Website Feedback
Closed Threads
IRC Web ChatTeamSpeak 3 (81 users)
Active: 6443 users | |
|
| Plansix United States. June 14 2012 07:34. Posts 5391 | Profile Blog # |
On June 14 2012 07:28 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Why does everyone want to make the races more symmetrical -_-;;
They assume it will make the game better? Personally, I like SC2 the way it is right now and I have high hopes for HotS. More tools are good, and that is what we are getting. There are almost no units being added that a player could just "add" to a death ball. Most of them require multi tasking to be used effectively. |
| | Nony on PvT: "It's not imbalanced, the protoss wins and then there is a five minute death animation for the Terran" |  |
|
|
| Thurken June 14 2012 07:40. Posts 871 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 07:28 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Why does everyone want to make the races more symmetrical -_-;;
I hope they don't do the same as for WOW where they gave all the abilities to all the races to please all the players. Symmetrical races would severely damage the viewing experience. I'd get easily bored with one kind of matchup... |
|
|
| Holytornados United States. June 14 2012 07:41. Posts 625 | Profile # |
"We see Terran's winning a little bit less in the tournaments that we're watching, which is exciting for us to see..."
..what? |
| | I need your love like a boy needs his mother's side. |  |
|
|
| SmokeMonster Canada. June 14 2012 08:23. Posts 72 | Profile # |
On June 13 2012 12:13 iTzSnypah wrote:
I'm a sad panda. 99% of the time TL does written interviews. 100% of the time I'm on 56k Dialup. WHY TL WHY!
Transcript of interviews PLEASE.
Didn't know they still produce 56k modems. |
|
|
| SmokeMonster Canada. June 14 2012 08:25. Posts 72 | Profile # |
| Unlike previous interviews, DB actually sounds like he knows what he's talking about. |
|
|
| Sawamura Malaysia. June 14 2012 08:30. Posts 7234 | Profile Blog # |
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it.
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for  . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/FirebatLast edit: 2012-06-14 08:31:24 |
| | BW/KT Forever R.I.P KT.Violet dearly missed .. |  |
|
|
| windsupernova Mexico. June 14 2012 08:39. Posts 5272 | Profile # |
Firebats actually did pretty well against Zealots, especially at high numbers. I don't know why people forget that upgraded Bio was fantastic against a Reaverless and Templarless P army.
|
| | "Its easy, just trust your CPU".-Boxer on being good at games |  |
|
|
 EneMecH United Kingdom. June 14 2012 08:39. Posts 218 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 07:41 Holytornados wrote:
"We see Terran's winning a little bit less in the tournaments that we're watching, which is exciting for us to see..."
..what?
Yeah dustin browder is very ignorant. That wasn't even the objectively worst thing he said
"DERP PPLZ USE MOTHERSHIP ARCHON VS INFESTOR BROODLORD IN PVZ? I DUD NOT NO THAT I FINK U LIE"
User was warned for this post |
| | Tears soaks each hand the dealer's dealt. But time taught me how to see every second as heaven even when they're perfectly disguised as hell. |
|
|
| SarcasmMonster June 14 2012 08:47. Posts 2897 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it.
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Show nested quote +Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests. |
| | MMA: The true King of Wings |
|
|
| Sawamura Malaysia. June 14 2012 08:52. Posts 7234 | Profile Blog # |
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it.
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks.
Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.Last edit: 2012-06-14 08:57:00 |
| | BW/KT Forever R.I.P KT.Violet dearly missed .. | |
|
|
| TrainSamurai June 14 2012 09:02. Posts 258 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it.
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
If you throw marines and medics in there zealots won't stand a chance...
Man sc2's tema game approach is half right half retarded. Why the hell are they excited that terran is winning less...
They see the importance of territorial control but they have wierd ways of implementing it... The carrier could have easily been fixed if they introduced BW micro again...Last edit: 2012-06-14 09:03:56 |
| | LoL is the greatest thing to happen to ESPORS. LoL is the KING of ESPORTS |
|
|
| SarcasmMonster June 14 2012 09:03. Posts 2897 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
On June 13 2012 21:49 ZAiNs wrote:
I would have liked some more pressing on the Carrier issue. Kennigit should have asked why the Carrier is one of the few units to literally have never been buffed/nerfed by a patch, and why they haven't tried something as simple as reducing its build cost and/or build time before ditching it.
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want... CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
Edit: @TrainSamauri the conversation is about which is better for Terran in SC2 Firebats or Battle hellions. You can have Marine backup for Battle hellions too.Last edit: 2012-06-14 09:05:19 |
| | MMA: The true King of Wings |
|
|
| TrainSamurai June 14 2012 09:05. Posts 258 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:
Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
[quote]
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want...
CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
Dude its not like its up for debate. The only reason rax units aren't used is because of HT and reavers.
|
| | LoL is the greatest thing to happen to ESPORS. LoL is the KING of ESPORTS |
|
|
| v3chr0 United States. June 14 2012 09:06. Posts 855 | Profile Blog # |
I hate how every time an interviewer mentions the Carrier, they can never give Dustin a reason for it to stay... simple: It's never really been buffed or nerfed, Blizzard just needs to try stuff with it, that is more than a valid reason to keep it in and look at it, atleast until HotS.
