EPTNew Dustin Browder interview (From WCS china) - Page 22
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
monk: Just talked to Dustin and did an interview. There's a mistake in this translation. He said in the test map, Psionic units will be unaffected by Fungal, not Neural. Also, they're looking into a lot of changes for the infestor, including removing Neural entirely in HotS. | ||
|
Spidinko
Slovakia1174 Posts
| ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
| ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
On November 18 2012 23:07 Fragile51 wrote: Cloaked ghosts not being revealed by fungal isn't going to change anything? DT's not getting hardcountered by fungal growth? This would be a massive buff to ghost and templar play against zerg, and i actually really like that approach. Hope they are putting out the balance map really quick. Can't really talk about PvZ, but about TvZ: - Overseer and broodlords are the reason why ghosts can't get close enough to snipe infestors, fungal isn't the problem. - it just pushes casters to be even more important, which is wrong. It's the same dumbshit "vortex vs neural" scenario, whoever lands it wins. - Even if you successfully snipe/emp infestors (2 abilities for a same purpose btw...) , what are you gonna do with your ghosts as they're useless against all zerg units beside infestor and the queen ? They become dead wood, like vikings after an ultra tech switch. - 1 fungal will still be able to lock down a bio, mech or sky army. - projectile is harder to land, but once it hits, chain fungal is as easy as always - projectile or not, fungal remains a boring anti-micro ability. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On November 18 2012 22:27 MiND.GaMeS wrote: That's just not true o.O if you can't fungal psionic units you aren't able to fungal cloaked ghosts anymore, you can't fungal a bunch of ravens in ZvT lategame either. This change definitely won't only change ZvP as you might rage about :-P Hm I had not thought about cloaked ghosts not being revealed tbh. Not that there's any ghost usage in the matchup nowadays, but could be interesting I guess. On the other hand I don't like making the counters more obvious while keeping the infestor good against everything else. There's enough of that in SC2 already. I still feel fungal not hitting air would help more all the matchups. Also making it slow, not root, like has been mentioned a thousand times before, would stop the chain fungals and still allow some micro. Both should be tested. Anyway I'm glad its being looked into, as a viewer there's nothing more boring than mass infestors. I literally alt-tab and play some other game myself. | ||
|
Kiwan
Australia36 Posts
On November 18 2012 21:02 Cuce wrote: fungal not effecting sentries is more intrested I think I wholeheartedly agree this, I think it will increase the chance of sentries from mid game pushes (when fungal first comes into play), to survive to the late game, where things like hallucination are starting to show promises of being useful against late game zerg (recent WCS - Hero, I think). I also think the no fungal against psionic units is good because zerg have it much easier to keep their spellcaster alive in late game. Every other race practically has to suicide them in (e.g. late game pvz, high templar feedback the infestor, but die to broodlord shots & fungal; ravens when they are trying to use any of their abilities in a fight (a tiny bit of cynicism there); late game tvz, ghosts get caught by fungal when trying to emp, most likely die; and as I said earlier, sentries once fungal comes out). Having to suicide spellcasters into battle are one of the reasons why broodlord infestor is so powerful. They get more spells, and they get more gas to be put into other things compared to the other races who have to constantly rebuild their spellcasters which are (should?) be needed in that game battle. It may unbalance the game for a little bit, but I think Zerg can adapt, or probably be buffed in other areas depending on the problems that may emerge. They should also change the raven to psionic while they are it. | ||
|
nojok
France15845 Posts
| ||
|
wUndertUnge
United States1125 Posts
It's also encouraging that even with HoTS coming out, they're trying to make WoL a great game in its own right. This is something I always wanted. I think Blizz does great credit to the franchis, the game, and their company if they not have some "ultimate" game by the time LoTV comes out, but have 3 very different games that can be played for different flavors (even if each successive game should be, well, an expansion). | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
| ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
There are a lot of other changes I didn't say here. The video interview will be up soon. Taking forever to cut, edit, transcribe, and upload such a big video. Also, we're doing a shitton of other interviews as well. monk So excited  | ||
|
TimENT
United States1425 Posts
And how hard is it to get streams into the client, wtf..."that's super cool, but it won't be in HotS, we focused on other features..." | ||
|
wUndertUnge
United States1125 Posts
