Najnovija Diskusija na Forumu

User Avatar on Forum
Author: Hronman Date: Saturday, 28 March 2015
User Avatar on Forum
Author: Silencer Date: Friday, 27 March 2015
User Avatar on Forum
Author: ultrazonfa Date: Thursday, 26 March 2015
User Avatar on Forum
Author: Platin Date: Saturday, 21 March 2015

Blizzard Entertainment na gamescom 2009

Quote from: Ancilorn (Source Blizzard Entertainment at gamescom 2009)
We’re pleased to announce that Blizzard Entertainment will be attending gamescom 2009 in Cologne, Germany next month. We look forward to welcoming old friends and new to our booth, which will feature hands-on gameplay with our upcoming games. Our booth is open to the public from Thursday 20 August until Sunday 23 August.

We will be revealing more information on our activities during the show in the coming weeks. You can find out more about what gamescom has to offer, and how to get there, at

Our recruiters will be at the booth ready to answer your questions about recruitment and working at Blizzard Entertainment. Blizzard Europe currently has numerous open positions in quality assurance, localization, customer support and other departments in our offices in Velizy, France (near Paris) and Cork, Ireland. We’re looking for Italian, Polish, Russian, German, French, Spanish and English speakers. Bring your CV along and talk to us about our employment opportunities.

Dnevne Blue Teme

Quote from Blizzard staff
Population imbalances in Battlegrounds (Source Re: Fix AV please!)
We've been discussing the population imbalances in Battleground matches a lot lately. If you read the Battleground Q&A we did a few weeks back, you may remember Cory Stockton mentioning that we have a lot of plans for Battlegrounds -- including rated, performance-based Battlegrounds providing access to higher-quality rewards -- actively in the works. We'll be discussing more of this at BlizzCon, but I'll add that the issue of faction imbalances in Battlegrounds you mention is something we recognize as a problem and plan to address when we're prepared to roll out some revitalizing touches to the Battleground system.

Many of our plans are not fully conceptualized to the extent that I'm able to share details with you at the moment, but I'm confident you'll hear more at Blizzcon and perhaps the weeks to follow the event. 

Class representation and game balance (Source Re: Why Is Class Representation Considered?)
Say we did some extensive data extraction from Ulduar and found that only 5% of guilds use Feral tanks when learning hard modes. Assume for the sake of my very contrived example that we could somehow select for those guilds with a potential to beat the encounters, but that the encounters weren't on farm yet. Assume that the sample size was somehow large enough that the statistics are not at fault in any of this data collection. (I'm trying not to let you Kobayashi Maru your way out of being able to resolve the scenario.)

Now, let's also assume that we convinced ourselves beyond a shadow of a doubt that using a competent and appropriately geared Feral tank made most of the hard mode encounters significantly easier. Assume that the community also felt the same way -- that it wasn't a dark secret.

The fair thing to do from a balance point-of-view would be to nerf Feral tanks. This will likely cause the percentage of them to drop from say 5% to 2% or virtually nil. A game designer should look at that and say: Yikes!

You can argue that maybe the bear is just a horribly frustrating spec to play and so nobody does it despite its advantages. I don't really buy that though. Players tend to say that about all of the classes, and I don't see a lot of evidence that Ferals are somehow unique in this regard. Furthermore, many of our players will do things that are soul-crushingly frustrating if they think it might confer to them a small advantage, which is often why we nerf such things -- to save players from themselves so to speak. It's just hard to resolve how, in this particular example, why more guilds don't go stampeding towards druid tanks if they are overpowered.

It's a tough question -- what to do with the overpowered but underplayed spec, assuming it doesn't have any crippling gameplay flaws? What do you do with the spec that is wildly popular but underpowered? Do you make them somehow less fun (even if it's relative) so players try out the other specs? I think saying "just make all the specs as fun!" is a cop out. We try to do that all the time, but I don't think that will ever result in as many shamans as warriors.

This is why I say we don't balance around representation. We don't tweak numbers until we have 25% of each tank in Ulduar.(Or should the number skew higher towards DKs since they have more than one spec? Or should the numbers skew lower for paladins and druids since fewer races can be them?) But we do have to consider representation when we're making changes. 

