EPTBlame their hate for Terran. Thor build showcased by Terran in one game? Nerf 2 weeks later. Best Terrans in the world have a month of troubles against foreign and code B Zerg? Foreign Terrans population falls off the Earth and foreign pro Terrans no longer exist? Terran is fine.
HotS-interview with Kim and Milker at gamescom - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
Blame their hate for Terran. Thor build showcased by Terran in one game? Nerf 2 weeks later. Best Terrans in the world have a month of troubles against foreign and code B Zerg? Foreign Terrans population falls off the Earth and foreign pro Terrans no longer exist? Terran is fine. | ||
|
johnny123
521 Posts
The tempest brings a very cool strategic element to the game and it would be a damn shame if it was to be removed for a fucking boring A-move carrier. I hope blizzard sticks with the tempest. If they bring in the carrier they better keep both in. Also very sad they removed the speed boost ability from the battlecruiser | ||
|
Buchan
Canada184 Posts
On August 21 2012 04:44 Swords wrote: I agree. TvZ used to be the best matchup to watch easily, but now it's either no one does anything for 15 minutes or Terran gets rolled by a roach bane all in with some exceptions. I still don't really understand why the queen change was even needed in the first place TvZ seemed like the most balanced match up. Instead of buffing the raven and nerfing creep just revert the change or change queen range to like 4 so they are kiteable again. My biggest problem with how these changes (patch and upcoming HoTS) is the fact that the game is becoming less fun to watch as a spectator. I play Protoss, but I absolutely loved watching TvZ. Since the patch it has become far less entertaining to spectate. The new Protoss Mothership Core to me seems to do the same thing as the buffed queen. It makes early aggression really hard, and while this should improve PvP it will turn PvZ and PvT into more of a snoozefest. A lot of people already hate watching those MUs (I personally enjoy PvZ quite a bit - although I hated the period where Zerg was simply I MAEK ROACH - a viable, but boring style), and making greedy early strategies is going to make it even more boring. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
I personally think that if Blizzard has decided to increase the number of units - and not just replace them, it still actually doesn't prevent them from introducing even more units, but as replacements this time. For instance, if they want zerg to have additional options at lair tech and therefore plan to add the swarm host, there's nothing preventing them from also replacing the roach/overseer/corruptor/brood lord/infestor (to pick a few unsuccessful units). But they're not doing so, they're building on the fundamentals of WoL instead of drastically cutting into this. All the flaws the game currently has will only be patched up, not just cut out from the game and replaced with something better. I mean, even if protoss has a new stargate unit available, the colossus tech path still exists and remains unappealing with no changes made. | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
| ||
|
VPVanek
Canada238 Posts
On August 21 2012 04:58 Buchan wrote: I agree. TvZ used to be the best matchup to watch easily, but now it's either no one does anything for 15 minutes or Terran gets rolled by a roach bane all in with some exceptions. I still don't really understand why the queen change was even needed in the first place TvZ seemed like the most balanced match up. Instead of buffing the raven and nerfing creep just revert the change or change queen range to like 4 so they are kiteable again. Might as well just cut to the chase and start terran with 3CC and zerg with 3 hatch, since thats what happens anyways -_- | ||
|
FataLe
New Zealand4501 Posts
| ||
|
mlspmatt
Canada404 Posts
| ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
Btw, it's Mvp (MVP is the team of MVP_DongRaeGu, etc)  | ||
|
gedatsu
1286 Posts
On August 21 2012 03:17 Snowbear wrote: You quoted the wrong person. The only difference between these 2 is that Broodlords fly + don't have to burrow, and the SH is a ground unit that does have to burrow. Is that the only difference? There's no difference in for example, immediate impact damage vs having to walk up to your target? There's no difference between general purpose of the unit, as in damage dealer vs damage soak? | ||
|
flanksteak
Canada246 Posts
On August 21 2012 04:43 Skyro wrote: MS Core = I don't see how "it doesn't feel like a unit" is a reason to change it. I don't think I heard a single complaint like that. Raven buff/Creep tumor nerf = The raven buff was pretty minor, but would have a positive effect on helping determine balance because it will cause more people to take another look at the viability of the raven and provide more data for blizzard to balance. I see no reason to delay it due to a small sample of recent tourney results. The delay in the creep tumor nerf is a lot more understandable. BC change = good IMO from a game design perspective, even though it may be a little boring. Tempest/Carrier = I don't think I have heard a single person think the Tempest is a good idea. It screams BORING. I have no idea why they have tweaked BCs in the past and will tweak BCs again now but seem so adamantly opposed to do ANY tweaks to the carrier. I'm not sure but is the carrier the ONLY unit to never get a single change from release until now? Why not change the fleect beacon carrier upgrade to a range upgrade and make interceptor production free? It would achieve exactly what they are trying to achieve with the tempest but also a bit more strategic value to it since you can use interceptors as cover fire. Yeah I feel the same way. I don't understand the reasoning behind making the MS mobile. They even said themselves there's an issue where if your bases are close by air, it can be used offensively - a problem that doesn't exist if it's tied to the nexus. It's meant to be defensive right? Why would "it doesn't feel like a unit" be a good reason to make it mobile? Why does it have to be a unit? People know it's an addition to the game without making it mobile. And I wish they'd just keep the Carrier. Again, my thoughts exactly - if one of the "features" of the tempest is that it has a range upgrade, just give that upgrade to the carrier. Now that Terran Mech is being given improvements, we might see more use of them. Anyway, not to be overly negative - I like almost everything Blizzard does, but I don't understand what the reasoning is with these two units. | ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
Him saying tempest will fix late game PvP makes me curious, I find it really hard to imagine but thatd be great. | ||
|
Deleuze
United Kingdom2102 Posts
| ||
|
PardonYou
United States1360 Posts
| ||
|
HeeroFX
United States2704 Posts
| ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
| ||
|
XMG GI cup
Germany34 Posts
Enjoy <3 | ||
|
PardonYou
United States1360 Posts
On August 21 2012 05:30 Lukeeze[zR] wrote: How can you not hate their balance approach: "well race X hasn't been performing that well the past week, so finally no change sorry". They are waiting for the game to pan out more before changing anything. For once, I agree with them for not patching too hastily. | ||
|
Faust852
Luxembourg4004 Posts
On August 21 2012 05:30 Lukeeze[zR] wrote: How can you not hate their balance approach: "well race X hasn't been performing that well the past week, so finally no change sorry". I guess Kim didn't see the same games then us. I only see Mvp doing well, other terrans and protoss were just destroyed by zergs. | ||
|
Yorbon
Netherlands4272 Posts
On August 21 2012 05:34 Faust852 wrote: And i not the same game then you.I guess Kim didn't see the same games then us. I only see Mvp doing well, other terrans and protoss were just destroyed by zergs. | ||
| ||