On November 19 2012 00:42 Grumbels wrote: I don't think I agree with making fungal not affect psionic units. For one, you can't fungal other infestors anymore, which seems silly. And now there are randomly a whole bunch of protoss units you can't attack. And there won't be a good way to stop ghosts from sniping your infestors for zerg. I know ghosts are not a good option at the moment, but this seems like it would remove some back-and-forth micro. I think the fungal projectile is a better solution for allowing ghosts to survive. Is the non-fungal of other infestors game-breaking, though, or is it just kind of neutral for ZvZ? Part of the reason they kept fungal versus air was to make sure Muta didn't break the mirror match up. I'm still not following your line of logic in how encouraging more ghost play in the TvZ matchup removes back-and-forth. Care to elaborate? | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On November 19 2012 00:46 suspiria wrote: Is the non-fungal of other infestors game-breaking, though, or is it just kind of neutral for ZvZ? Part of the reason they kept fungal versus air was to make sure Muta didn't break the mirror match up. I'm still not following your line of logic in how encouraging more ghost play in the TvZ matchup removes back-and-forth. Care to elaborate? The idea is that you have ghosts, which have EMP and cloak, vs infestors that can spread out, use burrow, use fungal to keep ghosts at bay, protect with overseers, use scan to kill them if they burrow, use snipe to kill overseers etc. It's all funny micro that never gets used because the infestors are protected by a cloud of broodlord/overseer and because infestors are so big that EMP doesn't work as well anymore, as EMP was continuously nerfed because of its strength against protoss. Ghosts not being affected by fungal actually won't change too much, as you still won't survive the brood lord defense, so it's still almost suicide to send them in, and they won't be able to kill too many infestors also. Fungal as a projectile on the other hand promotes the micro war even more, since with clever control you might dodge a few fungals. To change this dynamic for the better I think all that's needed is 1. mass brood lord should not be the default strategy 2. less infestors should exist, so killing or draining a few of them is actually relevant. i.e. it requires a redesign of zerg. | ||
|
VaultDweller
Romania132 Posts
On November 19 2012 00:45 TimENT wrote: Listening to Browder reminds me of watching The Wire. He has absolutely no idea what's really going on, he's just playing the numbers game. Fuck the numbers game. And how hard is it to get streams into the client, wtf..."that's super cool, but it won't be in HotS, we focused on other features..." Really? How hard it is to integrate a whole new feature that has to be created from scratch? Other than trying to figure out how to actually implement it, trying several ideas, coding aaall that, creating the interface ( again, trying several ideas), dealing with all the problems that appear along the way and doing that while they are launching an expansion, it's pretty "easy". If you have absolutely no idea about how software development works please shut up. | ||
|
skeldark
Germany2223 Posts
On November 19 2012 01:22 VaultDweller wrote: Really? How hard it is to integrate a whole new feature that has to be created from scratch? Other than trying to figure out how to actually implement it, trying several ideas, coding aaall that, creating the interface ( again, trying several ideas), dealing with all the problems that appear along the way and doing that while they are launching an expansion, it's pretty "easy". If you have absolutely no idea about how software development works please shut up. If you have absolutely no idea how software development works you thinks its hard. For you its hard but that does not mean its hard for an professional software developer. How hard it is for a car factory to make a car? They learned it, they did it before, they do it every day. Making software is no magic. And a stream client is nothing special or new. Many people coded that before. You dont even have to do it yourself if you think you are to bad for it. Just buy a solution form someone who can and put it in. We are not talking about inventing something or go a step ahead. Just redo what over people do for years already. Blizzard is a mulit-million software company. If they cant develop software they are in the wrong business... BTW: How i would do it: I would create a basic Webclient in the GUI frontend and than go and ask "twitch" or "own" or "youtube" how much they pay me that i put their sc2 stream-overview on default.... | ||
|
ErAsc2
Sweden256 Posts
On November 19 2012 01:02 Grumbels wrote: The idea is that you have ghosts, which have EMP and cloak, vs infestors that can spread out, use burrow, use fungal to keep ghosts at bay, protect with overseers, use scan to kill them if they burrow, use snipe to kill overseers etc. It's all funny micro. It takes 9 snipes to kill one overseer by the way so that's not really an option since the snipe-nerf patch ^^ Imagine Zerg having like 4 overseers, that's 36 snipes = not efficient. I think making overseer Psionic would be a cool idea, I don't think it would hurt Zerg in any other way. | ||
|
geokilla
Canada8230 Posts
| ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
On November 19 2012 01:54 ErAsc2 wrote: It takes 9 snipes to kill one overseer by the way so that's not really an option since the snipe-nerf patch ^^ Imagine Zerg having like 4 overseers, that's 36 snipes = not efficient. I think making overseer Psionic would be a cool idea, I don't think it would hurt Zerg in any other way. Indeed, since blizzard randomly makes units 'psionic or not', better make the overseer snipeable. I'd like to know what psionic means in sc2 btw, it seems meaningless. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
On November 19 2012 02:07 Lukeeze[zR] wrote: Indeed, since blizzard randomly makes units 'psionic or not', better make the overseer snipeable. I'd like to know what psionic means in sc2 btw, it seems meaningless. Better yet, change Snipe so that it's not dedicated for anti-Psionic. EMP already deals quite well with most spellcasters, anti-Psionic snipe overlaps too much. | ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
| ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
Just finished 35 min interview with Dustin. Told us after that they're also looking into changes for void ray, phoenix, and mutalisk -TL Twitter There are a lot of other changes I didn't say here. The video interview will be up soon. Taking forever to cut, edit, transcribe, and upload such a big video. Also, we're doing a shitton of other interviews as well. monk Looks like they are reexamining the WOL units so I don't see why not. | ||
| ||
