Our casters Daniel "cip" Meyer and Björn "Anathema" Siebrands had the opportunity to meet and exclusivly interview Senior Game Designer Kaeo Milker and the Lead Balance Designer David Kim at gamescom 2012 in Cologne, Germany.
The topics covered were the development process of HotS, in particular concerning the multiplayer balance and the campaign storyline, as well as Patch 1.5 and it's quirks, the likelihood of the changes to Raven and Creep Tumors being implemented and the fate of the Carrier.
If you liked this Interview, visit us at http://www.gaming-insight.de to check out our soon to be posted interviews with Tasteless, Feast and Kas from the recently finished Intel Extreme Masters Global Challenge Cologne and check out our awesome StarCraft 2 content, including our next XMG Gaming-Insight StarCraft 2 cup, esports coverage and news.
Edit: We've now transcribed the interview. Just scroll under the video in the news.
Edit 2: If you liked our interview with David Kim and Kaeo Milker, you might like our just now released interviews with Tasteless, Feast and Kas as well.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
thank good , no BC speed ! , im really happy with that as zerg player . I was thinking from begining of HOTS that terrans can really easy abuse that BC speed , more dmg for BC is good
On August 21 2012 02:40 niladorus wrote: cant open it with chrome. smthing wrong with the link?
With your computer , working fine , chrome here to
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
Agree, I'd like to take this opportunity and ask everyone that does videos in English that is nowadays the international language: please, make text and or subtitles for your videos, you'd be surprised by the number of non-native speakers that can only read and can't hear or vice-versa. Learning a second language isn't easy to most people. Though I have no problem, I know the reality here.
-Mothership Core is not stationary anymore, but moves slowly -Battle Cruisers don't have the sprint ability anymore, but instead get improved damage -They are not finally decided on the carrier yet, though the beta will start without (save the carrier!!!) -The call to action Zerg Creep nerf and Raven buff are on hold right now (I blame MVP and Taeja)
Designers are still absolutely clueless about the Carrier. The Tempest and the Carrier don't overlap at all (the Carrier is most crucial against super late game Z and T mech, the Tempest sucks against both of these) and the Tempest has a laughable amount of strategic depth. Not only that, the Carrier is used more than the BC, Hydralisk, and Reaper, yet we're seeing all three of these units get buffed.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
How can you watch a movie and read an interview at the same time? Better question, why are you browsing the internet while watching a movie?
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
How can you watch a movie and read an interview at the same time? Better question, why are you browsing the internet while watching a movie?
Because people watch movies on Netflix these days? It's as easy as pressing Alt+Tab.
Much harder to listen to two different videos at the same time.
On August 21 2012 03:08 Snowbear wrote: "My favourite unit is the swarm host, it's very unique, there is nothing like it in WOL, it generates free units over and over".
Yeah, there is really no unit like that in WOL! So unique!
On August 21 2012 03:08 Snowbear wrote: "My favourite unit is the swarm host, it's very unique, there is nothing like it in WOL, it generates free units over and over".
Yeah, there is really no unit like that in WOL! So unique!
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently. It's like saying Siege Mode and Psi Storm are too similar because they both deal AoE damage.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
I guess you stopped there and didn't listen any further. They may conceptually be alike, but in terms of tactical and dynamical possibilities, they are very different. If you listen correctly, he mentions that. Bashing blizzard is ok, but please, at least try to listen.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
Yeah you're right, I forgot Broodlords can spawn slow moving ranged units on command without a target and rally them towards a location to assault before quickly repositioning themselves. Good thing those broodlings can shoot air too and last long enough to hit targets 30 range away. Also I love surprise spawning them right on top of armies that walk over my Broodlords without detection.
Or how about those pesky locusts being fired straight onto tanks to do guaranteed damage on impact before drawing friendly fire? And of course they can be shot over cliffs so terrain has no effect on them. Thank god they aren't available until quite a ways after hive tech right?
Haha I'd love a bc buff in hots, but I think I would be more useful with the speed upgrade, I'm not sure.. :/ I don't like that they are thinking 'bout not doing the buff to ravens just because "zergs have been doing worse in tournaments", sounds kinda off. Raven could use that speed buff, it's okay if the skip the creep nerf though.
I hope the core stays ontop of the nexus aswell, I don't see the point of it being able to move. "Feels more like a unit because it can move" is wierd reasoning to me.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
Swarm host dont fly, have to burrow, can spawn unit on command, are effective against air, and are played differently than Broodlord, and come in play mid-game
i believe hots will fail horribly and WoL will continue to be the premier tournament title for at least 2 more years. So as long as the bc buff stays out of WoL ill be happy
I believe WoL still has depth yet to be discovered, as taeja/mvp lategames recently in tvz has shown us
MVP completely decimated maxed zerg armies in IEM with his max BC/viking/raven composition. Give BC's a damage buff in WoL and you might be completely overpowering terran lategame against zerg.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
How can you watch a movie and read an interview at the same time? Better question, why are you browsing the internet while watching a movie?
Because people watch movies on Netflix these days? It's as easy as pressing Alt+Tab.
Much harder to listen to two different videos at the same time.
i believe hots will fail horribly and WoL will continue to be the premier tournament title for at least 2 more years
No. Tournaments will immediately switch over HoTS upon its official release (not beta) because A its the expansion to the WoL not a whole new game, and B hype - people are gonna be more interested in seeing new strategies and tactics then seeing the same battles weve been witnessing for the next 2 years
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
Agreed, text interviews are my preference as well! thanks for posting though
On August 21 2012 03:28 kaokentake wrote: BC damage increase?
overpowered. completely overpowered
EDIT: oh good, its only for hots
thank god
i believe hots will fail horribly and WoL will continue to be the premier tournament title for at least 2 more years. So as long as the bc buff stays out of WoL ill be happy
I believe WoL still has depth yet to be discovered, as taeja/mvp lategames recently in tvz has shown us
MVP completely decimated maxed zerg armies in IEM with his max BC/viking/raven composition. Give BC's a damage buff in WoL and you might be completely overpowering terran lategame against zerg.
You are utterly deluding yourself if you seriously think ANY of the premier tournaments will be playing WoL a few months after HotS releases. Have fun with your outdated inferior game. Even if HotS still isn't on par with Brood War, it's going to beat the shit out of WoL.
On August 21 2012 03:28 kaokentake wrote: BC damage increase?
overpowered. completely overpowered
EDIT: oh good, its only for hots
thank god
i believe hots will fail horribly and WoL will continue to be the premier tournament title for at least 2 more years. So as long as the bc buff stays out of WoL ill be happy
I believe WoL still has depth yet to be discovered, as taeja/mvp lategames recently in tvz has shown us
MVP completely decimated maxed zerg armies in IEM with his max BC/viking/raven composition. Give BC's a damage buff in WoL and you might be completely overpowering terran lategame against zerg.
what? battlecruiser are utterly underpowered they need that buff, i sincerely hope that WOL die as a fast as a possible, is just bad
So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran... Spellcasters suck compared to the other races, they keep discussing ways to kill the defensive advantage that Terran was supposed to be about, and they plan on adding units that hard counter what Terrans usually build...
All that's left for them to do is remove the marine, and Terran will become the forgotten race.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
Not actually true, the way that they function differently is that you don't need to attack units to produce units with it.
i believe hots will fail horribly and WoL will continue to be the premier tournament title for at least 2 more years
No. Tournaments will immediately switch over HoTS upon its official release (not beta) because A its the expansion to the WoL not a whole new game, and B hype - people are gonna be more interested in seeing new strategies and tactics then seeing the same battles weve been witnessing for the next 2 years
what happens if tons of people think HoTS is boring and unexciting? no one can predict the future. Even dustin browder said in an interview he thinks it might take a while for the top tournaments to switch to hots
On August 21 2012 03:45 `dunedain wrote: So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran... Spellcasters suck compared to the other races, they keep discussing ways to kill the defensive advantage that Terran was supposed to be about, and they plan on adding units that hard counter what Terrans usually build...
All that's left for them to do is remove the marine, and Terran will become the forgotten race.
Uh, Ghosts and Ravens are formidable spellcasters. I've seen why ravens are so strong this weekend. HSM and PDD's (and turrets as a bonus)? Man they're so good.
(That person next to David Kim is so boring to listen to.)
I have to say that it's a pity that in these interviews with Blizzard there is never any criticism, never any statement by the interviewer to challenge what Blizzard said. Instead it's just a press release which is basically useless.
On August 21 2012 03:50 Grumbels wrote: (That person next to David Kim is so boring to listen to.)
I have to say that it's a pity that in these interviews with Blizzard there is never any criticism, never any statement by the interviewer to challenge what Blizzard said. Instead it's just a press release which is basically useless.
I guess the interviewer wants to get an interview again. If Blizzard feels giving him an interview hurts their reputation, than they search another interviewer, there are enough around.
On August 21 2012 03:45 `dunedain wrote: So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran... Spellcasters suck compared to the other races, they keep discussing ways to kill the defensive advantage that Terran was supposed to be about, and they plan on adding units that hard counter what Terrans usually build...
All that's left for them to do is remove the marine, and Terran will become the forgotten race.
Yes, Blizzard being the evil masochistic thing it is, created its own race called "Terran" and the proceeded to do terrible, terrible things to it just for the sake of pain & hate. Sounds reasonable.
In all seriousness though, the things they are adding to so-called "counter Terran's usual builds" aren't the only things added to HotS. Terran gets its share of nifty improvements. Also, T spellcasters don't suck particularly badly... I don't even know what else to say..
A lot of the blizzard head-something designers are pretty boring. It's better than having some pretty face explain stuff that he hasn't been involved in though.
I liked the interview, and I feel like Kim justifies the Tempest reasonably well, I can see it kind of ending up a semi-siege tank keeping people from pushing certain paths or whatever because they'd take unavoidable losses.
I feel like Blizzard just hates T...remove battlecruiser speed but give more damage. Boooooring. Don't buff ravens AND don't nerf creep tumors. New mine is boring. Warhound is boring. Wtf is this blizzard?
This was less an Interview than a presentation. Cause when I heard the presentation by David Kim and Kaeo Milker by myself at Gamescom it was exactly the same (ok BC stuff was missing)
Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached to the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
On August 21 2012 04:04 Apolo wrote: Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached that was the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
Yah agreed. I kinda thing adding a new building with allot of complex game uses feels more new than just another unit.
On August 21 2012 04:04 Apolo wrote: Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached that was the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
I agree with you. What is the best way to voice our opinion to Blizzard, what do they read? (I have the feeling they read TL as they seem to know about the save the carrier movement)
On August 21 2012 04:04 Apolo wrote: Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached that was the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
I agree with you. What is the best way to voice our opinion to Blizzard, what do they read? (I have the feeling they read TL as they seem to know about the save the carrier movement)
They read here, but you can voice your opinion on battle.net starcraft forums as well.
If the mothership core can move and shoot things with a giant cannon and recharge energy and shields and recall things to it, it should cost supply!
Just saying, it didn't before, so they should change it - they even call it a unit now ^^
So pumped for BC damage buff, but the raven/creep hesitation miffs me because they were so "let's do this" about the zerg buff which was in many opinions more significant than this buff.
On August 21 2012 03:23 Picklebread wrote: That factory unit he was talking about does anyone know what he was talking about ?
You mean the units that's so fucking terrible and redundant from a design standpoint that you're surprised it didn't get insta-gibbed by the developers?
On August 21 2012 02:33 Tachion wrote: Interesting that they may not release the raven/creep tumor patch as zergs have been struggling lately. I thought that was for sure going in.
On August 21 2012 04:04 Apolo wrote: Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached that was the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
Yah agreed. I kinda thing adding a new building with allot of complex game uses feels more new than just another unit.
Yeah, I really don't understand this change. I'm not too excited about anything Protoss is getting, but the core stuck to the nexi was at least unique and had a strange dynamic where you could shuffle it between nexi for best use. Making it another slow unit is kinda mundane.
On August 21 2012 04:07 Sroobz wrote: Removing the carrier is so stupid. I have no faith in this development team. No fucking clue what they are talking about
They say they have no clue when the release date for the beta is. Yay.
