Legacy of the Void Announced - Page 45
Forum Index > SC2 General |
RDaneelOlivaw
Vatican City State733 Posts
| ||
jojos11
Korea (North)314 Posts
| ||
Diaresta
United States597 Posts
Hopefully the game delivers. Looking alright so far, and I'm excited. | ||
Arolis
United States496 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:05 [PkF] Wire wrote: Yeah but that's what I mean, I hope macro remains the focus of the game rather than micro. Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this be more like SC:BW? People complained about the volume of mining done by a single base in this game since beta and complained that the army build up is so much faster than BW that mid-game fights are dominated by 150ish food or higher armies compared to the midgame armies of BW which were much smaller. Getting to 200/200 in a BW game was a big deal. It'd be nice if it was actually a big deal in SC2 instead of an every game occurrence. Going for something like a Hydra bust vs. Protoss might not even see 100 food reached by either army before the game ended in BW. Comparative to the early HotS Zergling/Baneling/Roach to bust a fast third vs. Terran. You need a crap-ton more units to make that attack. | ||
Prog455
Denmark970 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:15 Shinespark wrote: Literally less than 5% of this post will survive to the final version of LotV, so I don't see any reason to get excited. I beg to differ. Less than 5% means nothing in this post will make it into the final version. I'd be willing to bet a sizeable amount of money, that atleast a single new unit will make it into the final version. | ||
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
| ||
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:28 Arolis wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't this be more like SC:BW? People complained about the volume of mining done by a single base in this game since beta and complained that the army build up is so much faster than BW that mid-game fights are dominated by 150ish food or higher armies compared to the midgame armies of BW which were much smaller. Getting to 200/200 in a BW game was a big deal. It'd be nice if it was actually a big deal in SC2 instead of an every game occurrence. Going for something like a Hydra bust vs. Protoss might not even see 100 food reached by either army before the game ended in BW. Comparative to the early HotS Zergling/Baneling/Roach to bust a fast third vs. Terran. You need a crap-ton more units to make that attack. I don't know anything about BW sorry ![]() | ||
plasmidghost
Belgium16168 Posts
| ||
KingAlphard
Italy1705 Posts
For example, I can see where they want to go with economy changes, carriers and tank buff, swarm host and immortal changes, etc. But why exactly are they adding the herc? The cyclone? Did they really have to change the tempest, the oracle and nerf warpgate? Guess we're discussing too much about it since the game won't come out in less than one year, but still... | ||
Cheren
United States2911 Posts
Blizz homepage now has WoW, Heroes, Overwatch, and SC2, for those complaining it didn't have SC2 before. | ||
Hemling
Sweden93 Posts
The lurker announcement seriously gave me flashbacks from when i was 12y and i ran lurker drop rush every game on bnet! (yes i was a noob cheese kid with maphack back then lol) | ||
Gamegene
United States8308 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:19 Colston wrote: I can understand all of you not wanting to see the 12 worker change, I mean, if they'd implement that we'd all lose those 3 awesome minutes of worker building, barracks blocking and / or reaper expands. I really can't imagine how the competitive scene would survive that.. I mean, if there's one thing that'd be totally disgusting it would be some completely new strategies instead of small variations on a build order everyone uses. If I'd never be able to see another double hatch first into 5 minutes of extremely exciting boner-inducing hard droning I don't know how I'd be able to live with myself.... It's a pretty obvious bone to throw at the Viewing audience at the expense of depth. Early rushes are somewhat practical because you have a timing window where your opponent will be vulnerable (by starting a building(s) and subsequently units earlier than your opponent by cutting workers and/or proxying). With 12 workers at the start, it's going to be nearly impossible for any real "rushes" to occur when the starting buildings will always start at the same time. It's important that you have these kinds of possibilities in a game, even if these strategies aren't going to be used regularly they force players to scout, search for proxies, basically account for risk taking by their opponents (this plays a bigger role in tournament Best Of series). On the other hand, we might see more one base play in LoTV, especially for Terran since they benefit the most from having access to MULE earlier (earlier you start OC, the more MULEs will be in play throughout the opening stages of the game); but I think that's more lame since it's easily scouted. | ||
Hesmyrr
Canada5776 Posts
| ||
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:31 KingAlphard wrote: What I really don't understand about some of these changes is what problems with the game they are trying to fix. I feel like blizzard shouldn't make changes just for the sake of changing something, but they should rather find brilliant solutions to problems that exist in the gameplay. For example, I can see where they want to go with economy changes, carriers and tank buff, swarm host and immortal changes, etc. But why exactly are they adding the herc? The cyclone? Did they really have to change the tempest, the oracle and nerf warpgate? Guess we're discussing too much about it since the game won't come out in less than one year, but still... I think they're adding the herc to deal better with baneling lurker combos. From starbow bane lurker combos were very strong vs bio play. | ||
hoby2000
United States918 Posts
If they were to release this right now for multiplayer, I would buy it and try it out for sure. Looks interesting. | ||
Kokujin
United States456 Posts
| ||
[PkF] Wire
France24192 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:31 KingAlphard wrote: What I really don't understand about some of these changes is what problems with the game they are trying to fix. I feel like blizzard shouldn't make changes just for the sake of changing something, but they should rather find brilliant solutions to problems that exist in the gameplay. For example, I can see where they want to go with economy changes, carriers and tank buff, swarm host and immortal changes, etc. But why exactly are they adding the herc? The cyclone? Did they really have to change the tempest, the oracle and nerf warpgate? Guess we're discussing too much about it since the game won't come out in less than one year, but still... It's actually true a lot of changes seem to come out of the blue and to try and create a new game rather than fixing the one we currently play. They said there would be something to explain the reasoning behind the changes and it will be interesting to hear about that. | ||
Capped
United Kingdom7236 Posts
On November 08 2014 09:32 Gamegene wrote: It's a pretty obvious bone to throw at the Viewing audience at the expense of depth. Early rushes are somewhat practical because you have a timing window where your opponent will be vulnerable (by starting a building(s) and subsequently units earlier than your opponent by cutting workers and/or proxying). With 12 workers at the start, it's going to be nearly impossible for any real "rushes" to occur when the starting buildings will always start at the same time. It's important that you have these kinds of possibilities in a game, even if these strategies aren't going to be used regularly they force players to scout, search for proxies, basically account for risk taking by their opponents (this plays a bigger role in tournament Best Of series). On the other hand, we might see more one base play in LoTV, especially for Terran since they benefit the most from having access to MULE earlier (earlier you start OC, the more MULEs will be in play throughout the opening stages of the game); but I think that's more lame since it's easily scouted. Your logic is entirely flawed. Rushes and greedy openings will always exist in an RTS, theres a reason they exist in EVERY rts. Just because there are 12 starting workers instead of 6 doesnt mean rushes suddenly dont exist, it means the game changes and the meta shifts, new stuff emerges. Sure, everything might be "bigger" (Army size, tech, whatever) and the rushes "longer" or "later" but in the context of the game - it will still always be a rush, just like a greedy eco play will be greed. Doesnt matter if its a 2 rax proxy or a 12 worker 4 rax all in. | ||
Highways
Australia6103 Posts
There seems to be a lot of conflicting reports. | ||
| ||