Other than that, great inverviews. thanks. |
| | "He catches him with his pants down, backs him off into a corner, and then it's over." - Khaldor | |
|
|
| Sawamura Malaysia. June 14 2012 09:07. Posts 7234 | Profile Blog # |
On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
On June 13 2012 21:53 bokchoi wrote:
Thor's suffering from an art issue, hurting eSports. So funny, I don't know if he meant to say that to troll people or it just came out but good interview with David Kim.
[quote]
Realistically only one, and the one that we all want...
CARRIER HAS ARRIVED.
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
The thing is it's funny a unit have to "transform" in to something to be actually effective so they could stand up against your usual standard zealot . Firebats it self did not need any transformation to be actually useful this actually talks a lot about the unit design and game planning that the sc2 team is actually thinking about right now . Also how does un transform hellion which have actually weak armour have 270% extra armour in battle hellion mode ? . Do they magically have extra armours out of no where just because they transform ? |
| | BW/KT Forever R.I.P KT.Violet dearly missed .. | |
|
|
| Falcor Canada. June 14 2012 09:08. Posts 892 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 07:41 Holytornados wrote:
"We see Terran's winning a little bit less in the tournaments that we're watching, which is exciting for us to see..."
..what?
i think its because for a long time there was a stretch where terrans won everything. |
|
|
| DeCoup Australia. June 14 2012 09:17. Posts 1928 | Profile # |
| The biggest difference I see between SC1 and SC2 is that in SC1 almost every unit is OP in some way and we have balance. In SC2 they took a much more controled approach to each unit which I feel has hurt the game by making it less interesting in general. A lot of the changes they are making in HotS look like a move in the direction of SC1 when it comes to this concept, which is awesome. |
| | "Poor guy. I really did not deserve that win. So this is what it's like to play Protoss..." - IdrA | |
|
|
| SarcasmMonster June 14 2012 09:17. Posts 2897 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 09:05 TrainSamurai wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
[quote]
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
Dude its not like its up for debate. The only reason rax units aren't used is because of HT and reavers.
Dude, it's not about viability of Bio in TvP. The conversation is about whether Firebats or BattleHellions are a better idea for
HOTS.
On June 14 2012 09:07 Sawamura wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:08 Madkipz wrote:
[quote]
Even worse, if you gave carrier 22 range it could serve the same role as the tempest and do that role in a cooler way....
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated. What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game. Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential. No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter. Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no. Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever. Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper. As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far? Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
The thing is it's funny a unit have to "transform" in to something to be actually effective so they could stand up against your usual standard zealot . Firebats it self did not need any transformation to be actually useful this actually talks a lot about the unit design and game planning that the sc2 team is actually thinking about right now . Also how does un transform hellion which have actually weak armour have 270% (should read 50%) extra armour in battle hellion mode ? . Do they magically have extra armours out of no where just because they transform ?
It's for balance reasons I guess. Like how they had to nerf 100hp from Creep Colony->Sunken Colony and +1 armour to balance things out. Or how WC3 Footman can transform to a defensive stance to decrease incoming dmg.
Last post for realz.Last edit: 2012-06-14 09:21:14 |
| | MMA: The true King of Wings |
|
|
| Sawamura Malaysia. June 14 2012 09:21. Posts 7234 | Profile Blog # |
On June 14 2012 09:17 DeCoup wrote:
The biggest difference I see between SC1 and SC2 is that in SC1 almost every unit is OP in some way and we have balance. In SC2 they took a much more controled approach to each unit which I feel has hurt the game by making it less interesting in general. A lot of the changes they are making in HotS look like a move in the direction of SC1 when it comes to this concept, which is awesome.
Well you don't have to worry about it being better than sc1 because if hots don't work you always can hope for LoTv to bring some miracle. |
| | BW/KT Forever R.I.P KT.Violet dearly missed .. | |
|
|
| TrainSamurai June 14 2012 09:38. Posts 258 | Profile # |
On June 14 2012 09:17 SarcasmMonster wrote:
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 09:05 TrainSamurai wrote:
On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
[quote]
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated.
What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game.
Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential.
No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter.
Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no.
Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever.
Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper.
As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far?
Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
Dude its not like its up for debate. The only reason rax units aren't used is because of HT and reavers.
Dude, it's not about viability of Bio in TvP. The conversation is about whether Firebats or BattleHellions are a better idea for HOTS.
Show nested quote +On June 14 2012 09:07 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 09:03 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:52 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:47 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 08:30 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:45 SarcasmMonster wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:39 Sawamura wrote:
On June 14 2012 00:20 Bippzy wrote:
On June 13 2012 22:32 Gosi wrote:
[quote]
Yupp, but they just want to make their own units but with the same kind of role because SC2 is their game and HotS is a new expansion so something new and coOo0L has to get in. Just like in WoL, there is units in here that got added over completely fine and loved units because of the reason I stated.