I understand their reasoning. It may have tradition, but it is really kind of a general purpose unit, that is by the way very a-move friendly
Well, I guess since two of the best players in the world (Taeja , MVP) are doing well, that means Terran is fine. I don't really understand how they can like the flow of TvZ these days, all it is, essentially is a greed fest.
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.
On August 21 2012 04:39 VPVanek wrote: Well, I guess since two of the best players in the world (Taeja , MVP) are doing well, that means Terran is fine. I don't really understand how they can like the flow of TvZ these days, all it is, essentially is a greed fest.
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.
On August 21 2012 02:33 Tachion wrote: Interesting that they may not release the raven/creep tumor patch as zergs have been struggling lately. I thought that was for sure going in.
Blame MVP xD
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.
i rather see both units in HOTS (tempest and carrier) .I hope they do not remove the tempest . If they keep the carrier in hardly anything changes in terms of strategys from protoss, Protoss is such a boring fucking race.
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
On August 21 2012 04:39 VPVanek wrote: Well, I guess since two of the best players in the world (Taeja , MVP) are doing well, that means Terran is fine. I don't really understand how they can like the flow of TvZ these days, all it is, essentially is a greed fest.
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.
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.
I was wondering why it was the case that Blizzard seems hesitant to change the game a lot. They decided on not replacing any unit except the carrier and they also kept e.g. the battle cruiser the same. I wonder if they expect more of the new units than of your random WoL unit and don't want to make a change unless they are certain it is good. Because in that case HotS will basically have higher quality standards than WoL and we might get little change in the expansion while WoL units are allowed to keep existing.
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.
On August 21 2012 04:39 VPVanek wrote: Well, I guess since two of the best players in the world (Taeja , MVP) are doing well, that means Terran is fine. I don't really understand how they can like the flow of TvZ these days, all it is, essentially is a greed fest.
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.
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 -_-
no carriers were fine. it's not that they didn't do enough damage per cost which was the problem, it was that they didn't do enough damage per build time.
On August 21 2012 02:33 Tachion wrote: Interesting that they may not release the raven/creep tumor patch as zergs have been struggling lately. I thought that was for sure going in.
Blame MVP xD
Btw, it's Mvp (MVP is the team of MVP_DongRaeGu, etc)
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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?
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.
Well, I have the same excitement, or lack there of, for the game that I had before. I mean, everything to me seems fine, not having played beta yet--as it's not out yet--except the Swarm Host. Seems boring, even the way he describes the tedious back and forth.
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.
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.
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.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
If you are interested then turn off your flipping movie or music for a few minutes and watch it. Stop being so entitled.
BTW: Nice interview. I hope for the balance team so long as David Kim is on it. As for D.B., I fear the worse.
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.
They really took their time with those Zerg buffs as well. I'd be fine with their approach if we didn't have so many of our community indicators showing severe problems.
On August 21 2012 04:04 Apolo wrote: Mothership core now mobile ?... David Kim says they wanted it to feel like a new unit. My question is: why ? It felt much more unique as something attached to the Nexus. There's no such thing in the game right now, but now it just turns into a flying queen with some different abilities.
I agree with this. It was a unique concept how it was, and it fit protoss well. They shouldn't change it only because they want it to move around like a unit. The queen is already like that.
Nothing on mech TvP . BCs are already strong vs P and they'll be awesome in HotS. I'm hoping mech will be strong enough to hold expansions and make the transition.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
If you are interested then turn off your flipping movie or music for a few minutes and watch it. Stop being so entitled.
BTW: Nice interview. I hope for the balance team so long as David Kim is on it. As for D.B., I fear the worse.
No one is entitled here, but you are too stupid to understand what's going on.
The producers of this video are "selling" a product. They are selling this product to get pageviews and ad revenue. They are getting something out of it, and not just doing this out of the kindness of their heart.
It's not a free gift, and we give something in return that makes them money. If the product is something that could be better suited for what the customer wants, then we should let them know.
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.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
If you are interested then turn off your flipping movie or music for a few minutes and watch it. Stop being so entitled.
BTW: Nice interview. I hope for the balance team so long as David Kim is on it. As for D.B., I fear the worse.
No one is entitled here, but you are too stupid to understand what's going on.
The producers of this video are "selling" a product. They are selling this product to get pageviews and ad revenue. They are getting something out of it, and not just doing this out of the kindness of their heart.
It's not a free gift, and we give something in return that makes them money. If the product is something that could be better suited for what the customer wants, then we should let them know.
The guy asks for a text version because he is watching a MOVIE? Maybe it's me but I think that's pretty stupid.
Meh....I like how he said the swarm host serves a different roll than anything else the zerg has. Is he tarded? Just stop making excuses and give us the lurker back.
BC was powerfull at first but they nerfed it because BC all in was overpowerd, now they revert that shit again? How about removing the tank nerfs then -.-
jupp pretty nice to add the text version. I saw the carrier more often then hydras lately i think, not counting zvz where the player with the most hydras always lost. Reapers really fall out of the spectrum without goody and Thorzain. But I am curious if that will really work, a unit that will spoon the opponent into attacking. I mean if they want to make this work, they have to nerf all the other protoss units so hard. Because you have to break the Protoss in the perfect position with what you got, just to stop this one tempest there. Can't have the protoss siege you. I have no doubt that on the upper level this will work. But on the lower level this constant spoon hit will wreck everyone. Either maps will end up being totally open, that there is no perfect position in a giant radius (we had that for some time with siege tanks) or the range will be reduced to 14. And well the swarmhost is pretty unique, not that you could create broodlings out of creep tumors and use them to wear down the opponent on long range. But okay locust really fake the protoss move of moving in tanking with zealots and then retreatig the expensive units, so it will be a nice thing.
When they mentioned their unit design i had to think about "Too many cooks spoil the broth". But i know they have some people who have a last word, which is pretty important. At the end it will be a great game, despite not agreeing with everything they are doing/saying.
Its very easy to balance the new MScore, simply let him do only the trajectory between nexuses with a dedicated rallypoint. But you know what? The "Teleport" mechanics fits way more to the protoss general lore\design. Yes, it seems more a structure than a unit, because in fact its an "addon" structure and not a unit. Who the fuck can call a photon-spinecrowler a unit? Blizzard can cause only troubles to the mapmakers with that idea.
I actually really hate their new direction with the Mothership Core.
What was wrong with keeping it as a building add on? It was a unique mechanic that felt very Protoss like, like the Mothership was the center of the Protoss base. There's no point to making it mobile, just for the sake of making it mobile.
On August 21 2012 06:21 Vindicare605 wrote: I actually really hate their new direction with the Mothership Core.
What was wrong with keeping it as a building add on? It was a unique mechanic that felt very Protoss like, like the Mothership was the center of the Protoss base. There's no point to making it mobile, just for the sake of making it mobile.
But if it's an add-on and not a unit, they can't market it as a new unit. (lol) It's sad that Blizzard keeps giving these inane reasons for removing stuff. It's like they have no faith in the intelligence of their player base.
On August 21 2012 06:21 Vindicare605 wrote: I actually really hate their new direction with the Mothership Core.
What was wrong with keeping it as a building add on? It was a unique mechanic that felt very Protoss like, like the Mothership was the center of the Protoss base. There's no point to making it mobile, just for the sake of making it mobile.
Since when do addons to buildings feel very Protoss? WTF?
Tempest is still a really terrible unit in my opinion. I've tried it out a lot and I cant stand it. Being an old BW player I do have a bit of a nostalgia bias and would like to keep my good old carriers. They just need to keep them and find a solution to make them viable again in multiplayer.
wasn't what was cool about the MS core that it wasn't a unit? It was a building add-on that could jump between nexuses and that eventually turn into a unit. Now it's just a unit. Big whoop..
seriously, Blizzard seem so out of touch, the development of HOTS so uninteresting. Right now HOTS is absolutely a do-not-buy for me..
On August 21 2012 06:21 Vindicare605 wrote: I actually really hate their new direction with the Mothership Core.
What was wrong with keeping it as a building add on? It was a unique mechanic that felt very Protoss like, like the Mothership was the center of the Protoss base. There's no point to making it mobile, just for the sake of making it mobile.
I agree, but I will hear what they have to say on the subject. If they are dead set on making it a unit, they should make it so it can only operate with the powergrid, much like any buildng. At least that is intresting and will prevent it from being used to all in without some sort of warning. But it was still better as a building ad-on.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
If you are interested then turn off your flipping movie or music for a few minutes and watch it. Stop being so entitled.
BTW: Nice interview. I hope for the balance team so long as David Kim is on it. As for D.B., I fear the worse.
Wow, someone offers constructive criticism of what would make his enjoyment of their product better and you as a third party finds a problem with it? Talk about entitled indeed...
Anyone else feel like they are playing the carnival game where you spin the wheel of changes and it will eventually stop on one that you are stuck with until LotV?
Every time I see something new about HotS it appears to get even worse. I played it at Aneheim and was not impressed in the slightest. Definitely will not buy it at this point.
I like the BC change, but not the MS Core change. Also the widow mine with the timer was far better as it forced splitting micro out of the races that so far needed less splitting micro.
On August 21 2012 06:55 Sandermatt wrote: I like the BC change, but not the MS Core change. Also the widow mine with the timer was far better as it forced splitting micro out of the races that so far needed less splitting micro.
good point there. the timer could be balanced easily (just nerf/buff the time) and forces splitmicro like storm/fungal/banelings do. would be sad if they keep it on insta-explode. without the timer its just a burrowed superbaneling.
On August 21 2012 06:55 Sandermatt wrote: I like the BC change, but not the MS Core change. Also the widow mine with the timer was far better as it forced splitting micro out of the races that so far needed less splitting micro.
good point there. the timer could be balanced easily (just nerf/buff the time) and forces splitmicro like storm/fungal/banelings do. would be sad if they keep it on insta-explode. without the timer its just a burrowed superbaneling.
I'm fine with Terran getting a superbaneling
But seriously though I would love it if they kept the change for the Widow mine and reduced the timer to something like 5 seconds down from 10, so it forces other races to micro more to avoid splash and a fairly short timer like 5 seconds so that you had to be quicker to micro against it and would raise the skill cap of other races.
I do not want a timer on the mine. It removes the point of the mine entirely (to slow down people coming around your flanks as mech) and it'll be completely useless as it'll never be able to do any damage.
lol, now all i see in 2v2 is two P both get mothership core and attack, use recharge/purifer and 4 gate :D u recharge ur friends mothershipcore who than purifer and recharges U :D gonna be fun for multi-player tho...it should stay on the nexus.
On August 21 2012 07:22 Qikz wrote: I do not want a timer on the mine. It removes the point of the mine entirely (to slow down people coming around your flanks as mech) and it'll be completely useless as it'll never be able to do any damage.
Please just make it like the spidermine.
If it attaches to an air unit and explodes, does the splash hit ground? casue u know how some were saying u could put it ur mineral line to defend from oracals and banshees? If it explodes doesnt it kill ur own workers? Well i guess this change helps this cause u can put the mine around the minerals so when the mine goes off it doesnt do damage to ur workers, but than this brings up the problem of someone droping a mine into ur mineral line, and if it explodes instantly and ur not quick enough to pull workers before it burrows arent u fucked?
On August 21 2012 07:54 CrtBalorda wrote: Can the guy on the right please be fierd.
He likes abduct?!?! WTF, omg its horrible I dont want to live anymore, these guys dont know how to make games!
Don't worry, he's a senior game designer despite admitting to not being 'a david kim level player' and liking that idiotic spell. Everything's gonna be aaaaallllllright.
How can they honestly say the carrier is 'not used'? It's used in like every super late game PvZ in every major tournament for the last 4 months or so. I've seen battlecruisers exactly once in that entire time, and it was because MVP was having fun with Squirtle..
I do not like the logic of "it didn't feel enough like a new unit"
In the case of mothership core that is completely different. I like the idea of being able to transfer from nexus to nexus, why do you need that to be a moving unit?
To me that's not enough reason to make that kind of change... bleh
Overall I think blizz does a good job. But this particular decision should have been made during beta and not during alpha imo.
On August 21 2012 03:08 Snowbear wrote: "My favourite unit is the swarm host, it's very unique, there is nothing like it in WOL, it generates free units over and over".
