|
On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources.
There is two problems with that argument.
First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.
Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in).
Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill.
And again in that fashion the results are random. You are hoping your opponent moves units here without detection. Hoping for them to make a poor play which you can then capitalize on instantly, not making a good play on your own.
That is the crux of the problem of the Widow Mine, the instant burst damage at such a low cost and accessible so early in the game is a terrible mechanic that hinders game design. Only the Yatamoto Cannon and the Nuke do more damage per hit.
|
On January 23 2016 06:40 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources. There is two problems with that argument. First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in). Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill.
They not used like that. Cyclone openings are better than defensive mine openings in every way. Liberators and turrets deal fine with mutas.
Good job changing your stance on the wm being a "gamble" to a set "set and forget and guarantee and kill".
|
On January 23 2016 06:47 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources. There is two problems with that argument. First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in). Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill. Good job changing your stance on the wm being a "gamble" to a set "set and forget and guarantee and kill".
Below this is the first thing I said on this on the last page. Why are you misrepresenting what I said?
BronzeKnee wrote:
Wat?
That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable.
The gamble is setting and forgetting and hoping your opponent is bad. That is a gamble, and I clearly wrote that.
The problem lies with your comprehension and the fact you are purposely trying to misrepresent my argument and want me to say "well you just random spread them around" which is not what I said.
|
have they dropped the ladder transparency idea?
|
On January 23 2016 06:49 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:47 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources. There is two problems with that argument. First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in). Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill. Good job changing your stance on the wm being a "gamble" to a set "set and forget and guarantee and kill". Below this is the first thing I said on this on the last page. Why are you misrepresenting what I said? Show nested quote +BronzeKnee wrote:
Wat?
That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. The gamble is setting and forgetting and hoping your opponent is bad. That is a gamble, and I clearly wrote that. The problem lies with your comprehension.
Its not a "set and forget" its a "guarantee and kill" :p
Still no comment over the fact that cyclones and liberators killed those uses.
|
Blizzard please look into buffing the cyclone. The unit right now is basically useless for anything other than trolling your opponent. Its too expensive and too fragile, not to mention hard to use in large numbers.
|
a 40% nerf to PB... fantastic job blizzard, let those nasty zergs get destroyed by air once more!!
|
On January 23 2016 06:52 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:49 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:47 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources. There is two problems with that argument. First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in). Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill. Good job changing your stance on the wm being a "gamble" to a set "set and forget and guarantee and kill". Below this is the first thing I said on this on the last page. Why are you misrepresenting what I said? BronzeKnee wrote:
Wat?
That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. The gamble is setting and forgetting and hoping your opponent is bad. That is a gamble, and I clearly wrote that. The problem lies with your comprehension. Its not a "set and forget" its a "guarantee and kill" :p
The sentence ends where I decide it ends when I put a period. You don't get to decide where my sentences end. If you understood the context of what I was saying and could comprehend it, you understand that when defending with a Widow Mine (which means something is attacking, you have to have an attacker to defend anything), you can guarantee a kill if the opponent has no detection after setting and forgetting it.
And is that not what I said: "There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill."
You can't just remove the word defending, remove the set and forget and pretend I meant something different. Can't just add random placement into my argument for fun so you can win the argument.
This forum has really become toxic huh... people purposely misquoting others...
And by the way, when did you stop beating your partner?
On January 23 2016 06:52 royalroadweed wrote:
Still no comment over the fact that cyclones and liberators killed those uses.
Still waiting for you to comment on WM used in harass purposes. And talk about how I was right about the "rare" issue which you so quickly gave up.
|
On January 23 2016 06:52 Loccstana wrote:
Blizzard please look into buffing the cyclone. The unit right now is basically useless for anything other than trolling your opponent. Its too expensive and too fragile, not to mention hard to use in large numbers.
