|
1294 Posts
On November 20 2012 16:19 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:17 hiro protagonist wrote:I said this in the other thread but Ill say it here too: Just finished 35 min interview with Dustin. Told us after that they're also looking into changes for void ray, phoenix, and mutalisk ... really? I dont want to be skeptical, but the phoenix is my favorite new unit to starcraft, and the muta is by far the most intriguing and dynamic unit in the game, why do they want to revisit these units and not units like the colossus or roach or marauder?!? T__T Well they could add proper moving shot with better stacking... My LP record is skipping.
Well, Given Blizzards track record on fixing stacking bugs in SC2 does not lead me to be hopeful of whatever changes they have in mind for the muta. But I will cross my fingers in hopes that it will be moving shot!
I am glad that they are willing to take a chance on such big changes to the game. I think the experimenting that is going on right now is gonna ultimately lead to a more diverse, better game in the long run. even if the short run turns out to be a little hectic 
|
On November 20 2012 16:31 Falling wrote:
On the otherhand, it's probably for the best that the mothership gets nerfed into oblivion and everything else compensates in its place. Trying to balance the late-game around a single, super slow hero unit is going to be a head-ache no matter how they do it. Plus I'm convinced it promotes super passive play when it swings the battle so much in one direction or the other. Both sides are too scared to make a move and have it all go wrong due to Vortex on Zerg or Neural counter-Vortex.
Agreed, the mothership in its current form promotes slow, deathball-style play. Arbiters assisted in large fights, but they also helped with base raids, harassing and counterattacking because they were much faster and more disposable than the mothership.
If a mothership-style unit were to be created for use in professional games, it would be more interesting as a faster, more harass-focused unit similar to the arbiter. The mothership in its current form does not make the metagame more fun to watch and play in my opinion.
My ideas about fungal changes
+ Show Spoiler +I disagree with Dustin on fungal slowing units not changing much about the spell. Once a group of units are fungaled currently, it's a weird situation. The zerg has to check back every four seconds to make sure to chain the fungal in the same location, and whoever is being fungaled has to choose between abandoning their units and focusing on other tasks or trying to move their units away and hoping the zerg does not chain fungal in time. Making fungal a projectile increases the potential to micro units to avoid fungal, but once they have been fungaled the situation is still the same. Making psionic units immune to fungal also does little to change this situation, because the fungal dynamic is still the same for non-psionic units. If units were slowed by fungal, the engagement would be more dynamic. The player being fungaled would have the opportunity to spread their units to save some of them or maximize the energy spent by the infestors and the zerg would need to decide where and whether to fungal as the enemy units spread out or retreat. I think changing fungal to an area of effect slow and damaging spell that would affect any units present in that area during the duration would help change this dynamic. It would affect units once they entered the area and would no longer affect units once they leave the area (like time warp). This would make microing against and casting fungal growth more challenging and strategic. This wasn't my idea, it was from FS11111's comment on this video:
Overall a great interview, and the proposed changes seem to be headed in the right direction.
|
I love how Browder is so eager, and already knows where the questions will go before monk is done asking them, he's saying "sure, sure, sure, ok shut up lemme answer!"
I do hope we can get them to alter the fungal change from psionic to a slow. It kind of seems like Browder already likes the idea, but needs a little more convincing that it would help with actual fights, rather than just the "edge of danger" situation he describes.
monk should have poked him a bit more on the chain-fungal issue, and how it makes infested terrans infinitely more dangerous than they should be. Great, great interview, otherwise.
|
On November 20 2012 16:25 NightOfTheDead wrote:
That mothership redesign is questionable. Why would they do that when they put the core in, where mothersip is a follow-up? I think DB just ment that the vortex wont be in same place as it is now, or just wasnt focused speaking on mothership.
Just because you have the MS core, doesn't mean you have to get the Mothership. You still need to get the Fleet Beacon AND invest 300/300. And if they redesign the Mothership, maybe it won't be such a desirable investment.
On November 20 2012 16:28 Goldfish wrote:Show nested quote +Will redesign Mothership so it won’t be a serious unit used in professional esports play What? Removing a unit from competitive play will mean less variety which means less fun to watch. But really though, the Mothership was fun to watch in games. It did add variety. I don't get wanting to make the Mothership into a joke unit. Maybe redesigning it so it gets used in another way but specifically saying it won't be a serious unit anymore? Blizzard I'm disappointed.
The Mothership was supposed to be a 'joke' unit. It just turned out that Vortex was too good/essential.
|
Good interview, Dustin being diplomatic as usual. Someone should count how many times he says, "like".
|
On November 20 2012 16:43 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:36 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:30 lichter wrote:
Oh, for the medivac they should give them a 150/150 researchable ability that allows medivacs to drop all its load simultaneously. Give this ability a cool down (so that medivac micro isn't too easy) and a different hotkey so that moving drops and individual drops are still the default. That would be ridiculous. Double medi drop late game with 3/3 marines/marauders vs Z or P. Research said ability. Insta drop a base, snipe nexus/hatch/tech/ then leave. Repeat as needed. Part of what allows drop defense to be possible is the delay in units coming out. Several ways to try to balance the ability: medivac unable to heal while ability is on cool down; medivac loses x amount of armor when simultaneous drop command is issued until cooldown ends; units dropped this way lose 5 health (because they fall so hard? lol). Or maybe give medivacs an ability that increases their armor significantly, but slow their movement or drop speed. It depends what the problem Browder thinks there is about drops: drops being too slow, or drops being too fragile. Anyway it is just a suggestion. Drop play just isn't as prominent now that players have become so good at defending them, and making harassment like this (and in general, splitting up armies) less efficient just encourages more deathball play 
Like I said in my post previous to this, SC2 is severely lacking in good maps. It's not like players weren't good at defending drops in BW, they were amazing, but when the maps are designed larger, with more high ground and positional play encouraged, you were forced to be spread thinner, which made drops and flanks more effective among appropriate routes.
