| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Talack
Canada2742 Posts
On November 27 2012 10:43 monkybone wrote: I really like the raven change, might be used for some surprise harass in mineral lines early on. You'd have more success using the auto-turrets most likely | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 28 2012 05:50 c0sm0naut wrote: i can relate to this post, i play random and every time i get terran i feel that i will already lose, even though in the past i used to main race as terran. i never relax all game and the expansion doesnt really make me want to play much. when they removed the warhound it didn't bother me too much because I havent played in the beta, but when they said that their rationale was that "terran was already a pretty complete race" or something similar (i am paraphrasing mind you) it just didn't sit with me. What is complete about being on the losing end of asymmetric balance? What is incomplete about Z or P that is different from T? It seems that they dont actually have a reason, other than that the warhound was stupidly OP and that they really didn't want to have to deal with a whole nother sc2 launch where the next year was constant whining about terran. their reasoning for removing the Warhound was that it was that it was essentially a Marauder built from the factory and had nothing to do with some weird "completness" arguments. | ||
|
c0sm0naut
United States1229 Posts
On November 28 2012 06:00 Big J wrote: their reasoning for removing the Warhound was that it was that it was essentially a Marauder built from the factory and had nothing to do with some weird "completness" arguments. IIRC they said something along the lines of, terran is not getting as many units because they are already a "complete race" very old interview, but it demonstrates the mindset they have going into developing the game http://au.gamespot.com/news/6325853/starcraft-ii-heart-of-the-swarm-qanda-with-dustin-browder edit: looks like that interview is so old, it was removed, this is not the same interview, gamespot did one a while before but they replaced it with an updated hots interview . sorry. i hope you can find it, i have to run to work and dont have time to serach for more links  | ||
|
Anomi
Sweden149 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On November 28 2012 06:11 c0sm0naut wrote: IIRC they said something along the lines of, terran is not getting as many units because they are already a "complete race" very old interview, but it demonstrates the mindset they have going into developing the game http://au.gamespot.com/news/6325853/starcraft-ii-heart-of-the-swarm-qanda-with-dustin-browder edit: looks like that interview is so old, it was removed, this is not the same interview, gamespot did one a while before but they replaced it with an updated hots interview . sorry. i hope you can find it, i have to run to work and dont have time to serach for more links Yeah, I know what interview you mean. But I'm not exactly sure about the exact reasoning and content. Wasn't it more about them not exactly knowing what to give T, while they had very clear plans for Z and P? Anyways, it was not the reason for the Warhound removal as far as I remember. | ||
|
FeyverN
United States104 Posts
| ||
|
Account252508
3454 Posts
| ||
|
NEEDZMOAR
Sweden1277 Posts
On November 28 2012 05:50 c0sm0naut wrote: i can relate to this post, i play random and every time i get terran i feel that i will already lose, even though in the past i used to main race as terran. i never relax all game and the expansion doesnt really make me want to play much. when they removed the warhound it didn't bother me too much because I havent played in the beta, but when they said that their rationale was that "terran was already a pretty complete race" or something similar (i am paraphrasing mind you) it just didn't sit with me. What is complete about being on the losing end of asymmetric balance? What is incomplete about Z or P that is different from T? It seems that they dont actually have a reason, other than that the warhound was stupidly OP and that they really didn't want to have to deal with a whole nother sc2 launch where the next year was constant whining about terran. Terran imo is complete in the way that they dont rely on spellcasters and aoe to do the job, they have single target units that promote micro and head to head engagements where the core of the army is fighting units that dont rely on aoe and casters to back them up, unlike protoss and zerg who both rely on casters and aoe to to take cost efficient fights e.g: infestors and sentries / colossus / HTs to win fights. how is that not a good thing? | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
We'd like to thank everyone who participated in testing these tweaks with us. Those who played on the map repeatedly were of great help. Sometime in the next few days, we intend to replace this map with one that has a couple of different balance adjustments, for further testing. We'll go into greater detail on that in the blog and here in the forums at that time. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7199640072?page=24#474 | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
On November 28 2012 06:49 Big J wrote: Yeah, I know what interview you mean. But I'm not exactly sure about the exact reasoning and content. Wasn't it more about them not exactly knowing what to give T, while they had very clear plans for Z and P? Anyways, it was not the reason for the Warhound removal as far as I remember. This is what I remember about the Warhound. But nonetheless, Terran doesn't have anything new and with what many consider to be existing problems in WoL, what's the incentive for players like myself to continue playing as Terran, if at all? | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