Cyclone are very good as a early game defensive unit in TvT and TvP, they do fill a role in the game.
|
On January 23 2016 06:29 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:19 pure.Wasted wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. So along with WM, we remove stasis ward, Lurkers, and Vultures from Brood War? This conversation has nothing to do with Brood War. That said, Spider Mines could be killed before they hit (even if you had no detection), and just because Brood War was a great game, doesn't mean certain things couldn't be improved upon. But let's compare them to Lurkers, now that Lurkers are in the game. If you run into a single Lurker with your army while you are macroing, you'll get the signal that you army is under attack, and be able to react losing nothing. When you get that signal versus a Widow Mine, you've already lost units. The problem is burst damage, as it has always been with so many things in Starcraft. Razzia of Blizzsters so brilliantly illuminated that, that things like the Widow Mine compress time (reaction time) to the point where skill is diluted. Now of course if Zerg masses Lurkers, you might have lost your army to Zerg burst, but that the cost and dedication to such a move is significant. Far more significant than the cost and dedication of a couple of Widow Mines.
Lol how much damage do you think the average WM does?
Oh no, one WM killed one Cyclone/Adept/Oracle/Banshee, what shocking burst damage. How will the T/P ever possibly recover?
I don't think that everything in BW was brilliant, but mech was, and your criticism of the WM applies perfectly to the spider mine. Low invest, hard to spot, lots of burst, no warning. So just to be clear, you think Spider Mines (and by extension BW mech which entirely relies on their existence) are badly designed?
The Widow Mine was intended to make Mech viable. It turned out to replace the SIege Tank and make Bio better. It needs to go.
Not sure what any of this has to do with anything. Are you saying that things should only function in the way Blizzard envisioned them functioning? Or are you saying that something making bio better is a bad thing?
The only legit point hidden in there is that we see a lot less tanks directly due to WM. Which is true to some extent. Oh well.
Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:27 pure.Wasted wrote:On January 23 2016 06:19 PPN wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was Adept ghosts now have no vision. We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. How many terran in the world can consistently focus fire with a widow mine, again? Great. While we're cutting WMs for being shit design, let's make sure we first remove roaches, Ultralisks, Corruptors, Lurkers, vipers, Zealots, adepts, dark Templar, archon, MSC, mothership, carrier, tempest, void ray, Colossus, Oracle, thor, Battlecruiser for being the same or worse. Let's then not forget to make up a new reason for Zerg not to A+move 50 banes into bio. Solid plan. Do you know what a logical fallacy is? Instead of spouting non-sense and hyperbole, try actually discussing things, like why you think we should cut all those units since they are the "same or worse." Zealots are in no way akin to Widow Mines, so they aren't the same or worse in terms of game design. Just seems like you are raging because you need the Widow Mine to kill Banes. And that is fine, but Tanks took a lot more skill to counter Banes, and the game should be about skill.
Which logical fallacy have I committed, pray tell?
You want WMs gone because they're shit design, I gave you a list of units that are worse designed. How are they worse? Because they are 1) unmicroable and/or 2) frequently lead to binary timing losses (have enough defense in perfect position and perfectly controlled? Survive. Else: Die. Now. Just because.) Umicroable units subvert and contradict the entire point of competition.
The WM is very microable (especially in TvZ, where it serves the important function of forcing Ling/Bling micro in a way no other units do) and unlike Adept/Oracle/etc it never automatically leads to binary losses. You can always spot the Dropship coming on the map and severely minimize your losses even if you have no observers around. The unit's role is upping P/Z mechanical and multitasking requirement to match the stutter step/splitting shenanigans of a Terran. It is invaluable, and compared to the other atrocities in sc2, a paragon of genius design.
|
On January 23 2016 06:53 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 06:52 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:49 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:47 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:40 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:31 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:16 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 06:09 royalroadweed wrote:On January 23 2016 06:06 BronzeKnee wrote:On January 23 2016 05:58 Wintex wrote:
Honestly, the best nerf that could come to the adept was
[quote]
We don't need anymore gambling in SC2. We already have the Widow Mine, and it is terrible. This needs to die. We now know exactly which unit the mine has locked on and will fire at. Wat? That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. You might say "well the skill is where you put them" but the result is the same as a random ladder all-in that depends on your opponent not scouting, you are depending on your opponent to play poorly. That is not a good mechanic for the game. The Siege Tank is the complete opposite, it is entirely predictable and skill plays a huge role in how it works. Widow mines are rarely used that way. Outside of harass they're always with your army. You always know where they are. You poke forward with bio then retreat into mines drawing the enemy army into mine fire. You don't randomly place them around the map and hope for the best. That's a waste of supply and resources. There is two problems with that argument. First, it doesn't matter if it is rare. We have mass shootings in the United States rarely. That is not an argument for inaction against mass shootings. If we can do things to make things better, we should, regardless if the problem is rare.Secondly, I totally understand how Widow Mines are used and have been used. And it was not how Blizzard intended them to be used. That in itself isn't a problem, though it is damning for the designers (have to get my dig against David Kim in). Widow Mines are used defensively in locations versus Drops/Oracles/Mutalisks quite frequently, often spread as I said, not random, but in set and forget fashion. There is no other unit like the Widow for defending, set and forget and guarantee and kill. Good job changing your stance on the wm being a "gamble" to a set "set and forget and guarantee and kill". Below this is the first thing I said on this on the last page. Why are you misrepresenting what I said? BronzeKnee wrote:
Wat?