Yeah, there is really no unit like that in WOL! So unique!
On August 21 2012 08:00 thurst0n wrote: I do not like the logic of "it didn't feel enough like a new unit"
In the case of mothership core that is completely different. I like the idea of being able to transfer from nexus to nexus, why do you need that to be a moving unit?
To me that's not enough reason to make that kind of change... bleh
Overall I think blizz does a good job. But this particular decision should have been made during beta and not during alpha imo.
I think the argument was that it didn't feel like a unit, ie. felt like a building/addon with spells. Although I agree that their decision was unecessary, and the poll I posted in the last page showed a strong negative opinion of the change.
On August 21 2012 08:05 Archerofaiur wrote: Or make it a building that can teleport anywhere in pylon power.
Or leave it the way it was at anaheim and let more than 50 people worldwide play it in the beta. Nah, clearly the people who created abduct and the warhound know what's best and don't need help.
Great interview! These guys are awesome as always! Though just from hearing what they're saying I don't really like the change to the mothership core. It doesn't really need to be a unit. It added exactly what the protoss needed - early game protection and the ability to move out without being all in-ish...
Dunno why they felt they needed to make it a unit..
so if I understand correctly...with the mothership core being more a unit now could I attack enemy base with a mobile mothership core? i dont know about you but a 13 range mobile super cannon sounds pretty pimp....and a little op
On August 21 2012 08:07 Cereb wrote: Great interview! These guys are awesome as always! Though just from hearing what they're saying I don't really like the change to the mothership core. It doesn't really need to be a unit. It added exactly what the protoss needed - early game protection and the ability to move out without being all in-ish...
Dunno why they felt they needed to make it a unit..
On August 21 2012 08:07 Cereb wrote: Great interview! These guys are awesome as always! Though just from hearing what they're saying I don't really like the change to the mothership core. It doesn't really need to be a unit. It added exactly what the protoss needed - early game protection and the ability to move out without being all in-ish...
Dunno why they felt they needed to make it a unit..
Because terran protoss is about versatility. Duh.
lol
Ye it feels like they are slightly going against their own principle of not having too many units..
There havn't exactly been that many units that have been annouced to be removed..
On August 21 2012 08:05 Archerofaiur wrote: Or make it a building that can teleport anywhere in pylon power.
MC rush! Ya actually thatd be so overpowered.
Actually, the Mothership originally had an ability that let it teleport anywhere in Pylon power back during the WoL beta, but the spell got removed very early on in one of the first few patches.
I'm not sure if it's a good idea to make the Mothership Core move around. Actually, I would be okay if it was somehow "tethered" to a nearby Nexus, gradually becoming slower as it moves farther away from the Nexus until it can't move any further away at all. It would allow some flexibility in defending, possibly allowing the Mothership Core to move onto nearby cover to defend itself from an attack.
Depending on how fast the mothership core actually is it might not even be worth it to upgrade to a full mothership, since you lose teleport, purify, and energize and only gain vortex plus costing 300/350.
On August 21 2012 08:23 -NegativeZero- wrote: Depending on how fast the mothership core actually is it might not even be worth it to upgrade to a full mothership, since you lose teleport, purify, and energize and only gain vortex plus costing 300/350.
you gain stasis as well....basically freezes all air around mothership including mothership itself
On August 21 2012 08:29 Harbinger631 wrote: What's funny is that making the mothership core a unit means there's going to be more micro involved, and the community hates it.
it's almost like there's more to consider than how much micro something creates when evaluating whether it's fucking retarded or not
I hope abduct don't go through. What will be a perfect abduct? Everybody knows what units to pull, and it can be easily pulled off. They should stop going caster more than 2 useful spells.
It's great that Blizzard is taking their time before implementing patches like the Creep Nerf that can potentially alter the entire game. Shame they didn't do this when it came to change the Queen.
I hope their point about the Swarm Host being unique was a joke. That's all we need, more free units spawns that screw up the opponent's unit pathing.
On August 21 2012 08:41 Eps wrote: It's great that Blizzard is taking their time before implementing patches like the Creep Nerf that can potentially alter the entire game. Shame they didn't do this when it came to change the Queen.
I hope their point about the Swarm Host being unique was a joke. That's all we need, more free units spawns that screw up the opponent's unit pathing.
actually they did the same type of test map for the queen change
the difference is that zergs didn't start winning without the patch (like terrans did this time, according to david kim), which would mean in their mode of thinking that the change was necessary
On August 21 2012 08:41 Eps wrote: It's great that Blizzard is taking their time before implementing patches like the Creep Nerf that can potentially alter the entire game. Shame they didn't do this when it came to change the Queen.
I hope their point about the Swarm Host being unique was a joke. That's all we need, more free units spawns that screw up the opponent's unit pathing.
actually they did the same type of test map for the queen change
the difference is that zergs didn't start winning without the patch (like terrans did this time, according to david kim), which would mean in their mode of thinking that the change was necessary
I remember the test map. The point I was making was the amount of time they're taking with these small tweaks. Rather than the short amount of time they took with the Queen change that had such a big impact on the metagame.
On August 21 2012 08:23 -NegativeZero- wrote: Depending on how fast the mothership core actually is it might not even be worth it to upgrade to a full mothership, since you lose teleport, purify, and energize and only gain vortex plus costing 300/350.
you gain stasis as well....basically freezes all air around mothership including mothership itself
statis plus storm could be ... interesting
but without vortex how will Protoss deal with infestor bloodlord spine? actually, even with vortex, zerg can just sacrafice as many vipers are required to snag the damn thing and kill it off.
I cry for the state of protoss in HotS. I can't see PvT or PvZ working out...
On August 21 2012 04:39 VPVanek wrote: Well, I guess since two of the best players in the world (Taeja , MVP) are doing well, that means Terran is fine. I don't really understand how they can like the flow of TvZ these days, all it is, essentially is a greed fest.
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.
I don't think so. Mass recall and more chrono definitely have improved the early aggression as well. even after patch, TvZ has pretty much remained the same except we don't have as much different types of hellion all in and less roaches baneling ling all in the overall game trend is still the same.
Still not impressed, though I don't know what it will take to sway my opinion when every HOTS update just reinforces my current criticisms, perhaps I'm too biased. Tempest fixing PvP seems pretty farfetched, by the time you tech to them you'll have died to a colossus push. It may have a niche use in the late game, but even if it is used I don't see how it can magically transform the matchup. It's amazing how Blizzard still hasn't swallowed their pride and just removed the colossus, as it creates way more problems than it solves, and rather than trying to fix lategame pvp in its current state (and by that I mean 2 years) they're just going to pray it goes away with the Tempest.
Maybe the MC can solve some of the early game issues, but it seems like such a cop-out from Blizzard. Rather than give Protoss the raw potential and firepower to hold early aggression, they're given a "unit" with 13 range and 60 damage to basically turn every PvX matchup into what ZvX is at the moment.
The units' roles are too predetermined and narrow. If you want to harass, make an oracle - that's all it does. If you want to defend, make a MC. There's no thought behind it, and as a result I can't see the gameplay being exciting in the slightest, whether it's MVP playing or a gold league player. The units are too one-dimensional to be used in interesting ways and combinations; it's not a balance critique, but one of design. Even as a Terran player I'm disappointed that we're being handed straight counters. Zealots a problem? Here, a-move some battle hellions and warhounds.
The game should be about strategy - and strategy isn't picking rock when I spot my opponent has thrown scissors, which is exactly what HOTS seems to be moving toward. Give us units that have potential to be used throughout all parts of the game, and create opportunities rather than remove them. It all started with fungal, force field and concussive shell - limiting your opponent is dull both as a player and a spectator - and so further limiting your opponent by creating an I-protect-your-base-for-10-minutes "unit" will only worsen the already stale early game. Hell, I don't mean to rant, but I abhore having to listen to casters trade stories for 5-10 minutes because the only thing happening in the game is both players trying to out-greed eachother...
Also, my token Terran QQ: I can't wait to play against the new zerg lategame with swarm hosts, infestors, broodlords and vipers. How abduct was even considered in the first place is beyond reason.
Am I crazy, but why would you sink 1200/1200 and 24 supply into 4 tempests (to 1 shot a BL) when you can just slowly move your m-core closer, then turn on purifier for a range 13, 60dmg siege weapon?
You know what would do wonders to Protoss gameplay? Chargelots that can be microed in a way similar to speedlings. Right now charge is something that is used at enemy units. It could still work that way if it was set to autocast, but if it was cast manually, it would just give the zealot a big speed buff for, say, 5 in-game seconds, and it could be moved however the player likes. It would allow Protoss players to set up efficient flanks. This would break up the Protoss deathball, particularly when dealing with the new Terran mech deathball (send the zealots to the side where there are fewest battlehellions, and blink the stalkers on the side with the most battlehellions).
On August 21 2012 09:41 Empirimancer wrote: You know what would do wonders to Protoss gameplay? Chargelots that can be microed in a way similar to speedlings. Right now charge is something that is used at enemy units. It could still work that way if it was set to autocast, but if it was cast manually, it would just give the zealot a big speed buff for, say, 5 in-game seconds, and it could be moved however the player likes. It would allow Protoss players to set up efficient flanks. This would break up the Protoss deathball, particularly when dealing with the new Terran mech deathball (send the zealots to the side where there are fewest battlehellions, and blink the stalkers on the side with the most battlehellions).
I agree wholeheartedly, IMO charge should not have been autocast. To compensate, the permanent speed increase granted by the upgrade could be a little bit higher (3.0 instead of 2.75 speed after upgrade), but you have to target the charge yourself.
However, this'll never happen because everyone's too used to 1a autocast. It's too late to change that now, it should have been done in the beta.
On August 21 2012 09:31 Kodak wrote: HOTS: No rush 20 minutes.
Still not impressed, though I don't know what it will take to sway my opinion when every HOTS update just reinforces my current criticisms, perhaps I'm too biased. Tempest fixing PvP seems pretty farfetched, by the time you tech to them you'll have died to a colossus push. It may have a niche use in the late game, but even if it is used I don't see how it can magically transform the matchup. It's amazing how Blizzard still hasn't swallowed theire pride and just removed the colossus, as it creates way more problems than it solves, and rather than trying to fix lategame pvp in its current state (and by that I mean 2 years) they're just going to pray it goes away with the Tempest.
Maybe the MC can solve some of the early game issues, but it seems like such a cop-out from Blizzard. Rather than give Protoss the raw potential and firepower to hold early aggression, they're given a "unit" with 13 range and 60 damage to basically turn every PvX matchup into what ZvX is at the moment.
The units' roles are too predetermined and narrow. If you want to harass, make an oracle - that's all it does. If you want to defend, make a MC. There's no thought behind it, and as a result I can't see the gameplay being exciting in the slightest, whether it's MVP playing or a gold league player. The units are too one-dimensional to be used in interesting ways and combinations; it's not a balance critique, but one of design. Even as a Terran player I'm disappointed that we're being handed straight counters. Zealots a problem? Here, a-move some battle hellions and warhounds.
The game should be about strategy - and strategy isn't picking rock when I spot my opponent has thrown scissors, which is exactly what HOTS seems to be moving toward. Give us units that have potential to be used throughout all parts of the game, and create opportunities rather than remove them. It all started with fungal, force field and concussive shell - limiting your opponent is dull both as a player and a spectator - and so further limiting your opponent by creating an I-protect-your-base-for-10-minutes "unit" will only worsen the already stale early game. Hell, I don't mean to rant, but I abhore having to listen to casters trade stories for 5-10 minutes because the only thing happening in the game is both players trying to out-greed eachother...
Also, my token Terran QQ: I can't wait to play against the new zerg lategame with swarm hosts, infestors, broodlords and vipers. How abduct was even considered in the first place is beyond reason.
Hey, they nerfed everything that could kill you mid-game and balanced the game around 200-200 deathball. What else do you expect from these clowns?
On August 21 2012 09:31 Kodak wrote: HOTS: No rush 20 minutes.