On November 28 2012 05:50 c0sm0naut wrote: i can relate to this post, i play random and every time i get terran i feel that i will already lose, even though in the past i used to main race as terran. i never relax all game and the expansion doesnt really make me want to play much. when they removed the warhound it didn't bother me too much because I havent played in the beta, but when they said that their rationale was that "terran was already a pretty complete race" or something similar (i am paraphrasing mind you) it just didn't sit with me. What is complete about being on the losing end of asymmetric balance? What is incomplete about Z or P that is different from T? It seems that they dont actually have a reason, other than that the warhound was stupidly OP and that they really didn't want to have to deal with a whole nother sc2 launch where the next year was constant whining about terran. I think a lot of people felt this way. I would love to get excited about HotS, but as of right now, not so much. I think Blizzard needs to give Terran more options, or make the changes to the Raven significant enough that Terran can have a late game. | ||
|
zhurai
United States5660 Posts
On November 28 2012 08:13 eviltomahawk wrote: Looks like there will be another test map released soon with more changes. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7199640072?page=24#474 wonder what the changes are... | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On November 28 2012 08:13 eviltomahawk wrote: Looks like there will be another test map released soon with more changes. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7199640072?page=24#474 I expected some conclusions or something. | ||
|
spaceyme
20 Posts
Yet this patch is to address perceived zerg infestor being OP. Blizzard should stick to their guns and look at the stats on their side and come to their own conclusions, not be swayed by the vocal minority banding together to make their race more balanced in their minds. | ||
|
Twilight Sparkle
Australia235 Posts
On November 28 2012 05:50 c0sm0naut wrote: i can relate to this post, i play random and every time i get terran i feel that i will already lose, even though in the past i used to main race as terran. i never relax all game and the expansion doesnt really make me want to play much. when they removed the warhound it didn't bother me too much because I havent played in the beta, but when they said that their rationale was that "terran was already a pretty complete race" or something similar (i am paraphrasing mind you) it just didn't sit with me. What is complete about being on the losing end of asymmetric balance? What is incomplete about Z or P that is different from T? It seems that they dont actually have a reason, other than that the warhound was stupidly OP and that they really didn't want to have to deal with a whole nother sc2 launch where the next year was constant whining about terran. No, they removed the warhound because it was an awful unit. It was fast, it murdered everything on the ground, it had long range, its active ability microed itself. It was designed to counter mechanical units, a niche that didn't need to be filled, so even if it was balanced it still wouldn't have added anything to the game. It was a design disaster. | ||
|
c0sm0naut
United States1229 Posts
i agree with you that it filled a role that did not need to be filled (anti-mechanical) i think the beauty of TvT is in those positional battles and sieging/unsieging trying to jockey for position | ||
|
Crosswind
United States279 Posts
On November 28 2012 09:02 darkness wrote: I expected some conclusions or something. I can only assume they have been paying attention to this thread, and will do fungal vs. air nerf, and hydra speed/air damage buff. <_< >_> =D -Cross | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10366 Posts
On November 28 2012 06:33 Anomi wrote: Have anyone tought of using nukes more often with this nerf. Since now teh fungal down work on ghosts you can place them clocke in the middle of your army and dropa a nuke fi u take care of oversers with snipes and vikings. Hm, interesting, didn't think of that. I think for us to see it in pro play though (even if it is strong), it will depend heavily on players willing to try out new stuff (so we won't see it much). Also, finally a new update announced today! after the balance map + recent interviews, suddenly there were 0 blue posts on the forums. I just assured myself thinking that they were working hard. Still can't wait for the WoL reworks. Edit: Wtf, just noticed. The "latest blue posts" doesn't show the latest immediately? It's been 4 hours but that post regarding the new balance map coming doesn't show up there  | ||
|
ShamW0W
160 Posts
On November 28 2012 09:22 spaceyme wrote: Disappointing if you look at the 1st and 2nd place spots in the last 5 major tournaments there's 2 Zerg's out of 10 spots, with 5 protoss and 3 Terrans. Yet this patch is to address perceived zerg infestor being OP. Blizzard should stick to their guns and look at the stats on their side and come to their own conclusions, not be swayed by the vocal minority banding together to make their race more balanced in their minds. That's why, IMO, an Infestor nerf needs to be accompanied by a buff somewhere else. (i.e. the Hydralisk) The Infestor is an overpowered unit, no doubt, but sadly it fills in holes in the Zerg arsenal right now. If they plan on nerfing the Infestor into more of a support units, as it probably should be, then they'll need to make up for it elsewhere. | ||
|
Protosnake
France295 Posts
I'm looking forward to the new batch of changes | ||
| ||
StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Big Brain Bouts
goblin vs Kelazhur
TriGGeR vs Krystianer
Replay Cast
RongYI Cup
herO vs Maru
Replay Cast
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
Sparkling Tuna Cup
The PondCast
|
|
|
EPT