That isn't the problem when it comes to gambling and the Widow Mine. The problem is that you set it and forget it somewhere. It takes no skill. If your opponent happens to run over it without detection, they lose. And of course, they might have no detection and not run over it, so it isn't reliable. The gamble is setting and forgetting and hoping your opponent is bad. That is a gamble, and I clearly wrote that. The problem lies with your comprehension. Its not a "set and forget" its a "guarantee and kill" :p The sentence ends where I decide it ends when I put a period. You don't get to decide where my sentences end. If you understood the context of what I was saying and could comprehend it, you understand that when defending with a Widow Mine, you can guarantee a kill if the opponent has no detection. And to defend, you set and forget. You can't just remove the word defending, remove the set and forget and pretend I meant something different. Can't just add random placement into my argument for fun so you can win the argument. This forum has really become toxic huh... people purposely misquoting others...
They aren't even a guaranteed kill. Despite being "cloaked" you can see them on the minimap + it has graphical indicator on the unit it is locked on to.
All that is irrelevant anyways. Mines are not used like that anymore. All those cutesy mine placement behind refineries and ccs are dead because cyclones and liberators are just better. Mines are always with your army now. You should come up with a better argument than calling people toxic. Also stick to the topic at hand./
The only thing that was a gamble with widow mines was not knowing which unit it will fire at. That was changed.
|
I'm curious what direction they will go from here.
Obviously without Adepts being OP as hell and PO allowing very "greedy" 3rds Protoss is going to show serious weakness.
Do they buff harass units and AoE? Or will they buff Gateway units?
I think with the nerfs made to non-WP warpins it could be safe to buff Gateway units a bit.
|
On January 23 2016 07:03 pure.Wasted wrote:Which logical fallacy have I committed, pray tell?
There you go baby:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
And that pretty much wraps that one up.
And if you want to present an argument, you can't just say "well prove I'm wrong." So you get another:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof
I already discussed important differences that made Spider mines acceptable game design wise compared to Widow Mines. You ignored them. If you want to discuss them, address them and tell me why I am wrong.
The Widow Mine is terrible design, while you think it is genius. Well, I can answer with a design blog regarding anti-fun abilities from League of Legends, which is damning for the design of the Widow Mine.
http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=293417
Just go down the list: The Widow Mine is power without gameplay, which is bad, it places a burden of knowledge on the player playing against it, it creates significant anti-fun for the person playing against it, and is unreliable.
It is a horribly designed unit and simply isn't fun. And SC2 should be fun, and it used to be a lot more fun.
|
On January 23 2016 07:08 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 07:03 pure.Wasted wrote:Which logical fallacy have I committed, pray tell? There you go baby: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoqueAnd that pretty much wraps that one up. And if you want to present an argument, you can't just say "well prove I'm wrong." So you get another: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proofI already discussed important differences that made Spider mines acceptable game design wise compared to Widow Mines. You ignored them. If you want to discuss them, address them and tell me why I am wrong.
1. Tu Quogue applies when I attempt to discredit your argument by calling you a hypocrite, not when I discredit your argument by pointing out that it is a shitty argument ad there are worse designed units we need to fix first. Helps to understand the fallacies you're throwing around.