"Bring the Player, not the class" and raiding homogenization (Source Re: "Bring the player not the class" should)
We don't think that's true. Some of you guys seem to always head for a purity of game design where things would look very neat in a table or plotted on a graph. But we're not trying for a design where every possible raid comp is equally viable. We don't need to support a design where the raid of 8 mages and 2 dps warriors is as effective as the raid with 10 Holy paladins.

All we need to accomplish is to give groups enough flexibility to be able to bring the players they want while still getting all of the big buffs and enough of the smaller buffs. And we've done that. In the Sunwell days, the rosters of most progression-oriented raiding guilds (basically the ones trying today's equivalent of hard modes) were very similar. Now they are quite diverse. We don't have 30 specs represented yet, but we have 4 tanks, 5 healers and at least one dps spec of every class. That's more class diversity in raiding than WoW has ever had before. If you look at the guilds doing hard modes, they have pretty different rosters these days and that's even more true of the normal modes.

If you're new to raiding in WoW, that's awesome because a lot of people are and we made a big effort in LK to make that happen. But talk to the groups that did Sunwell and the frustration they had in trying to build their raids. The first thing these guys said to us when they heard about a new class was "There's no room in my raid to take any."

If you're looking for that one thing that's going to get you a raid spot, I'd shoot for a reputation that you know what the blank you're doing and some good friends. (Source)

Comparing Restoration Druids and Shadowform (Source Re: Druid Q&A: The Twilight Zone)
I think the best way to explain it is that when the Shadow priest has a model to follow – there are dps casters and in this case, a class with healing capabilities is deciding to turn its back on those abilities in order to be more like those casters. You can debate the relative power and utility of say Shadow priest and warlock, but at a high level there is a lot of overlap there. Now consider the Resto druid who decides to go Tree of Life. He is becoming a new type of character – he isn’t like the other healers, because they aren’t giving up buttons (except for those already absent from their talent tree). The Resto druid is giving up buttons, and for what? To be as effective a healer as the others. (You can argue Resto druids are overpowered if you’d like, but it certainly isn’t the design that Tree of Life allows druids to be the best healer in the game).

Tree of Life (Source Re: Druid Q&A: The Twilight Zone)
Yup. But honestly I think even before LK that Tree of Life wasn't situational enough -- it was just strictly a mistake to be in it nearly all the time in PvP. As I said with the Balance example above, it might work better if you decided "Okay I am going to be in Tree form for a little while because of the situation." It's a pretty different model, but imagine a druid changed forms at least once or twice a battle. That feels a little more like the shapeshifting druids from Warcraft lore. 

Balance druids and shifting (Source Re: Druid Q&A: The Twilight Zone)
Yeah, we agree. That is what I was getting at with the druid as a shifter. The idea is that a Balance druid would sometimes leave Moonkin form, but we haven’t made it easy enough to do so. We also don’t want to just adopt a model where say you shift to caster form to decurse and shift back – that just means your decurses take 3 button clicks (or a macro). It should be more tactical than that – do I want to be in Moonkin form for a little while, or would I rather be in caster form (or possibly even bear or cat)?

Healing as a Shadowpriest
I think you could make a few changes and insure that Shadow priests were about at the same healing level as say Ret or Elemental. You’d still have to decide if their healing got any better just from dropping Shadowform. If not, then there is probably no reason to ever drop Shadowform, and it should just be a passive talent not a spell. If so, then you'd have to make sure the spec wasn't too powerful over all as a backup or emergency healer, especially in PvP -- remember, we'd be talking about a Shadow priest who heals as well as Ret when in Shadowform, but better than that when not in Shadowform.