Still not impressed, though I don't know what it will take to sway my opinion when every HOTS update just reinforces my current criticisms, perhaps I'm too biased. Tempest fixing PvP seems pretty farfetched, by the time you tech to them you'll have died to a colossus push. It may have a niche use in the late game, but even if it is used I don't see how it can magically transform the matchup. It's amazing how Blizzard still hasn't swallowed theire pride and just removed the colossus, as it creates way more problems than it solves, and rather than trying to fix lategame pvp in its current state (and by that I mean 2 years) they're just going to pray it goes away with the Tempest.
Maybe the MC can solve some of the early game issues, but it seems like such a cop-out from Blizzard. Rather than give Protoss the raw potential and firepower to hold early aggression, they're given a "unit" with 13 range and 60 damage to basically turn every PvX matchup into what ZvX is at the moment.
The units' roles are too predetermined and narrow. If you want to harass, make an oracle - that's all it does. If you want to defend, make a MC. There's no thought behind it, and as a result I can't see the gameplay being exciting in the slightest, whether it's MVP playing or a gold league player. The units are too one-dimensional to be used in interesting ways and combinations; it's not a balance critique, but one of design. Even as a Terran player I'm disappointed that we're being handed straight counters. Zealots a problem? Here, a-move some battle hellions and warhounds.
The game should be about strategy - and strategy isn't picking rock when I spot my opponent has thrown scissors, which is exactly what HOTS seems to be moving toward. Give us units that have potential to be used throughout all parts of the game, and create opportunities rather than remove them. It all started with fungal, force field and concussive shell - limiting your opponent is dull both as a player and a spectator - and so further limiting your opponent by creating an I-protect-your-base-for-10-minutes "unit" will only worsen the already stale early game. Hell, I don't mean to rant, but I abhore having to listen to casters trade stories for 5-10 minutes because the only thing happening in the game is both players trying to out-greed eachother...
Also, my token Terran QQ: I can't wait to play against the new zerg lategame with swarm hosts, infestors, broodlords and vipers. How abduct was even considered in the first place is beyond reason.
On August 21 2012 02:40 Noocta wrote: Nice interview ! Learned a few new things, that's cool. I'm a bit afraid of Mothership core rush with the canon ability tho xD
Not knowming what the questions are is a bit weird tho
is so slow and cannon only last 15 seconds or so and costs energy . and mothership core has ~400 hp . will never be possible such a rush .
On August 21 2012 02:40 Noocta wrote: Nice interview ! Learned a few new things, that's cool. I'm a bit afraid of Mothership core rush with the canon ability tho xD
Not knowming what the questions are is a bit weird tho
is so slow and cannon only last 15 seconds or so and costs energy . and mothership core has ~400 hp . will never be possible such a rush .
Tempest a very Strategic unit AKA it's a gimmicky unit like most of the Protoss arsenal and will only work if your opponents lets it work. I am not happy with The Tempest if you can't tell from trying Hots custom map, the unit just feels horrible.
Can't wait for HotS to come out. Also, just get rid of the Carrier, it's a rubbish unit and the only reason people want it to stay is nostalgia; just do what's best for the game and replace it with a useful unit in the Tempest.
On August 21 2012 09:31 Kodak wrote: Tempest fixing PvP seems pretty farfetched, by the time you tech to them you'll have died to a colossus push. It may have a niche use in the late game, but even if it is used I don't see how it can magically transform the matchup. It's amazing how Blizzard still hasn't swallowed theire pride and just removed the colossus, as it creates way more problems than it solves, and rather than trying to fix lategame pvp in its current state (and by that I mean 2 years) they're just going to pray it goes away with the Tempest.
It seems pretty reasonable to me to think giving Protoss air options will help with colossus wars. The colossus has a powerful AoE attack to ground, making it so that once the colossus count gets big enough, almost nothing can stop it. In both the other matchups, Zergs and Terrans solve this problem by attacking colossi from the air. Protoss can't do this as well because they don't have very good air options, so their only option is to make a comparable number of colossus. The Tempest can snipe colossi from afar, making it a potential answer to the colossus problem.
Maybe the MC can solve some of the early game issues, but it seems like such a cop-out from Blizzard. Rather than give Protoss the raw potential and firepower to hold early aggression, they're given a "unit" with 13 range and 60 damage to basically turn every PvX matchup into what ZvX is at the moment.
Raw potential and firepower are what caused the early-game problems with PvP. 4gate is such a powerful build that you need to either a) 4gate yourself, or b) use defenders' advantage to hold it off. Protoss has fairly little in the way of defender's advantage, so for a long time 4gate vs. 4gate reigned supreme. Then they made the ramp change to give more defender's advantage, which "fixed" PvP, but more Protoss defender's advantage will help make economic play in the matchup possible.
It's not like you can never attack a Protoss any more. Mothership Core energy will be a scarce resource, and if you force him to use Purify, that's good damage right there. Then once he does you can back up and attack again when it wears off, or you can go attack another base, or you can go home satisfied with forcing him to waste that energy.
The units' roles are too predetermined and narrow. If you want to harass, make an oracle - that's all it does. If you want to defend, make a MC. There's no thought behind it, and as a result I can't see the gameplay being exciting in the slightest, whether it's MVP playing or a gold league player. The units are too one-dimensional to be used in interesting ways and combinations; it's not a balance critique, but one of design. Even as a Terran player I'm disappointed that we're being handed straight counters. Zealots a problem? Here, a-move some battle hellions and warhounds.
I'm not sure that criticism is all that, well, true. The oracle is used primarily to harass, just like the mutalisk or phoenix or reaper or anything else fast, but 1) it does so in an interesting way, and 2) it has other uses. One of its spells is for scouting purposes, which is different from harass. And cloak is much more useful where your army is.
For that matter the Mothership Core isn't all that one-dimensional. If you want to defend, use Purify. If you want to get aggressive, supercharge your spellcasters with energy and charge forward, or supercharge your chrono boost and do insane gateway aggression. Or catch your opponent out of position, snipe some important structures or a base or something, and mass recall out when his army shows up. The mothership core and oracle both give you a variety of dimensions for interacting with the game, which is exactly the game design we like about RTS.
The game should be about strategy - and strategy isn't picking rock when I spot my opponent has thrown scissors, which is exactly what HOTS seems to be moving toward. Give us units that have potential to be used throughout all parts of the game, and create opportunities rather than remove them. It all started with fungal, force field and concussive shell - limiting your opponent is dull both as a player and a spectator - and so further limiting your opponent by creating an I-protect-your-base-for-10-minutes "unit" will only worsen the already stale early game. Hell, I don't mean to rant, but I abhore having to listen to casters trade stories for 5-10 minutes because the only thing happening in the game is both players trying to out-greed eachother...
Also, my token Terran QQ: I can't wait to play against the new zerg lategame with swarm hosts, infestors, broodlords and vipers. How abduct was even considered in the first place is beyond reason.
HotS should have interesting new cheeses along with the new units. Zergs get creep dropping at evolution chamber tech now, which means a lot of spine crawler rushes will be possible (maybe even powerful enough to crush FFE). New reapers may have what it takes to make reaper aggression powerful again, and if not, Blizz may try something else in beta since they're committed to trying to make the reaper viable. Since the Mothership Core is mobile now, Protoss will always have the option to bring it along with an attack, which will make that attack much more powerful, but will also remove the power to retreat and make it very all-in. In other words, there will be plenty of possible early aggression if that's what you're into.
The only reason pros don't do so much 1-base or 2-base aggression any more is because early aggression is and has to be fully defendable if your opponent defends correctly (if some one-base build reliably killed any and all fast expands, that would be less than ideal game design a la PvP), which means that an attack like that can win, but you are relying on your opponent messing up. Pros prefer to rely on their own skill, rather than their opponents ineptitude. Sorry if that makes games unenjoyable to you, but pros still cheese plenty for mindgame purposes, so as long as you're watching Bo5's or Bo7's you should be able to enjoy the Starcraft scene well enough.
As a fellow Terran I agree that the viper makes Zerg late game look intimidating (I don't think the swarm host will contribute much to the broodlord-infestor composition). But pre-beta, it's a little early to be calling imbalanced. Battlecruisers are getting a big damage buff, and maybe that will make Sky Terran late-game viable. If it's imbalanced Blizz will try to fix it, but we should probably wait to see if it's actually imbalanced before QQing up a storm over units that haven't even entered beta.
Every unit Blizzard adds just seems to be so...idk narrowly useful? Protoss is weak early-game? Here let's give them a new unit that only allows for super defensive strats. Battle hellion, war-hound, tempests are all used to counter. If Blizzard truly wants an entertaining game, do it as Orb suggested once, and make it more into BW, where you weren't forced to make X unit to counter X unit, in BW you could make anything and with macro and strategy, make it work.
And I will truly sympathize with Protoss in HotS. Without Mothership + Vortex, and with carriers in jeopardy, what are we going to see now in late-game PvZ? Mass tempests? Vipers and their ensnare or whatever ability will make Collosi pushes so much harder to carry through.
On August 21 2012 11:01 FallDownMarigold wrote: Proxy nexus Mothership Core rush should be a pretty hilarious new cheese
Not anymore, the Mship Core is no longer tethered to the nexus, and being a slow moving unit, it will be too vulnerable to leave your base on its own.
On August 21 2012 11:17 aviator116 wrote: Every unit Blizzard adds just seems to be so...idk narrowly useful? Protoss is weak early-game? Here let's give them a new unit that only allows for super defensive strats. Battle hellion, war-hound, tempests are all used to counter. If Blizzard truly wants an entertaining game, do it as Orb suggested once, and make it more into BW, where you weren't forced to make X unit to counter X unit, in BW you could make anything and with macro and strategy, make it work.
And I will truly sympathize with Protoss in HotS. Without Mothership + Vortex, and with carriers in jeopardy, what are we going to see now in late-game PvZ? Mass tempests? Vipers and their ensnare or whatever ability will make Collosi pushes so much harder to carry through.
I don't see what you're so worried about in the second paragraph. Mship + Vortex is not the one strat Protoss relies on. Also why mass Tempests? People need to lose the "mass mentality" as I like to call it.
To answer this part of your question "with carriers in jeopardy, what are we going to see now in late-game PvZ" Let's back up for a second, who masses carriers vs late game Zerg? You should be rejoicing with the new Tempest, being able to snipe Brood Lords and Infestors from afar and fighting on your terms. The power of Tempests is near gamebreaking in its ability to force your opponent to do something. The siegebreaking potential this unit has is amazing, and a Carrier could never fulfill this role.
Also about Vipers and abduct, the zerg has to risk losing the viper because the colossus outranges abduct and it can be sniped by stalkers. Abduct has the same range as Neural Parasite, 7. Abduct is not a gamebreaking ability, it's an ability that capitalizes on the enemy making a mistake and letting his units stray too far. If that happens, then the zerg can take the unit without risk of losing the viper, but the trade off is that your colossus is still yours, free from neural parasite! A truly evil combo would be Abduct + Neural
On August 21 2012 11:37 aeroblaster wrote: To answer this part of your question "with carriers in jeopardy, what are we going to see now in late-game PvZ" Let's back up for a second, who masses carriers vs late game Zerg?
On August 21 2012 11:37 aeroblaster wrote: A truly evil combo would be Abduct + Neural
I don't fear Abduct + Neural as much as I fear Blinding Cloud + Fungal Growth.
I know everyone misses the old Defiler Dark Swarm. But what the hell is going on in the mind of Blizz devs that think giving a race that has a Micro-eliminating spell, along with a new spell that minimize Bio-Range to 1 would be a good idea? Better be hoping for those clutch EMPs or that you have some Sieged-up Tanks in a solid position.
Well, atleast they gave Battle Hellions to combat this as the "new" firebat.
On August 21 2012 11:37 aeroblaster wrote: A truly evil combo would be Abduct + Neural
I don't fear Abduct + Neural as much as I fear Blinding Cloud + Fungal Growth.
I know everyone misses the old Defiler Dark Swarm. But what the hell is going on in the mind of Blizz devs that think giving a race that has a Micro-eliminating spell, along with a new spell that minimize Bio-Range to 1 would be a good idea? Better be hoping for those clutch EMPs or that you have some Sieged-up Tanks in a solid position.
Well, atleast they gave Battle Hellions to combat this as the "new" firebat.
I think youre missing a key point here; no one will go bio in hots :p
On August 21 2012 03:45 `dunedain wrote: So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran... Spellcasters suck compared to the other races, they keep discussing ways to kill the defensive advantage that Terran was supposed to be about, and they plan on adding units that hard counter what Terrans usually build...