2. I did present an argument, you condescending douche.
3. Thanks for saving me the trouble of trying to discredit your points, your hostility did that for me.
4. Pointing out that other people will commit ad hominem gains tax you doesn't mean that I did. Just in case you were tempted with another link.
|
You answered criticism with criticism instead of addressing the criticism, that is why it was a "you too" argument. Some people refer to it as tit for tat. Calling someone a hypocrite is an ad hominem attack, though if you continue and argue why they are a hypocrite, it could be a "you too" argument. A you too argument is anytime you trying to deflect criticism of one thing by criticizing something else.
And that is exactly what you did, You saw the Widow Mine being criticized and criticized other units as a response. It is a logical fallacy at its purest because it does nothing to resolve the criticism of the Widow Mine.
On January 23 2016 07:23 pure.Wasted wrote:
2. I did present an argument, you condescending douche.
3. Thanks for saving me the trouble of trying to discredit your points, your hostility did that for me.
Have a good day. Arguments exist independent of people, my hostility has nothing to do with anything except your feelings apparently.
|
On January 23 2016 07:27 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 07:23 pure.Wasted wrote:
2. I did present an argument, you condescending douche.
3. Thanks for saving me the trouble of trying to discredit your points, your hostility did that for me.
Have a good day.
Oh, I'm plenty hostile right now. Surprisingly, being treated like a schmuck sometimes has that effect on people.
|
The fact I have power of over you over the internet says a lot about you. Be like me, don't care what other people think about you.
The only opinion that matters is what you think of yourself.
|
-1 dmg on adept won't change anything at all - Protoss will just research +1 ... and even then the unit will still be absurd.
Parasitic bomb is a no skill - no counterplay ability. Creates stalemates lategame because T can't engage unless you hit lucky emp/snipe on vipers (doesn't happen vs good players).
And wow blizzard ignores literally pages upon pages of mech feedback - who knew they would do this? I guess mech won't ever get an anti-air unit and will remain the current "made mech untis-> now have to turtle 30 more min into mass air units to beat his air units"
Not enough changes, changes come too slow, and they don't even understand / nor care about mech it seems other than their trivial understanding that tanks could use a buff. Tank buff alone is not going to do jack shit though, mech needs an anti-air unit otherwise it will always be "turtle into mass air units."
Also, how does -1 dmg do anything to address adepts in pvz/zvp? This shit should have been hot fixed like literally 1-2 weeks or less after it was shown to be a huge balance issue.
|
On January 23 2016 03:39 Clonester wrote:Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 03:32 brickrd wrote:
spore nerf makes 0 sense... you can already still go muta into transition in zvz on larger maps... Even 60dmg Parabomb is good enough to justify the nerf for the spore. The Protoss nerf will help terran and Protoss will again go for late games. Good to see that back and see, how it works out. When late terran is really stronger (what I think it is) then Protoss (who does not skip upgrades for a prism adept attack), I could see a buff to templar (Storm cast range +1?). I dont think Blizzard wants to make the coloss viable ever again and never wants to see viking coloss fights. Even the amulet could have its comeback, when they see that Protoss has Problems of fighting and defending in later stages. Show nested quote +On January 23 2016 03:38 Asturas wrote:
So... Adept is nerfed or not, because I am very, very (extremely?) confused. What kind of change is that? Is it at all? Damn Blizz... Adept now does 22 damage against light units per shot. That means, you need instead of 2 shots, 3 shots to kill SCVs and Marines. Thats quite a nerf. The problem is still the prism.
I completely feel that prism's themselves are not the problem.
The problem is you can get WP's so early. Economic income scaling is far too high. Late game techs too quickly and readily available for all races...
|
On January 23 2016 07:47 avilo wrote:
And wow blizzard ignores literally pages upon pages of mech feedback - who knew they would do this? .
Me. It isn't difficult to predict that Blizzard won't do what is needed when to comes to game design. They haven't wanted to fix Mech since Day 1.
On January 23 2016 07:47 avilo wrote:
Also, how does -1 dmg do anything to address adepts in pvz/zvp? This shit should have been hot fixed like literally 1-2 weeks or less after it was shown to be a huge balance issue.
Whoa... slow down buddy... this is Blizzard Entertainment we are talking about.
They thought the Warhound was a good idea, left it in the beta and wasted how much development time and money on it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