StarCraft II Insights: IGN

IGN nam donosi intervju sa Dustinom!
Australia, July 19, 2009 - IGN AU recently chatted with Dustin Browder, Lead Game Designer on StarCraft II, and he had some very interesting things to say. So much so, in fact, that we've decided to run a second feature, with some more fascinating insights into the design process. Enjoy…
Dustin Browder on… StarCraft II as a whole new game

"We're basically starting over. We get this on the team every now and then, when [someone says] 'the Siege Tank, what was it in SC1?' and the answer is 'who cares'. It doesn't even matter things have changed so much. Even if you take out all the units we've changed, which is huge, even if you focus on the fact that I can select as many units as I want, and they clump nicely together – that changes everything. Do you know what a Psi Storm does to that army? Do you know what it would have done in SC1? Half that, but these guys they all hug together in perfect formation and they go into battle. And one Psi Storm just obliterates them, right, so everything has changed, and the balance problems are exciting and varied…" 

Dustin Browder on… how play styles have changed over the course of the original game's ten year lifespan

"It's so different. Even from the original game and through Brood War, you start seeing pro gamers come online and they start doing very specific builds, doing very specific things, and I think in many ways they have defined what modern RTS competitive gaming is all about. I think that the community ultimately, in how they've played the game, has taught us so much."

Dustin Browder on… the upcoming closed beta

"We're really excited. We're getting to a point where we feel like we need more input... We've looked at this game for so long now… you get such a thousand mile stare; you have no objectivity left. At Blizzard we have these strike teams that we formed, from people who are not on the team, and these guys, they come and they tell us what they think, right, and we'd better listen to them, because they know. They're still objective, whereas I'm like 'is it good? Is it bad? I have no idea!' If people say it's good it might be good, but I still see all the bad, you know what I mean? It's so complicated, and you're looking for so long. So I think we're really looking forward to the beta at this point."

Dustin Browder on… making it balanced, but not too balanced

"Rob [Pardo] has advised me on this and he's really quite right… he says 'don't go in too tight'. Don't make it so perfect that you don't want to change anything. Go in with a few things that are like 'Hmm… I don't know, we'll see what they think', because maybe they'll love it and be lik
e 'I thought that was going to be terrible but it was really cool' or maybe they just really really hate it… so be a little bit relaxed on it, let it kind of happen." 

Dustin Browder on… the latest revisions to the Zerg tech tree

"The Zerg tech tree has gone through some radical revisions. We had a pre-beta that we all got to take home and play, and we were looking at it, and we had the Baneling at Tier 2, and we had the Roach at Tier 1, and the Roach was doing 8+8 biological damage, and the Baneling was hitting way hard against light units, but most light units are biological – Zerg are an exception, but really only things like Roaches and Ultralisks, everything else is also light: Hydras are light, Zerglings are light – so, you had two units, but you weren't buying the Roach for its regeneration; you were buying it because it hit so hard, right, so we've got this little smasher, and then you've got a suicidal smasher, and they're both hitting exactly the same targets. At a surface level it doesn't look like that – one's doing splash, one's not doing splash, one's really tough regeneration, one suicides and dies, but we're using them for exactly the same things, only the Roach didn't die when he was done – he got to roll on and kick some ass, so Banelings – bye bye! Nobody was using them, and for obvious reasons.

"And then again, you've got a unit like the Roach who is doing a tonne of damage, but that's not really what that unit wants to be about – why don't we call that a Zealot, you know what I mean? The Roach wants to be a tank – it wants to be something that's really tough, and really really hard to kill, and you want somebody else doing the damage. We talked about it forever, and had a bunch of fights about it, and blood was spilled. Anyway, we said, 'we'll make this Roach into what he wants to be'; he wants to be a tank. He wants to take it, so other Zerg don't have to, so what you'll do is you'll make a line of Roaches, then you put the Hydras in behind them, and you make this giant wall of horror boiling towards the enemy...

"So there's a change we made recently that really altered the way the Zerg feels and it makes the Baneling a much more viable unit: it means that the Roach doesn't step on him anymore; it means the Roach and the Hydra have a role together; it means the Hydra still has a role as himself – if he can get to a position using terrain or if he can just be defending a base, or whatever, he's golden; the Roach, if he doesn't have to fight something that's hitting back way too hard – if he can just power through and use the little micro to burrow and unborrow to maintain his integrity by regenerating - you can use just him, but the combo is really powerful, and that produces strategy for the enemy player as well; positional strategy – I know I can kill this army, if only I can get to the Hydras..."

