EPTCarrier Micro - Page 31
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
DanceSC
United States751 Posts
| ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12049 Posts
On September 25 2012 07:43 DanceSC wrote: I just wish Blizzard gets wind of this message, well said NonY Nony said on his stream just now when I asked that apparently they responded and said they liked the changes, but right now they're focusing on the hots units. To me it sounds like they could eventually change, but they won't be changing initially. | ||
|
SarcasmMonster
3136 Posts
On September 25 2012 07:57 Qikz wrote: Nony said on his stream just now when I asked that apparently they responded and said they liked the changes, but right now they're focusing on the hots units. To me it sounds like they could eventually change, but they won't be changing initially. We're seeing some community discussion on units that we shipped with Wings of Liberty. Examples include: - Carrier -Thor -Void Ray -Ghost While we are very willing to change these units down the road we are not focused on them for the next few weeks. We are very interested in what kind of strategies we are introducing with the new beta units as well as what types of balance problems we are creating. Obviously you can post on any subject you like and if you want to talk about older units feel free. We will definitely read your posts on older units. But we probably won't make balance or design changes of any significance to older units anytime soon. Once we stabilize the balance on the new beta units we will take a look to see what changes make sense to older units. -Dustin Browder This was exactly a week ago. Currently not as worried about Carrier as much as the new HotS units, but extra special thanks to Nony's video, we're thinking on 2 possibilities in the future: leashing thing Interceptor launching thing But let's try to focus on HotS if we can. -Dayvie, from the pro forum (I think we're aloud to post this stuff?) -goswser | ||
|
Zergrusher
United States562 Posts
Why did they have there armor dropped from 4 to 2? | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
On September 25 2012 08:42 Zergrusher wrote: Carriers Why did they have there armor dropped from 4 to 2? Marines Why do they have 5 extra health and the +1 range standardly included (compared to bw)? | ||
|
RavenLoud
Canada1100 Posts
Colossus. Why? User was warned for this post | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20343 Posts
On September 25 2012 11:08 RavenLoud wrote: 15 extra health is more like it. Colossus. Why? Terrible terrible damage :D:D From my limited brood war play and spectating though, reaver does seem a lot more fun, although i wasnt there to experience it at the height of the game, the higher volatility of spider mines, reaver shots, higher flat out damage siege tanks is very exciting, watching one of Sayle's casts of proleague + Show Spoiler + Watch from 7:40 | ||
|
DodgySmalls
Canada158 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
That is all. | ||
|
sacrilegious
Canada863 Posts
| ||
|
blarkh
Austria72 Posts
On September 26 2012 01:41 sacrilegious wrote: I saw this video, and was quite impressed and didn't even know BW carriers had that design that utilized a players skill to make the carrier even more efficient offensively. It makes me appreciate SC1 and BW more when I never gave the game a chance in the past, rather than play WC3. The fact Blizzard even acknowledged it on their b.net forums and would "consider it" is awesome. It's funny, to me all those skill based things you could do in bw look more like bad programming than like deliberate design. I highly doubt that Blizzard programmers actually wanted this mechanic to be in the game. Of course it makes the game more fun, but just like the thing where lurkers can't normally be put on hold, magic boxing mutas and all those kinds of things it seems like they were originally bugs that pro gamers started to abuse. If I'm right, it's really funny, because it means that the big problem with sc2 is its consistent and bug-free programming. Edit: mutas are magic boxed. That's the bug. Stacking was deliberate for sure. | ||
|
ShadeR
Australia7535 Posts
| ||
|
Prophanity
United States165 Posts
The whole "Brood War is a good game; go play it if you like it" attitude sucks for exactly things like this - reusing positive things is a sign of wisdom and acknowledgement that things were done right. Kicking and screaming against those things for the sake of being unique when this uniqueness is inferior just serves to shoot oneself in the foot. | ||
|
methematics
United States392 Posts
| ||
|
Alex1Sun
494 Posts
| ||
|
Cabinet Sanchez
Australia1097 Posts
On September 26 2012 03:02 ShadeR wrote: Don't mean to be a negative nancy but i have a strong feeling these changes will never be implemented because the current Blizzard suffers from so much BW envy. To an extent yeah. | ||
|
Cabinet Sanchez
Australia1097 Posts
On October 05 2012 15:15 methematics wrote: So is it being tested in the HOTS beta yet? I spose "lol" would be a suitable response?  Someone needs to bump this thread on the Blizzard forums, because they shut up the huge community whine by responding to it, now they can successfully let it die! - clever, very clever. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On October 05 2012 15:23 Alex1Sun wrote: Great post! Let's make carriers more micro intensive! Watch your wording: - "more micro intensive" sounds like players HAVE TO work more to use the unit, but that is not the case. - "more microable" would be the positive version where the players are given more options by becoming good enough to micro the unit. The word "microable" isnt a true english word - yet -, but is established pretty well in the eSports scene. Adopting micro like this for the units would be nice to have some more skill in using them for offensive purposes, because right now we only have "look out, the banelings are coming, its time to spread your marines" micro and some generic unit repositioning for greater concave or avoiding of forcefields. The two burrowed attacking units (widow mine and swarm host) are totally unmicroable as a unit concept and that is terribly boring. | ||
|
Shkudde
Netherlands709 Posts
![[image loading]](http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/24/carrier720.jpg/) nicopower5000 to the rescue! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=263421¤tpage=28 | ||
|
K_osss
United States113 Posts
| ||
| ||