All that's left for them to do is remove the marine, and Terran will become the forgotten race.
I love watching Terran QQ.
It's like they've forgotten that they were OP for most of the entire history.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
we introduced the tempest, which is a very similar unit to the Carrier, but we feel like in our internal play test games, that it’s just doing everything that the Carrier does, but a little better. The Carrier’s damage doesn’t really counter a lot of things for cost. So the strength is, it’s just an all-around unit against everything, that’s pretty decent, but not amazing. That’s exactly what the Tempest is. Tempest actually have an upgrade to increase their range to 22, which is a pretty crazy range. It’s not the final number. So we have this new unit that’s sort of like the Carrier, but better. So that’s the main reason, why we decided to remove the Carrier.
WTF? Tempest has absolutely dreadful DPS that can't kill diddley-squat in a fight scenario; How is that similar to the carrier? Carrier also shoots out those mofo interceptors that can tank units that auto-target. The only thing about the tempest that's good for combat is it's health, which just doesn't cut it for overall unit effectiveness in fighting.
Tempest is a decent concept, but right now it seems to be almost useless (really niche use which probably won't be that common considering the effectiveness of bio and the lack of warhound/siegetank/marauder anti-air) compared to carrier or void ray.
On August 21 2012 03:45 `dunedain wrote: So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran...
Ya, it's not like terran was dominating everything for the first half year of the game being out or anything — oh wait.
... From what I've seen the tempest looks like a shittier carrier... and Carriers have become more and more common in lategame PvZ. Frustrating, I wish they'd leave it in...
Tempest is way better than Carriers guys. 23 >>>> 8(14). What else do you want? Other stats, micro? Naw you don't get it. New Protoss micro is to suicide everything and mass recall.
Mothership core is now a unit..!!!! That's interesting... :D me likesssss
Liston to me guys, I am going to tell you the REAL reason to remove carrier from HOTS: They are simply saving it for LotV. That simple. No worries, it will return.
On August 21 2012 13:46 Cloak wrote: Tempest is way better than Carriers guys. 23 >>>> 8(14). What else do you want? Other stats, micro? Naw you don't get it. New Protoss micro is to suicide everything and mass recall.
you forgot to mention that the tempest has a dps of 7.5 on normal units 10 on armored.......so ya, go ahead and tickle the terran units from 22 range. you might kill something in 10 minutes or so
On August 21 2012 11:37 aeroblaster wrote: A truly evil combo would be Abduct + Neural
Hey, for once neural will actually be useable!
On August 21 2012 12:46 Eps wrote: I don't fear Abduct + Neural as much as I fear Blinding Cloud + Fungal Growth.
I know everyone misses the old Defiler Dark Swarm. But what the hell is going on in the mind of Blizz devs that think giving a race that has a Micro-eliminating spell, along with a new spell that minimize Bio-Range to 1 would be a good idea? Better be hoping for those clutch EMPs or that you have some Sieged-up Tanks in a solid position.
You think Dark Swarm is easier to deal with? you have to be delusional; dark swarm was so strong, and blinding cloud is so weak and niche in comparison. You're way too fast to judge things. To cast a single fungal–blinding cloud combo on a group on units requires a full 200 energy, and if you didn't know blinding cloud's AoE isn't particularly big from what I remember. Aside from the fact that it costs lost of energy, the opponent has three additional options to deal with it: snipe/EMP, more mech units, and spreading out bio units more.
When all that is considered your worries seem so absolutely ridiculous. The problem I have with blinding cloud is that the ability is too niche regardless of if it's too strong or too weak — it doesn't work on ANY Protoss units, which is outright stupid.
On August 21 2012 03:45 `dunedain wrote: So obvious that Blizzard hates Terran... Spellcasters suck compared to the other races, they keep discussing ways to kill the defensive advantage that Terran was supposed to be about, and they plan on adding units that hard counter what Terrans usually build...
All that's left for them to do is remove the marine, and Terran will become the forgotten race.
I love watching Terran QQ.
It's like they've forgotten that they were OP for most of the entire history.
"omg we're not OP anymore!"
Isn't that the wrong way to think about it though? "Here, let's buff Zerg to OPness right now, since Terran was OP most of 2011. Once we hit 2013, we can make Protoss OP. Then we can go back to Terran." I would rather have an actually balanced game rather than a cycle of OP races.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
On August 21 2012 12:46 Eps wrote: I don't fear Abduct + Neural as much as I fear Blinding Cloud + Fungal Growth.
I know everyone misses the old Defiler Dark Swarm. But what the hell is going on in the mind of Blizz devs that think giving a race that has a Micro-eliminating spell, along with a new spell that minimize Bio-Range to 1 would be a good idea? Better be hoping for those clutch EMPs or that you have some Sieged-up Tanks in a solid position.
You think Dark Swarm is easier to deal with? you have to be delusional; dark swarm was so strong, and blinding cloud is so weak and niche in comparison. You're way too fast to judge things. To cast a single fungal–blinding cloud combo on a group on units requires a full 200 energy, and if you didn't know blinding cloud's AoE isn't particularly big from what I remember. Aside from the fact that it costs lost of energy, the opponent has three additional options to deal with it: snipe/EMP, more mech units, and spreading out bio units more.
When all that is considered your worries seem so absolutely ridiculous. The problem I have with blinding cloud is that the ability is too niche regardless of if it's too strong or too weak — it doesn't work on ANY Protoss units, which is outright stupid.
I would rather not get into a BW vs SCII debate, as that's a completely different topic. I mentioned the comparison, since the Viper is essentially Defiler 2.0 in air form. Dark Swarm was in a much different game, one where there was no micro-locking abilities. Ensnare can't even begin to compare to FG.
As for the radius of Blinding Cloud, it looked to be around 1.5 which is standard. Considering that EMP, Storms are 1.5 as well, while FG is at 2.0 radius.
From what you're saying - I didn't know that Blinding Cloud and FG came from 1 Single unit. It's not as if Zergs can't morph a bunch of Infestors with FG-energy ready..wait. It's not as if Blizzard didn't give Vipers an ability to leech building HP for energy..wait. /sarcasm
Wow spreading out units more, why didn't I think of that? It seems like the Zerg response to every proposed attempt to raise issue with one of their units is to tell the opponent to Micro better. Now why didn't Zergs just Micro better when they had to deal with pre-nerf EMP's and Ghost Snipe?
Great interview. I like to here David Kim's thoughts on things. Battlecruiser reasoning seemed sound. Mothership core flys slow is cool too... make it slower than old Overlord and then never patch it for 2 years! I'd like that.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Yea, your attitude toward the game.
It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Terran was nerfed because their win rates were too high. Those just happened to be good areas to nerf.
Our casters Daniel "cip" Meyer and Björn "Anathema" Siebrands had the opportunity to meet and exclusivly interview Senior Game Designer Kaeo Milker and the Lead Balance Designer David Kim at gamescom 2012 in Cologne, Germany.
The topics covered were the development process of HotS, in particular concerning the multiplayer balance and the campaign storyline, as well as Patch 1.5 and it's quirks, the likelihood of the changes to Raven and Creep Tumors being implemented and the fate of the Carrier.
If you liked this Interview, visit us at http://www.gaming-insight.de to check out our soon to be posted interviews with Tasteless, Feast and Kas from the recently finished Intel Extreme Masters Global Challenge Cologne and check out our awesome StarCraft 2 content, including our next XMG Gaming-Insight StarCraft 2 cup, esports coverage and news.
Edit: We've now transcribed the interview. Just scroll under the video in the news.
Enjoy <3
Just one piece of advice for the makers of that website:
Change your color scheme, because this "purple in purple" is terrible for the eyes. Its not only the "aggresive purple", but also the lack of contrast between text and background which makes it really terrible. The best contrast for long term reading is to have a light background and dark text.
The stuff about the "free units being cool because you can wear down the enemy without losing anything" is the PERFECT explanation as to why it is TERRIBLE ... since Zerg have the biggest economy already and *should be* the race which has to replenish their army.
The "we put the creep nerf and Raven buff on hold" stuff shows that Blizzard seems to be hanging their colors in the wind when it comes to balancing and long-term data doesnt seem to matter.
Why isnt there any interview which asks critical questions like the one about having too many free units for Zerg and the impossible-to-balance-right range 22 Tempest? Or why it is ok to have a non-unique Protoss flying unit which can cloak surrounding units when the Raven sucks so badly and the Overlords dont automatically detect cloaked units anymore ...
I wish instead of increasing the BC damage, they'd buff it's armor/life.. everything already dies in like 5 seconds in SC2 anyway.. :/ I personally want longer battles, but maybe I'm just being crazy
On August 21 2012 16:01 Wafflelisk wrote: I wish instead of increasing the BC damage, they'd buff it's armor/life.. everything already dies in like 5 seconds in SC2 anyway.. :/ I personally want longer battles, but maybe I'm just being crazy
I have to agree there, because the BC has the Yamato for dealing big damage, but it dies far too quickly to a bunch of measly ground units (which shouldnt be able to reach it IRL).
1. Taking only half damage from ground units (maybe for all air units? => major damage revamp needed for air units), except for specialized anti-air attacks (Terran turret, Spore Crawler, Thor AA). 2. Making BCs immune to Feedback damage (but not the emptying of the enrgy bar?) OR giving it a defensive matrix (or some other cheap way to spend their energy). 3. Neural Parasite should have its range halved against air units OR the Infestor should take some damage from the connection since part of it actually reaches inside a huge machine where a few Marines are probably shooting it or something. Maybe EMP could be used to sever such connections defensively ...
The gist of it all is that one of the major reasons why BCs arent used is that they are extremely expensive and die too easily to cheap stuff. That is the weak point of most air units and some general balance changes should be made ... like Fungal Growth only affecting ground units for example. That would make Mutas very viable in ZvZ and not instantly shut them down once one of them has some Infestors with energy for Fungals.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
the whole interview is texted right beneath the video. mb check it out before whining?
On August 21 2012 10:22 BlindKill wrote: need less late game, more early game pushes
Yes! Throughout the development of SC2 they have always moved away from the early and mid game, they remove small maps, they make everyone get a free third without even needing to kill the rocks, they nerf all early timings like warp gate reaper speed blue flame... etc. Maps are huge, queens are great defence, no way to punish...
Hots should focus on rewarding early and mid game strats! Bring back the action to the middle of the map at the 7, 10, 12 minute marks... Not 25 with 3/3 and 200/200 and thousands in the bank.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
the whole interview is texted right beneath the video. mb check it out before whining?
The transcript was not posted until later, when more people asked for it.
On August 21 2012 02:30 Ketara wrote: As a request, next time you guys do an interview.
I don't like watching videos of these things. I'm often playing a game or listening to music or watching a movie or something while I check stuff like this. I want to read it.
Please provide a text version.
the whole interview is texted right beneath the video. mb check it out before whining?
first of all, he was not whining. second, the transcript got up there because he asked for it, it was not there from the beginning but put in after he (among others) asked for it. third, you are quite rude and assumptive, when you enter a thread this late and expect to know everything. fourth, well just be nicer please
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Terran was nerfed because their win rates were too high. Those just happened to be good areas to nerf.
thorzain was the only one using thors effectively in tvp, and he only did it against MC and Nony. And he only used his thor build in one game per series. I mean, terran has always had a better successrate with mmm against protoss, so saying nerfing thors was a "good area to nerf" makes no sense.
On top of that, they didn't actually nerf thors because they were "op." They nerfed thors because they don't like how mass thor looks. But on the other hand they did nothing to prevent terran going mass thor in the other two match ups, so apparently mass thor looks ok vs zerg, or something. I seriously lost all faith in Blizzard's balance design team as soon as I read the justification for the thor nerf. It basically makes no sense.
o how close are we to actually finishing HotS? We are actually in the very final stages right now of polishing HotS. On the campaign side, all the missions are done, we’re basically just tuning difficulty on it. Like I said, adding that final level of Blizzard polish, that we’re so famous for. All those little details and like I said easter eggs and fun stuff like that that we’re putting into it. On the multiplayer side we’re actively working on locking down the balance to get a beta build together. And once we have that, we’ll go into beta. And the beta process will take as much time as we need to kind of make sure that the multiplayer balance and the units are where they need to be. And once we’re feeling confident that things are set for esports and for people to start playing, we’ll solidify a release date and announce it.