Dustin Browder on… why StarCraft II is like Team Fortress

"One of the things I like to compare our game to a lot - because it's one of my favourite games ever - is Team Fortress. Team Fortress is a blast, and one of the things I love about it is that there are class counters but you can always micro your way out of any situation. Like, if I'm a Heavy and I encounter you and you're a Scout, you're dead. I'm going to kill you, you little Scout - you've got nothing on me. Well, unless the Scout uses jump well, unless he uses the terrain well, unless he knows where the medpacks are nearby, [or] if he sneaks up with that stupid little baseball bat, then I'm dead. Oh, so wait, I don't really counter the Scout, do I? I only really counter the Scout who charges at me like a fool. When we meet on the field of battle, it doesn't matter that I brought the wrong weapon; what matters is how I use the weapons that I brought.

"Now, RTS is still RTS – there are some sharp counters out there, but in general we try to make sure that the early-mid game is very dependent on what you do, and not as dependent on what you brought. As scouting gets more and more powerful, and as the stakes get raised, we start introducing units that [are more like] 'that kills that and there's not much you can do'. You need that to have built that, but you should have scouted that, so you should have known, or you need to position so the right units fight the right units."

Zoltan - Prvi igrač koji je dostugao 10,000 Achievement Poena

Pre manje od godinu dana u igri je dodat Achievement (tačnije kako je izašao patch 3.0).  Zoltan (Refuge @ EU-Aegwynn) je prvi igrač koji je dostigao 10,000 Achievement Poena! Dečko je sigurno imao velike motivacije Svaka čast!

Serija Pitanja i Odgovora klase Warrior

Posle serije pitanja i odgovora klase Druid, Bornakk je objavio nove serije pitanja i odgovora klase Warrior. Naravno odgovore na sva pitanja dao je Ghostcrawler.
Quote from: Bornakk (Source Class Q&A Series: Warrior)
Community Team: We’d like to start things off by asking a question that players often ask in regard to the very purpose of each class. In this case, we’re looking specifically at warriors, which have been stalwart base for comparisons since the start of World of Warcraft.

Q. Where do warriors fit into the larger scope of things currently and where do you see them going from this point forward?

A. Historically, warriors have always been one of the most dominant classes in World of Warcraft. In Molten Core and for raids afterwards, warriors were THE tank, no question. DPS warriors could also top the damage meters, and were a very potent PvP force. We think we allowed the warrior class to overshadow some other classes, which is probably to be expected given the iconic nature of the plate-wearing fighter in RPGs that long preceded World of Warcraft. We think they are in a fairer place now, in that there is room on the stage for other classes, yet they are still a very powerful and popular class to play. The warrior class has been a very tricky one to balance, largely due to the way rage converts into damage (which converts into rage, which converts into damage...), and we haven’t completely nailed that design just yet.

One of the things we want to do in the future is take a hard look at the Arms and Fury trees. There are several talents which just haven’t weathered the course of time well and pale in comparison to some of the newer Wrath of the Lich King talents. We’re happiest with the Protection tree -- we made a conscious effort to pare down that tree and remove a lot of mandatory talents in order to give the warrior more flexibility to take some more fun or utility-oriented talents. We need to make the same pass on the dps side of things. The reason we haven’t done so yet is that warrior dps is in a pretty good place and we don’t want to have to dilute the class across the board just to make some talents a little sexier. We will eventually do this though. We also need to make some decisions about the difference between Arms and Fury. Traditionally, Arms was the PvP tree and Fury was the PvE tree. We understand some players prefer that model, but we don’t like the way it cuts off such a big chunk of the class from players who might not have much interest in the PvP or PvE parts of the game. However, we would like to reinforce a little more the kits of Arms and Fury. Everyone (I hope) gets the difference between Frost and Fire mages. Arms is supposed to be about weapons and martial training and feel “soldierly.” Fury is supposed to be about screaming barbarians in woad. You get a sense of that, but it could be stronger. With the death knight, we allowed all three trees to more or less be able to tank. There is a desire among some players and designers to see Arms tank with a two-hander while Prot tanks with a shield. We’re still not sure that’s the direction we’ll go -- it’s a lot of re-design and will never work for say the druid or paladin classes.

