You win the thread.Sounds like the kind of problem that would create hundreds of complaining threads if it were happening in SC2.
11-13-2009, 05:09 PM
#11
You win the thread.Sounds like the kind of problem that would create hundreds of complaining threads if it were happening in SC2.
"When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." - C. S. Lewis
"You simply cannot design a mechanic today to mimic the behaviour of a 10-year old mechanic that you removed because nearly nobody would like them today." - Norfindel, on the Macro Mechanics
"We want to focus the player on making interesting choices and not just a bunch of different klicks." - Dustin Browder
StarCraft 2 Beta Blog
11-13-2009, 05:14 PM
#12
11-13-2009, 05:14 PM
#13
Balance is a very subjective matter. When I play SC again after a long time of not playing it… I instantly feel that terran are so overly over powered.
Marines + Medic feel so completely IMBA. Instant regen? Super fast attack?
Siege tanks… No way to get close? 1-2 hit kills on all my units?
Like it immediately feels SO op… but once you get used to it and form some coherent counters, they don’t feel as much OP.
I feel SC2 is leaning towards too much “balancing” act rather than letting people just play the game… form strategies to counter obvious IMBAs and then try to balance out problems that are incredibly had to counter.
11-13-2009, 08:22 PM
#14
Yeah, that's kinda what I was getting at. With the inclusion of the above mentioned units meaning you don't necessarily have to sacrifice mobility for firepower so much anymore, the idea of having to babysit sieged up tanks during offensive pushes suddenly doesn't seem so appealing anymore.
But then several people have brought up some really good points about it's roles being changed to more of a strategic one, and that it's now just one option out of many instead of the 'be-end-all' overcompensation unit it often became in sc1.
That being said I wouldn't really mind all that much if it was scrapped (and I'm a die hard terran player). Hell, IMHO it would make more sense to scrap it and give the thor back it's barrage ability. But as you mentioned earlier, with all the stat tweaking and artistic adjustments blizzard has invested into it, it's probably here to stay.
11-14-2009, 07:33 PM
#15
no way are siege tanks obsolete. i think one of the only real threat to siege tanks are thors because they'll live long enough to use their ability to destroy the tanks regardless of the tank's support hammering away at them.
Last edited by mythology; 11-14-2009 at 07:37 PM.
11-14-2009, 08:10 PM
#16
The real question is if Siege Tank (Tank Mode) is going to be as obsolete as it was in SC1 (the attacking part, not the moving part).
![]()
11-14-2009, 10:13 PM
#17
I fully and completely support the removal of the Siege Tank from SC2, and endorse the creation of a new static Terran siege building (or siege Bunker upgrade) and returning the Thor to its reveal glory as an offensive siege titan.
11-14-2009, 10:18 PM
#18
Not me, I love the Siege Tank way too much, it's just too iconic but that's not the only reason I want to keep it in. I fully support its current carnation (being more expensive but more strategical than the SC1 tank spam). It's a great unit, unique, and is very beneficial to gameplay because it adds a lot to timing, range, placement, etc, those aspects of the game.I fully and completely support the removal of the Siege Tank from SC2, and endorse the creation of a new static Terran siege building (or siege Bunker upgrade) and returning the Thor to its reveal glory as an offensive siege titan.
11-14-2009, 10:27 PM
#19
11-14-2009, 10:44 PM
#20
I for one, propose the scrapping of all currently manufactured Thors, shipping them to Earth, and then dumping them into the oceans to serve as artificial reefs, where fish and all sorts of squid food may prosper.
In the meantime, the Siege Tank would retain its current incarnation and the Banshee would be boosted to partially fill the spot that the Thor has left behind.