|
On June 20 2009 06:34 SoleSteeler wrote:
I think that the force fields may already be destructible, actually.
Skip to about 5:14 in the video. After he blocks his ramp and kills a few, he appears to shoot something on his ramp. Unless there was a Zergling IN the force field (unlikely), he seems to shoot the force field for a sec.
If you pause and count the Zerglings before and after the force fields, two get stuck outside and five of the selected six get inside. When one Nullifier attacks towards the force fields the 6th selected Zergling is shown as damaged at the bottom of the screen.
|
On June 20 2009 06:37 Fen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 06:15 Ancestral wrote:On June 20 2009 06:05 Fen wrote:On June 20 2009 05:52 Ancestral wrote:
Fen, saying you "personally think it is lame" sounds like fanboyism to me, you want the casters to not have attacks because in SC they don't. You don't mention balance or anything, just that you "personally think it is lame." Ghosts have attacks too, by the way, but also aren't used very often, except awesomely by brat.ok. Theres a big difference between saying what I think the game should be like and fanboyism. Im currently defining fanyboyism is when someone defends any argument made with the chris crocker defense "leave blizzard alone, you should be thankful that they are even doing this wahhh" etc. which seems to occur WAY too often when talking about SC2. Your right, I forgot about the ghost, but they still fall into the same catagory as arbiters, where they are never used by themselves as an actual legitament attack (unless nuking). I liked the aspect of starcraft where a spellcaster was a very powerful support unit for your army, but could not actually fight a war for you. I would like that aspect to return as I felt warcraft 3 spellcasters were too powerful with their attacking moves and made a strategy of massing spellcasters too legitimate a tactic. Well, personally, though I don't have a logical argument to make, I don't think there's a particular reason why casters shouldn't have attacks, other than "that's the way it is in BW." Now personally, I agree with what you want in terms of the game, but my reasoning is simply that - it was that way in BW. I dont know what your experience is with war 3, but one of the factors I found frustrating in that game was that an army of pure sorceresses had everything pretty much everything covered (except for anti-spellcasters). This is an imbalance. Not an imbalance as in "omg this unit is too strong" but an imbalance in that massing one unit was very viable (which should never happen in a rts). Seeing the protoss in this battle report make a very viable attack with just nullifers brought that frustration up in me again. You never saw a person charge in with an army of high templars for a reason in starcraft. That reason was because they were a spellcasting support unit, not a frontline attacker. That to me is what a spellcasting unit should be all about. Something that has the capability to change the entire course of battle, but must be looked after as it has very little in the way of defending itself.
No its not, it was a viable strategy in the tft beta which has long since been fixed, someone masses sorceress you mass the counter, ie seige and/or aoe spells and/or a method of dispelling.
The protoss caught the zerg player with his pants down, the zerg player choose not to use an appropriate counter which im gonna guess is likely range and air units. But this is just pointless since you are judging something based on 1 game.
|
|
|
|
|
Boo i'm leaving for the weekend... hopefully they dont release the beta haha, this video has me pumped :\
|
On June 20 2009 06:56 ManWithCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 06:37 Fen wrote:On June 20 2009 06:15 Ancestral wrote:On June 20 2009 06:05 Fen wrote:On June 20 2009 05:52 Ancestral wrote:
Fen, saying you "personally think it is lame" sounds like fanboyism to me, you want the casters to not have attacks because in SC they don't. You don't mention balance or anything, just that you "personally think it is lame." Ghosts have attacks too, by the way, but also aren't used very often, except awesomely by brat.ok. Theres a big difference between saying what I think the game should be like and fanboyism. Im currently defining fanyboyism is when someone defends any argument made with the chris crocker defense "leave blizzard alone, you should be thankful that they are even doing this wahhh" etc. which seems to occur WAY too often when talking about SC2. Your right, I forgot about the ghost, but they still fall into the same catagory as arbiters, where they are never used by themselves as an actual legitament attack (unless nuking). I liked the aspect of starcraft where a spellcaster was a very powerful support unit for your army, but could not actually fight a war for you. I would like that aspect to return as I felt warcraft 3 spellcasters were too powerful with their attacking moves and made a strategy of massing spellcasters too legitimate a tactic. Well, personally, though I don't have a logical argument to make, I don't think there's a particular reason why casters shouldn't have attacks, other than "that's the way it is in BW." Now personally, I agree with what you want in terms of the game, but my reasoning is simply that - it was that way in BW. I dont know what your experience is with war 3, but one of the factors I found frustrating in that game was that an army of pure sorceresses had everything pretty much everything covered (except for anti-spellcasters). This is an imbalance. Not an imbalance as in "omg this unit is too strong" but an imbalance in that massing one unit was very viable (which should never happen in a rts). Seeing the protoss in this battle report make a very viable attack with just nullifers brought that frustration up in me again. You never saw a person charge in with an army of high templars for a reason in starcraft. That reason was because they were a spellcasting support unit, not a frontline attacker. That to me is what a spellcasting unit should be all about. Something that has the capability to change the entire course of battle, but must be looked after as it has very little in the way of defending itself. No its not, it was a viable strategy in the tft beta which has long since been fixed, someone masses sorceress you mass the counter, ie seige and/or aoe spells and/or a method of dispelling. The protoss caught the zerg player with his pants down, the zerg player choose not to use an appropriate counter which im gonna guess is likely range and air units.