If you want to make drops more effective, design better maps so you can't just sit with 3-4 bases extremely close to each other, thus making base defense easier.
|
On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing  Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in.
Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter.
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On November 20 2012 16:44 Rainling wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:31 Falling wrote:
On the otherhand, it's probably for the best that the mothership gets nerfed into oblivion and everything else compensates in its place. Trying to balance the late-game around a single, super slow hero unit is going to be a head-ache no matter how they do it. Plus I'm convinced it promotes super passive play when it swings the battle so much in one direction or the other. Both sides are too scared to make a move and have it all go wrong due to Vortex on Zerg or Neural counter-Vortex. Agreed, the mothership in its current form promotes slow, deathball-style play. Arbiters assisted in large fights, but they also helped with base raids, harassing and counterattacking because they were much faster and more disposable than the mothership. If a mothership-style unit were to be created for use in professional games, it would be more interesting as a faster, more harass-focused unit similar to the arbiter. The mothership in its current form does not make the metagame more fun to watch and play in my opinion.
They would need to redesign the Arbiter's recall ability though. With warpgates and warprisms, Protoss already have 1 option to mass drop wherever they want as long as they have a warpcycle. Giving them recall on the Arbiter is redundant and probably more than a bit OP.
|
Doesn’t feel changing Fungal to a slow will change much to the game
Fire this man. Fire this man now.
|
On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter.
From a balance perspective, no.
From a map design perspective, yes.
|
Great interview Monk. Glad you didn't just ask about balance, but about design as well.
|
On November 20 2012 16:50 Flonomenalz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter. From a balance perspective, no. From a map design perspective, yes.
Well and a fun perspective. We saw it used 3 times to sen i believe? I saw the last two games but it's just not fun to watch. It's just idk incredibly boring to watch someone do that lol.
|
On November 20 2012 16:47 Pyre wrote:
Good interview, Dustin being diplomatic as usual. Someone should count how many times he says, "like".
+ Show Spoiler +
right right right right right
right
right
riiiiiiiiiiight
==
Why in the world would they want to cut neural D:
They already nerfed it to hell in WoL despite how cool it is. I was hoping maybe it would get a complete redesign for HotS.
|
Great interview. Thanks Monk and DB
|
Cool! we are finally moving forward, albeit not as fast as i would like, but it's progress! now just take tal darim altar out of the map pools.
|
On November 20 2012 16:52 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:50 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter. From a balance perspective, no. From a map design perspective, yes. Well and a fun perspective. We saw it used 3 times to sen i believe? I saw the last two games but it's just not fun to watch. It's just idk incredibly boring to watch someone do that lol.
Lol that too.
|
That interview put alot of my worries to rest. Blizzard can be stupid, but they (Dustin Browder and crew) seem to care alot about the game. Sweet interview, thanks
|
1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts
On November 20 2012 16:52 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:50 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter. From a balance perspective, no. From a map design perspective, yes. Well and a fun perspective. We saw it used 3 times to sen i believe? I saw the last two games but it's just not fun to watch. It's just idk incredibly boring to watch someone do that lol.
Infestor Broodlord is boring to watch too
I am really considering switching to Terran now, because Z and P matchups are so boring to play -_-''
|
On November 20 2012 16:52 blade55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:50 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter. From a balance perspective, no. From a map design perspective, yes. Well and a fun perspective. We saw it used 3 times to sen i believe? I saw the last two games but it's just not fun to watch. It's just idk incredibly boring to watch someone do that lol.
Sen actually defended it in the first game with roaches and 1-1 lings, but then still lost in a macro game.
|
On November 20 2012 16:56 lichter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2012 16:52 blade55555 wrote:On November 20 2012 16:50 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:49 Al Bundy wrote:On November 20 2012 16:44 Flonomenalz wrote:On November 20 2012 16:40 Al Bundy wrote:Thanks for sharing Looks like we're going to have to wait for HotS in order to see significant changes. I'm fine with that. I agree with Dustin about the immortal all-in. Also I agree with him about Terran in HotS. Now hopefully when the balance test map (featuring the fungal immunity for psionic units) will be live, people won't jump to conclusions. Like all changes, it may take some time for the Zergs to adapt. I don't agree with him about the immortal all-in. He seems to think it can be solved by the players' strategies, when in actuality it is solved through map design. Any all in centering around forcefield has nothing to do with the Zerg it becomes a question of whether the Protoss hits his forcefields. This can be alleviated through better map design (*cough* no more Ohana maps please Blizzard) which allows the Zerg to bait forcefields earlier on and get a better concave/surround, since that's just about all the micro we can do against the all in. Bottom line is, there is no need for Blizzard to intervene in that specific matter. From a balance perspective, no. From a map design perspective, yes. Well and a fun perspective. We saw it used 3 times to sen i believe? I saw the last two games but it's just not fun to watch. It's just idk incredibly boring to watch someone do that lol. Infestor Broodlord is boring to watch too I am really considering switching to Terran now, because Z and P matchups are so boring to play -_-''
Oh I agree. I have said this many times that zerg late game is boring, but it's our only viable way to consistently win, which sucks trust me. It's why I haven't played sc2 much because it's boring to do that style if I want to win zvp consistently. In general zvp is dull to watch :/.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