What role has Thor in WoL that Goliath couldn't fill? With and without minor tweaks to the Goliath. And now with Warhound coming in to take place in Terran mech compositions, it's like 2 Goliaths in the game.
Hellion? I don't mind the Hellion, but why couldn't they have the Vulture and Firebat in SC2? Now we get Hellion and firebat (battle hellion) in HotS but no Vulture or Hellion with Vulture micro pontential.
No Arbiter in WoL but Oracle(?) is like an Arbiter in HotS but still not Arbiter.
Science Vessel didn't have to be replaced by Raven, just tweak the spells a bit, but no.
Changed awesome Reaver for Colossi, I don't think I even have to say anything here since everyone outside of Blizzard HQ understand that this was like the biggest mistake ever.
Because they are to proud of their own game they can't even add a fucking normal lurker into the game so they make up their own shit lurker... the same with defiler and the Viper.
As you see, they scrap good units that already fill roles to make their own, worse version of that unit and that is what is happening to the Carrier. Why do you think they haven't done shit for the Carrier so far?
Oh I forgot about the "widow mine"... just lol. Can't even put in damn spider mines without making them fucking wierd and with a new name. xD
I don't like your attitude. Not going to go into intensive detail, but extensively you assume that all BW units are better and that all units are just copies of BW units(which I believe they are not). As an intensive example, Battle hellions seem almost more convenient then firebats because their robotic nature makes them effected by mech upgrades.
So having an opinion that bw units are much more useful than sc2 units is having a bad attitude huh ? .Bio firebats didn't even need upgrades to start frying zergs for breakfast their splash damage is already enough to hurt dozens of zerglings and hold a ramp with a single medic .His point was reasonable though most of the units that are being reinstated in to hots are like a watered down version of the units in broodwar .
Battle hellion doesn't require an upgrade in the current build. Plus, Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots. David Kim mentions in his interview that the primary target of Battle hellion is to cost effectively deal with Charglots. A buffed-tier1 Firebat that is strong enough to cost effectively fight Chargelots is scary as hell for . For what they want to accomplish, the Battle hellion is a better approach than the Firebat.
Well this only means you didn't play broodwar and only assume firebats are bad against zealot .On the contrary firebats actually rapes zealot because their splash damage just kills their shield instantly allowing other units like the marine to rip the zealots to bits without their shields to protect them .
Supported by medics, firebats can stand up to zealots despite the large difference in health between them. With stims and medics, firebats can easily defeat swarms of zerglings.
http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Firebat
I have to disagree. "Firebats were bad at fighting Zealots" is not right either. I should have written "Firebats were decent at fighting Zealots", but they certainly do not rape Zealots. Getting them to be cost-effective is tricky. In low numbers, Firebats don't stand a chance. You can throw more mins/gas into Medics if you want your bats to "stand up" to Zealots like the Liquipedia article suggests.
Duh even marines won't stand a chance against a 1 on 1 on a zealot well unless if you have sim city of a barracks and supply parallel to each other . I tried Bio vs protoss and having 3 firebats with mnm vs 6 zealots the firebats was able to take out the zealot shields so fast that my supporting marines were killing the zealots much more faster compared to the standard MnM vs Zealot . So in conclusion firebats are not tricky at all they are really quite cost effective against high zealot count protoss and if he goes mass dragoons just simply make more tanks. Also talking about firebat being cost in efficient a price of a fire bat in broodwar only cost 50 minerals and 25 gas and 1 supply while a Hellion takes 100 minerals with 2 supply . Firebat here actually wins the cost efficient battle here.
This is the last post I'll make of this conversation since we are arguing over a nonexistant hypothetical situation anyways. Battle Hellion's have 270% the health of a Firebat so you can't compare cost efficiency like that.
The thing is it's funny a unit have to "transform" in to something to be actually effective so they could stand up against your usual standard zealot . Firebats it self did not need any transformation to be actually useful this actually talks a lot about the unit design and game planning that the sc2 team is actually thinking about right now . Also how does un transform hellion which have actually weak armour have 270% (should read 50%) extra armour in battle hellion mode ? . Do they magically have extra armours out of no where just because they transform ?
It's for balance reasons I guess. Like how they had to nerf 100hp from Creep Colony->Sunken Colony and +1 armour to balance things out. Or how WC3 Footman can transform to a defensive stance to decrease incoming dmg. Last post for realz.
Ey I think your confused. In sc2 we see BIO TvP because the storms and collo ain't BW reavers and storm and mech sucks in comparison. In BW T uses mech because rax units can't handle late game protoss, if P had no HT and reavers they would have a 100% lost rate precisely because of rax units, I don't know why your trying to make it seem like this is a debate.
And firebat would probably get screwed by collo in sc2 anyways. Like every other unit... so I'm gonna go with battle hellion just because?
Last edit: 2012-06-14 09:45:42 |
| | LoL is the greatest thing to happen to ESPORS. LoL is the KING of ESPORTS |
|
|
| Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next All | |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
