| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On October 05 2012 17:45 Psychobabas wrote: Why did they scrap the shredder again? The Shredder was scrapped because it was being used to kill workers, and it overlapped with the Siege tank. Even though the Widow mine is used to kill workers quite often, and it will begin to overlap with the Siege tank if it's able to attack multiple times, LOL. | ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On October 05 2012 17:24 papaz wrote: Although it's cool they try out things in beta like this I feel they just sacked the warhound without any drastical changes to it and now the widow mine will be a unit. The warhound absolutely sucked, no doubt. But they could have done so much more with the unit and its synergy with other units before scrapping it entirely. They could have changed its role, changed roles of other units to try fitting it in. They kinda HAVE TO make the Widow Mine work now ... and thats terrible. Any "free unit spawner" is terrible, because it fully clashes with the "you have to get an economy and rebuild your army after a battle using your resources" part of any RTS. | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12021 Posts
Let's see how this works! When's the next patch? :o! | ||
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On October 05 2012 18:00 Rabiator wrote:n. They kinda HAVE TO make the Widow Mine work now ... and thats terrible. Any "free unit spawner" is terrible, because it fully clashes with the "you have to get an economy and rebuild your army after a battle using your resources" part of any RTS. How exactly is it a free unit spawner? You pay for the unit, and it attacks multiple times. When it is in a position to attack, it is also in danger of being killed. Just like most other units in the game. | ||
|
cerebralz
United States443 Posts
I would also advocate that none of these mines actually do direct damage. Like other people have posted, that overlaps much to much with what mech is. I would see it as a debuffer and crowd control unit dropping basically traps that blind, slow, or de-energize. I think that would be a lot more interesting and would promote the whole, slow push-consume the map, type play. | ||
|
DuckNuked
France60 Posts
I Like that, If Blizzard takes inspiration from SF Standards, HoTS can't be a funless game. Self-extending Minefiels is a good idea and really Terran-like. The most fun would be that mines attack everything that comes close, including Terran units, :D Keep that way, rework the Broodlord so it fits better in the Zerg "Horror-film-like" and I'll be very excited to play HoTS. | ||
|
wcr.4fun
Belgium686 Posts
seems like blizzard isn't running out of terrible ideas any time soon? -.- | ||
|
Zaurus
Singapore676 Posts
| ||
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On October 05 2012 18:47 Zaurus wrote: Why not just put back the reaver, since launcher is like an immobile reaver with very slow attack rate. Just feel blizz is changing for the sake of changing. Haha Not really, a lot of people have been asking for something like this. Whether Blizzard executed it well, we shall have to see. It may be included in tomorrow's patch (assuming there is a patch tomorrow). | ||
|
Quotidian
Norway1937 Posts
| ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
On October 05 2012 19:12 Quotidian wrote: I wonder if there's a mineral/gas cost each time it rebuilds itself.. otherwise, it's not really "rebuilding" is it? It's just a unit with a long cooldown between attacks I guess it probably is something like that. People are just jumping to conclusion when they don't know how it will exactly work. I guess it will be something like that idea about unit that plant mines around itself(or in cone), but somehow tweaked. It really won't be a Mine that explodes and then rebuilds itself, lol. | ||
|
tsango
Australia214 Posts
It's an interesting idea, i think the only way to change the mechanic to work like this without said cost/damage changes would be to place a hard cap on a players number of allowed active widow mines, i dont want to speculate on what that number might be - i would think no more than like 8 though with their current design. Alternatively they could perhaps be placed in a location on the map, and after exploded and rebuilding regain only the capacity to explode but not relocate, such that they can be reused as many times as it takes for the other player to kill them but only be placed and once 'armed' are there to stay and explode rebuilding at the location of the unit they attached to at point of exploding. As long as its balanced and the rebuilding process isnt automated (the player has to target it and hit the hotkey to have the action complete) i think im okay with it, new mechanics help move the game forwards and bring new dimensions to play so its usually a good thing | ||
|
[]Phase[]
Belgium927 Posts
On October 05 2012 09:58 unteqair wrote: That does seem like a problem. It may also make turrets less necessary, though, then again, you may not want supply sitting by the mineral line. I think we'll have to wait and see how it works. Lets be honest, mutas are ALREADY getting less and less popular on higher levels, mainly due to increase in popularity in the double upgrade + infestor. Yea, it gives you more mapcontrol and defense against drop, but I fear that if other tech paths become too strong compared to the muta path, even more pros will simply drop the muta alltogether in zvt. I mean, now you can spend that gas on upgrades and infestors, but what if you ALSO can spend the gas on vipers or swarm hosts, and since turrets already are pretty good, with the addition of the mines, muta for harassment would only work if you catch your opponent really off-guard, which rarely happens on the highest level. | ||
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On October 05 2012 20:00 []Phase[] wrote: Lets be honest, mutas are ALREADY getting less and less popular on higher levels, mainly due to increase in popularity in the double upgrade + infestor. Yea, it gives you more mapcontrol and defense against drop, but I fear that if other tech paths become too strong compared to the muta path, even more pros will simply drop the muta alltogether in zvt. I mean, now you can spend that gas on upgrades and infestors, but what if you ALSO can spend the gas on vipers or swarm hosts, and since turrets already are pretty good, with the addition of the mines, muta for harassment would only work if you catch your opponent really off-guard, which rarely happens on the highest level. Infestors are the big problem. They are ridiculously effective in too many roles. They already killed the Hydra. | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
On October 05 2012 20:05 Crawdad wrote: Infestors are the big problem. They are ridiculously effective in too many roles. They already killed the Hydra. they hydra just outright sucks and loses to over 80% of all units supplywise. thats what killed the hydra :-P but yeah the infestor is obv part of the problem since its too strong and hydra too weak. making the widow mine rebuildable and keeping it 2 supply might be a solution. now make it not hit air and it might work out nicely. although a 0,5 supply mine that only hits ground and has less damage would be better designwise since you would actually be able to get a mine field. | ||
|
Steins;Gate
1422 Posts
| ||
|
IcemanAsi
Israel681 Posts
| ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12021 Posts
On October 05 2012 21:06 IcemanAsi wrote: Wait... So it's a burrowed unit that will slowley produce an additional unit that rushes enemy units and explodes...It's a baneling swarm host. ... no? | ||
|
Ramiz1989
12124 Posts
ROFL, that was funny, don't know how he even got that idea. :D | ||
|
nukkuj
Finland403 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War |
|
WardiTV Invitational
herO vs GuMiho
Clem vs Solar
MaxPax vs SHIN
ByuN vs Dark
Replay Cast
Online Event
Replay Cast
Master's Coliseum
Maru vs Lancer
herO vs Lancer
GuMiho vs herO
Korean StarCraft League
Master's Coliseum
Maru vs GuMiho
Lancer vs GuMiho
herO vs Maru
CranKy Ducklings
Defiler Tour
CranKy Ducklings
|
|
|
EPT