Oh right so there going to drag it out as long as possible then The "easter egg" comes up alot too...i have no idea what that means unless they just politely hinting at an April realase date?
I dont get it, their removing carriers when they are trying to make mech viable?
How is the tempest suppose to stop mass collossi late game PvP? Blink stalker will wreck it before it even matters or collossi will melt the person who made tempest army so fast and then just blink under and kill tempest. The tempest has shit DPS and no splash vs something that can splash and has high DPS. Collossi also has better synergy with gateway unit cause of the gateway upgrade. Why in the world would you decide to make a Tempest in PvP? It the same reason people didnt make carriers in BW but I can atleast see carriers being somewat viable compare to tempest if they were in BW. Honestly, in the TvP battle report, the protoss had 5+ tempest and the terran mech army just walk into the toss base and win. That is how PvP would go if the toss went Tempest. I dont understand...
I thought they nerfed thors because of thor rushes (it was very good VS toss when strike cannons was a cooldown as you could one-shot every immo), not because of Thorzain. Also the blue flame nerf was fine, TvT was just a fucking mess "I better kill all his workers before he does it to me". Apart from that I agree with Avilo, it seems they jumped on every occasion to nerf T, and are now reluctant to any tiny buff (raven speed lol).
On August 21 2012 11:37 aeroblaster wrote: A truly evil combo would be Abduct + Neural
I don't fear Abduct + Neural as much as I fear Blinding Cloud + Fungal Growth.
I know everyone misses the old Defiler Dark Swarm. But what the hell is going on in the mind of Blizz devs that think giving a race that has a Micro-eliminating spell, along with a new spell that minimize Bio-Range to 1 would be a good idea? Better be hoping for those clutch EMPs or that you have some Sieged-up Tanks in a solid position.
Well, atleast they gave Battle Hellions to combat this as the "new" firebat.
The bio cloud doesn't make any sense at all, they said they wanted to fill gaps, but does zerg have problems with bio at infestation pit tech?
Also I dislike the turtling and greed in the early game, but I blame map makers.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Damn it, Carriers aren't bad and it's madness that someone actually suggested free interceptors to 8-14 range units from a race that often floats masses of minerals and complains about not knowing what to spend it on, saying "gas is king" (though granted, we're seeing more and more zealot+war prism harassment these days). Aiyaiyai!
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Instead of the terran it's now the zerg who does the same build every game (6 queen) it's safe, you can tech, you can get your 3rd and creep spread. Where's the risk of this opening?
I like it in ZvZ though.
I dislike the mothership core, just like the queen buff it kills early game strategies. 11/11, 2 rax, marine/hellion drop, banshees (you're gonna lose it if you get anywhere near the mineral line) are all pretty bad once the protoss gets his MC.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Yea, your attitude toward the game.
It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
They have explained the reasons behind each of those nerfs when they took place. I remember each of them and they all sounded very reasonable(snipe might be the exception, but it was still a bit nuts) And why would Blizzard explain themselves again when the community has shown it is far from level headed when it comes to balance.
And I don't see protoss/zerg dominance over the last 5-6 months. The win rates have never dropped below 40% for terran, which is more than can be said for protoss and zerg in the worst days of terran dominance.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Also, the fact that one terran opening was being use against zerg regardless of map is pretty silly. I don't know a protoss build that I can do against zerg or terran on every map and claim total map control.
On August 21 2012 19:06 NormandyBoy wrote: I thought they nerfed thors because of thor rushes (it was very good VS toss when strike cannons was a cooldown as you could one-shot every immo), not because of Thorzain.
no, it was allegedly primarily a mass thor pathing/obscuring issue. I think David Kim denied it being based on Thorzain specifically, but Thorzain was the only guy going mass thor at that time, so it's obviously not true
First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.
I guess they didn't notice that every big unit in the game obscures smaller units. And they also didn't notice that adding the energy bar only stops mass thor in tvp. It's a shining example of a game developer's inability to think holistically about his game
On August 21 2012 19:06 NormandyBoy wrote: I thought they nerfed thors because of thor rushes (it was very good VS toss when strike cannons was a cooldown as you could one-shot every immo), not because of Thorzain.
no, it's was allegedly primarily a mass thor pathing/obscuring issue. I think David Kim denied it being based on Thorzain specifically, but Thorzain was the only guy going mass thor at that time, so it's obviously not true
First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.
I guess they didn't notice that every big unit in the game obscures smaller units. And they also didn't notice that adding the energy bar only stops mass thor in tvp. It's a shining example of a game developer's inability to think holistically about his game
I think they did it more for two base all-in using thor-marine. It was a brutal build and with the strike cannons, the terran could lock down any immortals the protoss built to deal with it. This was back in the days of the range 5 immortals vs range 7 thors as well.
Second, we felt counter relationships were turning too heavily. The nature of lockdown abilities in general is that they have the potential to heavily turn the tide of battle against armies that would otherwise counter your units. Most of these abilities, especially for an ability as strong as this one, have to be fairly difficult to bring out and easier to counter. We feel that having the additional counters of EMP/Feedback to the Strike Cannons ability is better so that we don’t get into degenerating situations where the opponent is stuck without recourse.
On August 21 2012 18:50 Patate wrote: So, when are they going to finally decide to make this game a worthy successor to BW and implement the lurker instead of that dumb burrowed broodlord?
This game isn't trying to be Brood War, stop being dumb already.
On August 21 2012 03:05 Chaosvuistje wrote: I wonder that now the mothership core can move around, how the abilities it has right now will hold up.
People like you need to stop making comparisons between the SH and Broodlords, they function completely differently.
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.
you're actually very wrong about that. i dont know why people do not have the ability to think these days and figure out the key differences between units like SH and BL.
first of all the main difference between BL and SH is mobility. on creep the SH is pretty fast so it can engage and retreat from a battle alot more easily then a BL can. this allows you to do cute harassments on faraway expansions or combine it with drops/nydus worms. BL is a very slow moving unit so you cant retreat with it easily nor can you harass faraway expansions with BL. infact you cant harass at all with a BL. BL is mainly used during direct engagements.
another difference is the spawn units AT WILL command SH has. this is very important because you can turn off the auto cast on SH and chose when they can or cant spawn units. (i assume all of the good players will always have auto cast turned off except when sieging) what this means is that you can set up the most epic ambushes or flanks with SH without the opponent ever noticing. thats something that is impossible to do with BL. when was the last time you flanked with the broodlings on BL?
another very important aspect of SH is the ability to defend pretty much any expansion you want combined with nydus worms. it would be similiar to lurkers of BW that would go into nydus canals and help defend faraway bases from drops/harassment and by enough time for units to get there. obviously you cant do this with BL. the best defense u can do with BLs is sit them above a mass of spines and infestors. yes this is good (altho wasteful IMHO) defense you can only defende that position. your other expansions that are far away are undefended and BLs will never get there in time. SHs on the other hand can defend multiple bases if need be especially with nydus worms being set up everywhere.
anyway those are the main differences between SH and BL. there might be more, but i feel like those are the main key differences of the 2 units. the only thing they share in common is the ability to spawn infinite free units, and even that machanic is different because of the autocast feature on SH.
They say they want to stop PvP from being a Collossus wars by adding the Tempest. Why not just remove the fucking Collossus? It's the worst designed unit in the game, and is creating so many problems balancing the game.
On August 21 2012 19:06 NormandyBoy wrote: I thought they nerfed thors because of thor rushes (it was very good VS toss when strike cannons was a cooldown as you could one-shot every immo), not because of Thorzain.
no, it's was allegedly primarily a mass thor pathing/obscuring issue. I think David Kim denied it being based on Thorzain specifically, but Thorzain was the only guy going mass thor at that time, so it's obviously not true
First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.
I guess they didn't notice that every big unit in the game obscures smaller units. And they also didn't notice that adding the energy bar only stops mass thor in tvp. It's a shining example of a game developer's inability to think holistically about his game
I think they did it more for two base all-in using thor-marine. It was a brutal build and with the strike cannons, the terran could lock down any immortals the protoss built to deal with it. This was back in the days of the range 5 immortals vs range 7 thors as well.
Second, we felt counter relationships were turning too heavily. The nature of lockdown abilities in general is that they have the potential to heavily turn the tide of battle against armies that would otherwise counter your units. Most of these abilities, especially for an ability as strong as this one, have to be fairly difficult to bring out and easier to counter. We feel that having the additional counters of EMP/Feedback to the Strike Cannons ability is better so that we don’t get into degenerating situations where the opponent is stuck without recourse.
When they structure their reasoning into two sections of "first" and "second," I tend to think that is how they thought about the problem. Deal with mass thor first, lockdown second.
Jjakji was successful with 2 base thor/banshee/marine all-ins long after the thor nerf, so I don't think that is true. Thor all-ins were never reliant on the lock down to be successful anyway. Most of the time you never even got the upgrade that early, favoring +1 armor on the thors instead. If the real problem was the lock down, they could just have shortened the duration and made it a mini-stun or something, or just removed the upgrade entirely. They wanted to remove the thor as a core, lategame unit for tvp specifically, and they did.
But you do bring up a point with the Immortal range buff - and it goes for queens in relation to reapers as well. With longer ranged immortals and queens, maybe it's time for Blizzard to start thinking about rolling back some of the earlier changes
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Mind explaining to me what risks there is to the 6 queen opener? It seems kinda counter-intuitive to have an opener that makes you safe vs 99% of early game rushes, gets you a retarded econ and allows you to tech?
And there was a hold and quite easy counter to helion expand, its called roaches. Quite alot of zergs actually used them, but sadly its the views of most zergs that you're completely all in if you cant get 3 bases and 70 drones by 8 mins without taking risks
My opinion on the Tempest will improve DRASTICALLY if the orb damage is increased, but becomes dodgeable. Imagine having to lead Tempest shots and all the dodging that could happen. It would make for some amazing intense situations.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Mind explaining to me what risks there is to the 6 queen opener? It seems kinda counter-intuitive to have an opener that makes you safe vs 99% of early game rushes, gets you a retarded econ and allows you to tech?
And there was a hold and quite easy counter to helion expand, its called roaches. Quite alot of zergs actually used them, but sadly its the views of most zergs that you're completely all in if you cant get 3 bases and 70 drones by 8 mins without taking risks
What was the risk of the reactor hellion build pre-queen buff, if any? That build seemed beyond awesome, with little or no risk.
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Mind explaining to me what risks there is to the 6 queen opener? It seems kinda counter-intuitive to have an opener that makes you safe vs 99% of early game rushes, gets you a retarded econ and allows you to tech?
And there was a hold and quite easy counter to helion expand, its called roaches. Quite alot of zergs actually used them, but sadly its the views of most zergs that you're completely all in if you cant get 3 bases and 70 drones by 8 mins without taking risks
What was the risk of the reactor hellion build pre-queen buff, if any? That build seemed beyond awesome, with little or no risk.
roach/bling all-ins could be very dangerous, depending on how you followed up the hellions
On August 21 2012 14:58 avilo wrote: Just food for thought.
Tanks nerfed because of 1 map (steppes of war). Thors nerfed immediately after 1 bo5 (thorzain vs MC). Ghost snipe nerfed after a few series of MVP and others (course of 3-4 weeks only after people started to use ghosts). Blue flame nerfed after one tournament weekend of use.
Now, fast forward to over the last 5-6 months of Zerg/Protoss dominance and Terran struggling...
They say they acknowledge finally there may be an issue TvZ and will work on it.
After 1 tournament weekend of IEM, David Kim believes that Zergs are struggling (3/4 finalists were Zerg), majority of previous tournies also Z/P heavy with the exception of taeja).
Something is very wrong.
Tweaks on the game at that time doesn't have the same impact as today. And they pretty much nerfed some specifics builds (or the fact that one unit counter all T3 of Zerg).
The Queen change was good because o two things:
- Terran was claiming complete map control too easy with just one opening, denying creep spread, killing drones sometimes. It was strangely balanced, but it was so boring and counter-intutitive. Where's is the risk of this opening? It is so rewarding, but you can sitll tech, still expand, there were no hold back.