Q. What is it that makes them unique compared to all other classes?

A. The big ones are stances and rage. Other than warriors, only bear druids use the rage mechanic, and that is pretty much just because that form is intended to mimic warriors. Rage is an unusual resource because it is infinite over the course of minutes, but can be very limiting over the course of seconds. While the basic mechanic of rage is interesting, it has caused us lots of balance problems over the course of World of Warcraft -- sometimes in the favour of the warrior and sometimes not. It’s probably time to give the mechanic another look.

Stances are intended to be a major battlefield decision for warriors, though we realise it doesn’t always pan out this way. You have access to different abilities in different stances, but pay a rage cost as well as sacrificing the potential to use other abilities. More on this below.

Warriors also have some unusual mechanics like say their ability to move quickly around a battlefield, to survive massive physical damage through plate armor and Defensive Stance, and game-changing abilities like Spell Reflect.

Community Team: Warriors have quite a few abilities that are contingent on certain circumstances like Overpower and Intervene.

Q. What is the reasoning behind this and do we have any plans to change that type of gameplay?

A. We like situational abilities. When specs don’t have situational abilities, it’s easy to fall into a very fixed rotation. We call this the metronome. Push button 1, 2, 3 on your keyboard over and over until the bad guy drops loot. We have made more of an effort in all the classes to have certain moments that require players to pay attention a little more and then reward them when they both cause those situations to happen and then execute on them.

Q. What would be the impact of changing those class mechanics?

A. I think if anything, abilities like this need to be more prominent. You should be less effective at your job if you ignore them, and ideally you’d also be less effective if you just macro’d them in. We like macros (obviously, or we wouldn’t have them in the game), but we like for them to simplify chains of things that you have to do often without making decisions in between point A and B. We don’t like it when playing your class becomes how clever your macro can be to the point at which you are pushing one button to play your class. That’s not playing an RPG -- that’s programming a robot.

Community Team: Stances have long been a debated aspect of warriors’ gameplay from the pluses and minuses each one offers to the restrictions they apply on what abilities are available for use.

Q. What is the overall purpose of stances and how are stances intended to be used?

A. The purpose of stances is for warriors to have to make decisions in combat. How badly do I want to Intercept now? Should I pay the cost of Spell Reflect? Ideally, we want warriors to switch stances in combat -- not every few seconds, but a few times over the course of a battle. Now we realise it’s going to be harder to enforce this in raid fights unless you have a battle with a lot of movement or other unusual circumstances.

We get a fair number of suggestions from players trying to basically slip the stance concept out of the warrior class: make it not take rage, or let them do more abilities per stance so they don’t need to switch stances so often. That’s not really what the warrior is all about though. You should care what stance you’re in and it should be a decision to change stance. Note that if you pay too high a price to change stances, that counts as there not being a decision though.

Q. Has there been any thought on moving away from restricting abilities based on the stance a player is in?

A. No. The design intent of warrior stances is that you change your toolbar when you go from one stance to another and that that decision isn’t a trivial one. Now, the third part aside from the rage cost and ability limitations is the penalties (such as 5% damage taken in Berserker). We cut those in half recently, and we’d eventually like to get rid of them altogether. We just don’t want to see Arms warriors in PvP in Defensive Stance 100% of the time. We have seen DKs stick with Frost Presence in PvP despite losing 15% damage, so I don’t think you can just argue “Oh, no warrior would EVER do that.”

Community Team: There has recently been a growing number of concerns with warrior damage, as a whole.

Q. What are our thoughts on the overall damage for warriors in each of the three specs?

A. Warrior damage was too high in Naxxramas and then a little low early in Ulduar. We think it’s in a pretty good place now and warriors will get a small damage buff in 3.2. Part of the concern here is we used to exempt warriors from the design philosophy that pure dps classes should do more damage than hybrid dps classes. We try to no longer play favourites here. Warrior damage should look like that of Feral druids, Enhancement shamans, Retribution paladins, and death knights. If their damage isn’t at that level, then it’s possible our numbers need some tweaking. However don’t always assume that you can’t possibly improve your gear or your button mashing either. Also remember that some fights just favour one class or spec over another. We’re totally cool with that, so long as it isn’t always the same exact class or spec that gets to shine.