I said this earlier, but im going to say it again. Im not arguing that sorcs are overpowered, all Im saying is that they were too viable when massed in many situations. Being a support unit, they shouldn't be soo strong that a bunch of them can hold their own without an army to fight alongside. Yes of course there are units that are designed to kill sorcs (anti-spellcasters), but the fact remains that they are extremely powerful should an enemy not have these units.
You look at a unit such as a high templar in starcraft. It has a damn powerful attack. It can change the course of the battle. But you arent going to see a player mass high templar and try to charge into someone's base. Because high templar are support units, not your main army.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o
|
On June 20 2009 07:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o
nullifier?
|
On June 20 2009 07:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o
Nullifiers by the looks of things. If thats just an exception, then my arguments are not valid and im happy with that. I just dont want blizzard to go the same direction with spellcasters as it did with warcraft 3.
|
On June 20 2009 06:49 scintilliaSD wrote:
Step 1 - Neural Parasite Warp Prism
Step 2 - Suicide it into opponent's own Cannons, or kill it yourself like the BR.
Victory.
this
Now i think, why he wasted the neural parasite on two Stalkers instead of the warp prism, stopping the warp ins. He not even thinked or the range is not that far to reach it.
Thats why its too early to judge ppl, wait for the beta. Some counters will appear.
|
On June 20 2009 07:13 Fen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 07:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o Nullifiers by the looks of things. If thats just an exception, then my arguments are not valid and im happy with that. I just dont want blizzard to go the same direction with spellcasters as it did with warcraft 3.
Nullifiers did 5 damage last I knew, with a small bonus against bio (edit: now sc2 wiki says 10+3bio. They can't fight on their own unless it's against trapped melee 
It also says nullifiers are 100 gas >.<
|
On June 20 2009 07:13 Fen wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 07:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o Nullifiers by the looks of things. If thats just an exception, then my arguments are not valid and im happy with that. I just dont want blizzard to go the same direction with spellcasters as it did with warcraft 3.
You saw 4 nullifiers splitting up a mass of lings and fighting them in even numbers.
List what units, other than other zerglings, that zerglings can beat in an even number match.
|
This might not be Battle Report 3
it could be one of the choices for Battle Report 2 that got leaked somehow
it was just a few days ago they announced they were working on report 3 (yet the graphics updates/death animations/name changes had already been announced long before)
not to mention that blizzard hasn't said anything on the matter yet, disruptor is still named nullifier, and graphics are all not updated (especially those of the zerg)
I'm guessing that they had/have at least two (maybe more) drafts they choose from and then pick what they think is the best to release for the battle report.
I could be mistaken but it's my guess.
|
On June 20 2009 07:27 GGTeMpLaR wrote:
This isn't Battle Report 3
it was one of the choices for Battle Report 2 that got leaked somehow
it was just a few days ago they announced they were working on report 3 (yet the graphics updates/death animations/name changes had already been announced long before)
not to mention that blizzard hasn't said anything on the matter yet, disruptor is still named nullifier, and graphics are all not updated (especially those of the zerg)
I'm guessing that they had/have at least two (maybe more) drafts they choose from and then pick what they think is the best to release for the battle report.
I could be mistaken but it's my guess.
Why does it have 17 minutes of commentary if it was only a "choice" for br2?
Also, as someone already mentioned earlier, this isn't even a leak and may actually just be a Korean exclusive.
|
You probably are mistaken. BR3 was going to include zvp. This one has it. They never said it would be a newer build (you would imagine it would be). I highly doubt they would voice over this and everything then decide "nah lets not use this for BR2". I guarantee they only voice record ones that are going to be shown not change their mind after voice recording it.
|
this is lookin really really good many thx to husky for the pootube upload
|
On June 20 2009 07:21 Tsagacity wrote:Show nested quote +On June 20 2009 07:13 Fen wrote:On June 20 2009 07:07 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Which SC2 spellcaster do you see as being able to fight on its own?
I can't think of one ;o Nullifiers by the looks of things. If thats just an exception, then my arguments are not valid and im happy with that. I just dont want blizzard to go the same direction with spellcasters as it did with warcraft 3. Nullifiers did 5 damage last I knew, with a small bonus against bio (edit: now sc2 wiki says 10+3bio. They can't fight on their own unless it's against trapped melee
Thats however what they seem to excel at. Sure they might not do much damage by themselves (even though 10+3 to bio sounds pretty damn strong for a spellcaster), but in large numbers they might be able to control the battlefield in such a way that they can totally overwhelm the enemy. I currently see them as similar to the sorc of war 3 in which they could turn the enemy units into sheep that couldnt attack. They mightnt have been strong by themselves, but their capability to completely control the battlefield made massing them very formidable in most situations.
My argument isnt so much about balance however as much as it it about feel/focus of the game. Im not worried that nullifers will be overpowered, im only worried that mass nullifers will be a viable tactic.
My main issue is with spellcaster attacks is that in SC1, you generally needed to protect your spellcasters and keep them out of harms way to prevent them being picked off. This is something I enjoyed in starcraft and would like to see in starcraft 2. If you can imagine a science vessel autoattacking and killing scourge that were flying it to kill them, im sure many of you would think that would be pretty lame as the defenselessness of spellcasters was a very important dynamic to the game.
EDIT: Im off to bed so I cant discuss this any further tonight
|
|
|
forcefields look so fucking imba...
|
I'm afraid to click because this guy has 1 post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