- Fixed ZvZ increasing defenders advantage. Now, a more defensive oriented Zerg can fight to reach midgame, instead of just dying to baneling all-ins.
Now you finally have to learn to play late game TvZ instead fo just relying on one unit or heavy advantage gained by a easier midgame.
Mind explaining to me what risks there is to the 6 queen opener? It seems kinda counter-intuitive to have an opener that makes you safe vs 99% of early game rushes, gets you a retarded econ and allows you to tech?
And there was a hold and quite easy counter to helion expand, its called roaches. Quite alot of zergs actually used them, but sadly its the views of most zergs that you're completely all in if you cant get 3 bases and 70 drones by 8 mins without taking risks
What was the risk of the reactor hellion build pre-queen buff, if any? That build seemed beyond awesome, with little or no risk.
Where i my post did i say there were many risks going reactor helion? Seems like some culprit must have hacked me and deleted that passage! I mere wrote that because i think its quite funny seing a zerg saying there's not risk bla bla bla to reactor helion, when currently all zergs are going 6 queen thats easy to pull off and requires no micro at all, and most of all is completely risk free
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
On August 21 2012 20:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote: if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent
Personally I think they ARE incompetent, because it should be apparent from the get go that a unit with a range of "much longer than anything else" is going to be either terribly OP (if it deals too much damage) or not worth getting (if it deals pitiful damage, is slow as a snail or frail as a 500 year old corpse). There is no chance to balance a unit with such a big difference between "yay" or "eww" simply due to the influence of maps on the gameplay. On one map it might be ok and totally IMBA on the next and thats why the Tempest is really really REALLY bad in its core idea. If they nerf the range to something around 12-14 they will just have a "bad Carrier without Interceptors" or something similar to a BC and thats bad game design. [EDIT: Siege Tanks got balanced for Steppes of War and right now they are a bit weak on the larger maps, because you either have all of your tanks with you OR you will be making a bad trade in resources against most opposing armies.]
Having a unit which enabled Protoss to cloak surrounding units was ok in BW due to the ever present Overlords who all could detect them and the "no use for anything else" Comsat with sufficient energy. In SC2 those two defenses are not there anymore OR cost resources to get OR share their energy with another skill which uses most of it as a core part in Terran economy. Thus the Oracle has yet another probably OP ability.
The mothership core can become a very long range cannon OR it can save the Protoss expedition corps very early in the game from total destruction. Both of these abilities are terribly broken, because they make it impossible for Protoss to get rushed early (well once you have the MS core and sufficient energy). You also only need one Sentry to block your ramp indefinetely since the MS core can refill that energy bar fast; yet another really terrible idea which only looks good on paper.
So I think some doubts as to the "unit design skill" of Blizzard is really in order, but then they seem to be testing the stuff on their tiny maps again ... The point is that the core design of the units and their abilities are sooo terrible and the abilities cant be balanced by tweaking some numbers ...
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
I see what you are trying to do with the Illuminati, conspiracy theories are always on the verge of the reasonable and person who spreads them often times looks like a lunatic, but you can still go middle of the road and say that, since Starcraft 2 is much more popular/played on the international scene than BW was, Blizzard maybe wants a race that will be easier to play so that foreigners can have their heroes that can stand up to Koreans. I mean, we already have Stephano, just look how many viewers he is pulling when he streams.
Protoss was never really that strong when we look at overall win rates, terran if buffed would result in guys like Mvp having a field day and zerg basically has huge potential because it is very focused on heavy macro play and it gets exponentially stronger the more bases you have.
I'm not saying there is a certain ulterior motive and David Kim sure isn't a lizard, but international market is way bigger than Korean market and people do like to see foreigners win.
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
I see what you are trying to do with the Illuminati, conspiracy theories are always on the verge of the reasonable and person who spreads them often times looks like a lunatic, but you can still go middle of the road and say that, since Starcraft 2 is much more popular/played on the international scene than BW was, Blizzard maybe wants a race that will be easier to play so that foreigners can have their heroes that can stand up to Koreans. I mean, we already have Stephano, just look how many viewers he is pulling when he streams.
Protoss was never really that strong when we look at overall win rates, terran if buffed would result in guys like Mvp having a field day and zerg basically has huge potential because it is very focused on heavy macro play and it gets exponentially stronger the more bases you have.
I'm not saying there is a certain ulterior motive and David Kim sure isn't a lizard, but international market is way bigger than Korean market and people do like to see foreigners win.
I have to disagree with you on the conspiracy theory, because there are so many units in HotS that are totally unbalanceable that the game becomes unplayable. The units which can be balanced and are fair (Battle Hellion and that new mech unit which I forgot the name of) will be balanced to be fair during the beta. The mothership core with the three basic abilities does create a totally new meta for the early game and therefore isnt one of those balanceable units. It seems to be one of those non-optional things you have to get as a Protoss ... like Warp Gate research. I wish they hadnt come up with such a stupid "must have" design again and instead had given alternatives for each race instead.
My vote clearly goes to the "Blizzard designers are incompetent" pile and not the "they have an ulterior motive" one.
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
I see what you are trying to do with the Illuminati, conspiracy theories are always on the verge of the reasonable and person who spreads them often times looks like a lunatic, but you can still go middle of the road and say that, since Starcraft 2 is much more popular/played on the international scene than BW was, Blizzard maybe wants a race that will be easier to play so that foreigners can have their heroes that can stand up to Koreans. I mean, we already have Stephano, just look how many viewers he is pulling when he streams.
Protoss was never really that strong when we look at overall win rates, terran if buffed would result in guys like Mvp having a field day and zerg basically has huge potential because it is very focused on heavy macro play and it gets exponentially stronger the more bases you have.
I'm not saying there is a certain ulterior motive and David Kim sure isn't a lizard, but international market is way bigger than Korean market and people do like to see foreigners win.
I have to disagree with you on the conspiracy theory, because there are so many units in HotS that are totally unbalanceable that the game becomes unplayable. The units which can be balanced and are fair (Battle Hellion and that new mech unit which I forgot the name of) will be balanced to be fair during the beta. The mothership core with the three basic abilities does create a totally new meta for the early game and therefore isnt one of those balanceable units. It seems to be one of those non-optional things you have to get as a Protoss ... like Warp Gate research. I wish they hadnt come up with such a stupid "must have" design again and instead had given alternatives for each race instead.
My vote clearly goes to the "Blizzard designers are incompetent" pile and not the "they have an ulterior motive" one.
this is funny, as i always thought that the tempest is way easier to balance. For me it is like a nuke with damage-over-time. Is a nuke overpowered? It certainly has enough damage to be worth getting it, and it can win games by forcing the opponents hand. As of right now, the tempest seems to cost way too much (especially in supply), so you will not mass them, but you will get the occational one or two for picking up high priority targets from long range (tanks, ghosts, medivacs). On the other hand, battle hellions seem to be like the worst unit ever to balance. If in normal mode (like they are right now), they need 3 baneling hits to be taken out. In HotS? Trololol, i just transform them before the impact of the baneling, suddenly the can absorb 8 baneling hits due to not being light armored anymore, plus having more hp. Why did they suck in TvP? Because they required Zealots to line up, plus they got crushed way too badly to Colossi. Will they be more viable now? I guess not, since Colossi still deal decent damage, plus suddenly the Immortal became even stronger in fighting the Terran Mech army straight on. But you suddenly will lose 20 Zerglings to 4 Hellions, even when getting that full surround. Easy to balance? I highly doubt that.
D Kim: "And the reason for that is, because the Swarm Host is very unique in that there’s nothing like it in Wings of Liberty. Because the Swarm Host keeps generating free units over and over. "
Has he heard of broodlords? (infestors and hatcheries could qualify for this too, practically free :p)
Milker: "So I’m really looking forward to seeing the Viper at the pro level and sitting at a BarCraft and have that moment where just the perfect abduct is pulled off and everyone is screaming and that’s something I’m really really looking forward to. "
People will be screaming WTF is this imba BS, let me micro my units, not have them flung about the map by my opponent,neural and fungal are annoying enough as it is. Let me control my units plz.
D Kim: " And we will continue doing so if we find some of those things that either aren’t feeling that great or that we could improve upon."
This mean the old profile snapshot will be back soon?, much preferred the old one.
D Kim: "The carrier is actually removed right now. There’s two main reasons. One is the Carrier is a unit that is not used very frequently in WoL."
This really pissed me off, they used that excuse to remove flux vanes, then they said they were removing khydarian amulet because it was being used too much. Is it not the balance teams job to buff the underpowered things so that the see more use? (while also nerfing the overpowered things so that they can not be abused). They buffed the battlecruisers speed from 1.406 to 1.875 when the battlecruiser was not seeing much use, they reduced the build time on ultralisks to encourage zerg players to use them more they have changed many other units so that more people would use them but they have never changed anything about the carrier.
The carrier is cheaper then the battlecruiser by 50/50 and yet it takes 120s to build, the BC takes 90s. If anything the carrier should build faster then the BC. The ultralisk is cheaper then the carrier by 50/50 and it takes 55s to build, faster by 65s. Why does it take 2 minutes to build a carrier?, imo that is WAY too long.
I think more people would use the carrier if they made it build faster and let the interceptors stay outside of the carrier when it is issued move commands (like broodlings with the broodlord) they could impose a range the interceptors must be within.
Also they could make the interceptors free, that should be fairly easy to implement and I cant imagine many people complaining about that. No other units have to pay to shoot in SC2.
They say they are replacing it with the tempest but of the 2 I would say the carrier is the one that must stay. I thought the tempest was supposed to be protosses answer to mass mutalisk, not a 22 range pew pew ship.
Everytime I hear blizzards reasoning behind their decisions I get more annoyed, the queen/overlord patch, the UI patch and these HOTS changes I have been seeing are all changes in the wrong direction imo.
Forgot to mention my dislike of this new A move Terran mech composition vs protoss of battlehellion + warhound. Do not like the new protoss units either. Only change I like in the "current" build is the timer on the spider/widow mine, I like the way it forces quick micro and good potential if it does friendly damage with lings running into marines, the hit marine stimming away from the pack into opponent scvs or a hit stalker blinking into a ghost etc.
On August 22 2012 03:53 paddyz wrote: Forgot to mention my dislike of this new A move Terran mech composition vs protoss of battlehellion + warhound. Do not like the new protoss units either. Only change I like in the "current" build is the timer on the spider/widow mine, I like the way it forces quick micro and good potential if it does friendly damage with lings running into marines, the hit marine stimming away from the pack into opponent scvs or a hit stalker blinking into a ghost etc.
Umm what? I thought Kim said they removed the timer.
If he removed the timer I have lost all faith in blizzard. It was good while it lasted, got to play over 5k games, over 800 this season. Its rare that you get to enjoy a game for that long. I thought SC2 would be something a bit more special, that it would improve with time, seems not. HOTS has not hit yet though, there is still time for them to undo these stupid changes.
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
I see what you are trying to do with the Illuminati, conspiracy theories are always on the verge of the reasonable and person who spreads them often times looks like a lunatic, but you can still go middle of the road and say that, since Starcraft 2 is much more popular/played on the international scene than BW was, Blizzard maybe wants a race that will be easier to play so that foreigners can have their heroes that can stand up to Koreans. I mean, we already have Stephano, just look how many viewers he is pulling when he streams.
Protoss was never really that strong when we look at overall win rates, terran if buffed would result in guys like Mvp having a field day and zerg basically has huge potential because it is very focused on heavy macro play and it gets exponentially stronger the more bases you have.
I'm not saying there is a certain ulterior motive and David Kim sure isn't a lizard, but international market is way bigger than Korean market and people do like to see foreigners win.
I have to disagree with you on the conspiracy theory, because there are so many units in HotS that are totally unbalanceable that the game becomes unplayable. The units which can be balanced and are fair (Battle Hellion and that new mech unit which I forgot the name of) will be balanced to be fair during the beta. The mothership core with the three basic abilities does create a totally new meta for the early game and therefore isnt one of those balanceable units. It seems to be one of those non-optional things you have to get as a Protoss ... like Warp Gate research. I wish they hadnt come up with such a stupid "must have" design again and instead had given alternatives for each race instead.
