maybe cut the range in half vs air (down to 11), i'd be alright with that, as long as it can do some splash against mutas. | ||
|
FaZ-
United States191 Posts
DB: "You're not supposed to fight with it. You're supposed to use it to harass the enemy." This is the biggest admission of overdesign that I've ever seen. | ||
|
Veritas
United Kingdom106 Posts
On June 22 2012 19:54 Antylamon wrote: While your first arguments are relatively valid, the complaints about Toss I disagree with. The colo is actually a unit idea I liked from the beginning. Did you expect a Reaver? They would be ridiculously op in SC2 because of unit clumping. Tempest is not a "shitty art concept", it's a shitty unit concept. The idea of the unit was to allow Toss to control how an engagement begins. Carrier with a slight buff could do this just fine. I really got annoyed at your incredibly pessimistic attitude, though. I just want a gateway unit that doesn't suck in a straight up fight. Is that too much to ask? I hate everything about the Colossus. It reeks of "wouldn't lazers be cool?", which pretty much sums up the design attitude towards Protoss. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On June 22 2012 20:33 Veritas wrote: I just want a gateway unit that doesn't suck in a straight up fight. Is that too much to ask? I hate everything about the Colossus. It reeks of "wouldn't lazers be cool?", which pretty much sums up the design attitude towards Protoss. It is too much to ask, with the current state of Warpgates. Good gateway units would require a Warpgate nerf, and there isn't going to be one. Warpgate is the SC2 design team's primary contribution to Protoss design relative to BW, and changing it would hurt their pride too much. Personally, I'd be fine with a gateway unit similar to a Reaper or Hellion, something mobile and good against light units, that we could use for map control early on, and for drops/harassment in general. But that's clearly too difficult of a concept for Justin Browder and co, so we're getting the Oracle instead. | ||
|
Xpace
United States2209 Posts
 | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
| ||
|
paralleluniverse
4065 Posts
On June 22 2012 21:07 Sbrubbles wrote: So ... no LAN because they was us to have an "integrated experience". Sure he mentions piracy, but it's funny how he avoids calling it the main reason. Integrated? With B.net 0.2? Is this some kind of sick joke or is Sigaty really that delusional? | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 22 2012 15:26 DrZz wrote: + Show Spoiler + On June 22 2012 15:16 docvoc wrote: On June 22 2012 14:59 architecture wrote: There is something fundamentally wrong with Terran not having the longest ranged unit in the game. It's like the inverse of what the race represents. Then again Blizzard already butchered that with marauder and thor. So what you are saying is the game must be a certain way to be acceptable to you, and if not its complete garbage (like your statement on thors and marauders). Blizz is attempting to make SC2 a novel experience from BW, BW is a great game, no questions asked, but SC2 is not BW and therefore should be treated differently. There is no reason that the marauder and thor are butchered by any means, and there is no reason why Terran should have the longest ranged unit. IIRC, the carrier with full sight range has the same range as the seige tank, at 12.(here, bro] Its not what the inverse of what the race represents, Terran has a mix of units, all ranged fighters that are relatively high dmg output with good dps but low-ish health and upgrade reliant, Protoss has very strong, high health units that cost more to build and build slower, but are very synergized together, Zerg spawns many cheap quick units thats overrun the opponent with only some synergizing well together I.e. you will never see ling-hydra like in BW. TLDR; I can't agree with your statement at all. I pretty much agree to your oppinion. I don't understand why there is so much hate twards Blizz when it's obvious that they really try to make the game better. The ideas are there: take food from the main army, add new strategy options but don't butcher the current ones, add new game mechanics etc. Also in the interview they say they worked 6 months for the Arcade feature and they get no money for it so that feels to me that they care about what fans say The problem is that they are trying to make the game better, but they refuse to listen to the fans. They are so focused on making it a balanced game and making it "their" project (namely, very different from BW) that they want to include as few things from BW as possible and they won't listen to the fans, even if they blatantly want either the race design (aesthetics/feel of the race) or certain units from BW to stay/come back. Not only that, this has driven them to go for balance at the cost of creativity and dynamic gameplay; many of the new units are dull, generic, A-move units that aren't inspiring or interesting to play with or watch at all. Those of us that are upset with WoL don't want it to be a clone of BW, but we want certain things. We want it to still be a SC game; each race should feel like that race. Currently this isn't the case. Protoss is not "strong but few with a lot of micro/focus on tactics". We want interesting and dynamic gameplay, which often isn't the case because of unit/engine design promoting A-moving and/or deathballing as the most efficient way to win. To obtain these things, we don't need to turn WoL into BW. The comparison is brought up because BW had these things and is WoL's direct predecessor. If Browder and Co. would just drop their pride a little bit and stock chalking up all of the deficiencies in WoL to "We planned to have the race/unit designed this way" and realized that some of their unique ideas could use some work, this game could be so much better. And don't get me wrong, this game is great for sure, but when it's trying to become the pinnacle of the esport world and the messiah of esports in the west, dethroning BW, it has a few more expectations than your standard RTS that's released. Integrated? With B.net 0.2? Is this some kind of sick joke or is Sigaty really that delusional? He's completely clueless. While your first arguments are relatively valid, the complaints about Toss I disagree with. The colo is actually a unit idea I liked from the beginning. Did you expect a Reaver? They would be ridiculously op in SC2 because of unit clumping. Tempest is not a "shitty art concept", it's a shitty unit concept. The idea of the unit was to allow Toss to control how an engagement begins. Carrier with a slight buff could do this just fine. I really got annoyed at your incredibly pessimistic attitude, though. The Colossus is a terrible unit. Big AoE, no micro potential, really an A-move unit. It was even voted as the unit that people want to see out of the game the most in a poll thread a while back (and it won by a huge margin). Yea, the Tempest is a terrible unit design as well. Similar concept. Boring, no micro or dynamic gameplay involved. The range can make it mildly interesting, but they could actually try to redesign the Carrier and it could easily fit this role. | ||
| ||