My vote clearly goes to the "Blizzard designers are incompetent" pile and not the "they have an ulterior motive" one.
this is funny, as i always thought that the tempest is way easier to balance. For me it is like a nuke with damage-over-time. Is a nuke overpowered? It certainly has enough damage to be worth getting it, and it can win games by forcing the opponents hand. As of right now, the tempest seems to cost way too much (especially in supply), so you will not mass them, but you will get the occational one or two for picking up high priority targets from long range (tanks, ghosts, medivacs). On the other hand, battle hellions seem to be like the worst unit ever to balance. If in normal mode (like they are right now), they need 3 baneling hits to be taken out. In HotS? Trololol, i just transform them before the impact of the baneling, suddenly the can absorb 8 baneling hits due to not being light armored anymore, plus having more hp. Why did they suck in TvP? Because they required Zealots to line up, plus they got crushed way too badly to Colossi. Will they be more viable now? I guess not, since Colossi still deal decent damage, plus suddenly the Immortal became even stronger in fighting the Terran Mech army straight on. But you suddenly will lose 20 Zerglings to 4 Hellions, even when getting that full surround. Easy to balance? I highly doubt that.
You seriously compare a Tempest with a regular 22 range attack to a nuke which has to be built separately in a building and thus isnt available every few seconds (unless you spend A LOT of resources to build many of those silos)? According to the Liquipedia the Nuke is launched by a Ghost at a range of 12, which is pretty short compared to the "you cant even see me" range of the Tempest. It is this fact of awesome range AND regular (though slow atm and therefore pretty useless for the cost) attack AND the fact that Oracles can give vision on buildings for some time (and then run away) OR cloaked Observers giving vision which makes the Tempest terrible. Being able to attack from a safe distance - thus REQUIRING certain actions from the opponent like massive numbers of detectors to check for Observers - is a terrible thing in a strategy game and for the same reason the Swarm Host is going to be either completely broken (most likely) or totally useless, because it gives free units and doesnt include risk in any attack.
Did you know that the transformation for Battle Hellions takes A FEW SECONDS? Thus it seems pretty fair to me, because you cant instantly switch it up when you dont need mobility anymore. This is a FAIR AND BALANCED unit design, because it involves immobility again (during transformation), just like the Tank transformation makes it vulnerable for a short time. The battle Hellion is easier to balance because you have that weakness as a tradeoff, something which neither Tempest nor Swarm Host have. Hellion presentation at Blizzcon 2011
On August 22 2012 03:53 paddyz wrote: Forgot to mention my dislike of this new A move Terran mech composition vs protoss of battlehellion + warhound. Do not like the new protoss units either. Only change I like in the "current" build is the timer on the spider/widow mine, I like the way it forces quick micro and good potential if it does friendly damage with lings running into marines, the hit marine stimming away from the pack into opponent scvs or a hit stalker blinking into a ghost etc.
All of Zerg and Protoss is deathbally a-move already. Why shouldnt Terran mech be "upgraded" [sarcasm alert] to the same state?
Carriers and BC don't appear in multiplayer very often because they suck, if blizzard can buff the BC why can't they buff the carrier? What logic is this???
On August 23 2012 14:28 uh-oh wrote: Carriers and BC don't appear in multiplayer very often because they suck, if blizzard can buff the BC why can't they buff the carrier? What logic is this???
They actually don't suck. It's just really hard to tech switch to them and get them out. They take a long time to build which is why they "suck".
On August 21 2012 15:08 avilo wrote: It would be interesting to know the exact thought process/reasoning behind the recent interview statements is all i'm saying considering a majority of the community would disagree with the assessment that "Zerg is struggling."
you've decided to play a new game. new games are volatile. if you want more stability pick an older game. some of these older games have imbalances that are well known and tightly quantified. by old i mean 50 years old or more
if your goal is to play games professionally and you believe Blizzard and/or David Kim are incompetent and/or dishonest then pick a different game. any other choice would be career suicide. poker, curling, backgammon and chess are a few older games that can be played professionally.
in order for you to speak for "a majority of the community" i gather you are at minimum bilingual? you speak both korean and english... maybe cantonese and russian too?
every one not immersed in 4+ hours per day of SC2 game play believes David Kim and Blizzard have only one motive. a 1/3 , 1/3, 1/3 winning ratio split between each of the races.
do you think David Kim is being less than honest and wants either Zerg or Protoss to dominate the game?
Forget about special guest appearances on "State Of The Inside Game" or whatever these shows are that JPWheat runs or whatever their names are...
Get on the Alex Jones show and state your case that David Kim is actually part of the nWo or Illuminati or wants to secretly implant silver fillings in our teeth so we all end up dumb.
if David Kim were either incompetent or had any kind of alterior motive other than balanced winning ratios between races then every Blizzard employee (who feeds their children with the money they make from Blizzard) would want him fired instantly.
I see what you are trying to do with the Illuminati, conspiracy theories are always on the verge of the reasonable and person who spreads them often times looks like a lunatic, but you can still go middle of the road and say that, since Starcraft 2 is much more popular/played on the international scene than BW was, Blizzard maybe wants a race that will be easier to play so that foreigners can have their heroes that can stand up to Koreans. I mean, we already have Stephano, just look how many viewers he is pulling when he streams.
Protoss was never really that strong when we look at overall win rates, terran if buffed would result in guys like Mvp having a field day and zerg basically has huge potential because it is very focused on heavy macro play and it gets exponentially stronger the more bases you have.
I'm not saying there is a certain ulterior motive and David Kim sure isn't a lizard, but international market is way bigger than Korean market and people do like to see foreigners win.
I have to disagree with you on the conspiracy theory, because there are so many units in HotS that are totally unbalanceable that the game becomes unplayable. The units which can be balanced and are fair (Battle Hellion and that new mech unit which I forgot the name of) will be balanced to be fair during the beta. The mothership core with the three basic abilities does create a totally new meta for the early game and therefore isnt one of those balanceable units. It seems to be one of those non-optional things you have to get as a Protoss ... like Warp Gate research. I wish they hadnt come up with such a stupid "must have" design again and instead had given alternatives for each race instead.
My vote clearly goes to the "Blizzard designers are incompetent" pile and not the "they have an ulterior motive" one.
this is funny, as i always thought that the tempest is way easier to balance. For me it is like a nuke with damage-over-time. Is a nuke overpowered? It certainly has enough damage to be worth getting it, and it can win games by forcing the opponents hand. As of right now, the tempest seems to cost way too much (especially in supply), so you will not mass them, but you will get the occational one or two for picking up high priority targets from long range (tanks, ghosts, medivacs). On the other hand, battle hellions seem to be like the worst unit ever to balance. If in normal mode (like they are right now), they need 3 baneling hits to be taken out. In HotS? Trololol, i just transform them before the impact of the baneling, suddenly the can absorb 8 baneling hits due to not being light armored anymore, plus having more hp. Why did they suck in TvP? Because they required Zealots to line up, plus they got crushed way too badly to Colossi. Will they be more viable now? I guess not, since Colossi still deal decent damage, plus suddenly the Immortal became even stronger in fighting the Terran Mech army straight on. But you suddenly will lose 20 Zerglings to 4 Hellions, even when getting that full surround. Easy to balance? I highly doubt that.
Although I haven't had a chance to play HotS yet, my understanding was that hellions would have a noticeable tranformation time, and hence changing modes with them mid-battle would usually not be a good idea.
I actually like the idea, even if I think some details need a tweak, because they fill the role of cannon fodder for a siege tank mech army. The number one reason seige tanks are not used in mid-to-late game TvP is that chargelots shut them down really hard. Battle hellions go a long way towards addressing this problem.
Well, it's also because Carriers are not really cost-effective even when they're out, except for things that physically can't shoot back (complacent Broodlord spammers). Something can have a low reward/risk ratio by hitting a low numerator (low reward) AND a high denominator (high risk), that's like quadratically bad.
On August 23 2012 14:28 uh-oh wrote: Carriers and BC don't appear in multiplayer very often because they suck, if blizzard can buff the BC why can't they buff the carrier? What logic is this???
They actually don't suck. It's just really hard to tech switch to them and get them out. They take a long time to build which is why they "suck".
currently the problem with both capital ships is that they are costly and they are too upgrade dependent, especially for the carrier where +1 armor can take away 20% of their dps, if blizzard can patch BCs to make them a bit better, they can patch the carrier too, why are they giving up on this starcraft cultural icon is beyond me.
On August 23 2012 14:28 uh-oh wrote: Carriers and BC don't appear in multiplayer very often because they suck, if blizzard can buff the BC why can't they buff the carrier? What logic is this???
Thats exactly the point which is frustrating a lot of people, because they dont understand why Blizzard didnt even try for 2 years to make the Carrier work and even the other underused units dont get many adjustments either. Reapers, Ravens, Carriers should receive adjustments just like the Warp Prism and the Queen got. The BC isnt really "finished to be adjusted" either.
The sad part is that they cant do too many adjustment to "core" skills and units in quick succession, because that will completely destroy the precarious balancing of the races for the pro scene and could produce "random big money tournament winners", which would be terrible for them if suddenly Joe11257 won MLG by figuring out an OP strat for one precise moment due to a recent patch change to the core stuff.
The game balance is VERY DEPENDANT upon the maps and since they are slightly different for each tournament this causes problems for the racial balance, which is on a knifes edge due to Blizzard insisting on making SC2 like they did [such hugely different economic and production burst potential in the races will cause one or the other race having big advantages at a certain time in the game and that is actually terrible]. This dependance upon maps does make me doubt Blizzards skill at designing new units, since they have apparently created yet another set of "too small" maps for their new gimmicks. I really hope they are playing more games on the current large maps to test the balance of their new units.
On August 23 2012 14:28 uh-oh wrote: Carriers and BC don't appear in multiplayer very often because they suck, if blizzard can buff the BC why can't they buff the carrier? What logic is this???
Thats exactly the point which is frustrating a lot of people, because they dont understand why Blizzard didnt even try for 2 years to make the Carrier work and even the other underused units dont get many adjustments either. Reapers, Ravens, Carriers should receive adjustments just like the Warp Prism and the Queen got. The BC isnt really "finished to be adjusted" either.
The sad part is that they cant do too many adjustment to "core" skills and units in quick succession, because that will completely destroy the precarious balancing of the races for the pro scene and could produce "random big money tournament winners", which would be terrible for them if suddenly Joe11257 won MLG by figuring out an OP strat for one precise moment due to a recent patch change to the core stuff.
The game balance is VERY DEPENDANT upon the maps and since they are slightly different for each tournament this causes problems for the racial balance, which is on a knifes edge due to Blizzard insisting on making SC2 like they did [such hugely different economic and production burst potential in the races will cause one or the other race having big advantages at a certain time in the game and that is actually terrible]. This dependance upon maps does make me doubt Blizzards skill at designing new units, since they have apparently created yet another set of "too small" maps for their new gimmicks. I really hope they are playing more games on the current large maps to test the balance of their new units.
But as HOTS beta is coming out it is expected to be imbalanced and blizzard will be expected to fix the game step by step, so it's the perfect testing ground for the carrier, blizzard can experiment with the carrier during the beta because that's what a beta supposedly does right? That way blizzard will have all the time they need to fix the carrier without having me winning GSL :D I assume no one's gonna run a super big tournament with a game that's still in beta right?
On August 21 2012 03:08 Snowbear wrote: "My favourite unit is the swarm host, it's very unique, there is nothing like it in WOL, it generates free units over and over".
Yeah, there is really no unit like that in WOL! So unique!
its the unholy devilspawn of a siege tank and a blord.....
Carriers, along with broodlings and some few others are units that have never been patched since the beta was released, even infested terrans and point defense drones were buffed! It's a bit frustrating to see how little blizzard did for the carrier, they simply say it's useless and never cared about it. Come on there are lots of good suggestions of how to buff the carrier around TL, the least they can do is make some tweaks in HOTS beta and let us experiment with a carriers, yeah it may become OP but that's what a beta is all about isn't it?
EPT
. BCs are already strong vs P and they'll be awesome in HotS. I'm hoping mech will be strong enough to hold expansions and make the transition.