Community Team: Warrior shouts have added some unique utility to the class in the past, but now they tend to be used very sparingly.

Q. What is the reasoning behind their short duration and do we have plans to improve the duration similar to the buffs other classes already provide?

A. The shouts are supposed to be buttons that warriors push in combat. They aren’t intended to be pre-fight buffs like Arcane Intellect or Prayer of Fortitude. We had a discussion about this recently and decided with glyphs and talents that the duration isn’t a problem. If you lack Booming Voice and the minor Battle Shout glyph, it might be more annoying.

Q. Demoralizing Shout tends to have a very minimal impact in most situations, are there plans to improve this ability?

A. I think by “most situations” you must mean “PvP.” Demo Shout has a massive benefit against raid bosses. It’s probably 20% less damage from a typical boss and literally like 50% against say Thorim’s Unbalancing Strike. However, removing 400 attack power from a Feral druid with 9000 attack power, or a Shadow priest who doesn’t care about attack power at all is of much more limited use. Monsters and players use pretty different combat formulae (which is one of the weird things about the old design of say Vindication). We would like Demo Shout to be more useful in PvP, at least against characters who rely on attack power.

Community Team: The rage mechanic as a whole is very unique, but sometimes leads to situations where players aren’t able to perform due to lack of resources. A prime example of this is when a tanking warrior’s gear is much higher than the content they are at, by taking less damage they get less rage which results in less threat and therefore cannot perform at a higher level.

Q. Are there any considerations in store for improving this mechanic and allowing more rage generation in these situations?

A. Yes. In 3.2 we changed Shield Specialization to provide a little rage on a dodge, parry, or block. This will help in say the 5-player dungeons or in the first few seconds of a raid boss fight. It does not solve the problem of the Prot warrior who is not being targeted (because they are there to pick up adds later in the fight or something). We want to solve that problem by letting Prot warriors generate more rage through doing damage. It could be in the future that we shift most of rage generation to damage done and have little or none in damage taken (and we would have to change a lot of other mechanics to make this work obviously).

Now, long-term we need a better solution to rage generation. Tying it to damage done is logical in the theoretical world of game design, but has problems in reality. When your gear sucks, you have rage problems. When you have great gear, you are no longer limited by rage. That’s just not a great model, and one of the reasons warriors are overly gear dependent.

Q. Where do we feel warriors fit into the current raid environment and where do we see them progressing in the future?

A. Obviously warriors were the traditional tanks and pretty much the only tank in much of World of Warcraft’s history. Warriors now share tanking responsibilities with three other classes, which can feel psychologically like a diminishment in role. In Ulduar, we think warrior tank balance is about where it should be -- death knights were a little ahead, paladins were a little behind, and druids were about even with warriors. We are making a few Prot changes to 3.2 to help in some of the areas where they fall short, such as damage done. Death knights are getting an adjustment, paladins are getting a buff, and druids might get anadjustment or stay as-is. There are plenty of guilds progressing through hard modes with warrior MTs on almost every fight, and we don’t see that changing in the Crusader’s Coliseum.
We’re happy with warrior dps in Ulduar. Whether you go Fury or Arms probably depends on whether you need Trauma or Rampage, and we know warriors in good guilds who flip between both specs. There is some evidence that Fury may overtake Arms dps once you get really good weapons. Dual-wield yet again shows its propensity to scale very well. Warriors will get a slight dps buff through Armored to the Teeth.

Community Team: Sticking with raiding content for a moment. Many tanking Warriors have felt the there is little value in both Strength and Block Value attributes.

Q. We have expressed an interest in improving Block Value for tanking warriors in the past; do we have any definite plans to update this?

A. Shield Block Value just isn’t a strong mitigation stat these days. However, the amount it would need to be increased is enormous in order to make a difference vs. bosses that can hit for 40K. The problem with improving shield Block Value by so much is that Prot warriors would be nigh invulnerable -- they literally might take no damage -- against large groups of adds, in easier content where opponents don’t hit that hard, and in PvP. The real problem is that the amount blocked doesn’t scale with the amount of the swing. We think block needs to be a percentage of damage blocked in order for the stat to do what we want. But the trade-off would mean that warriors (and paladins) couldn’t block every incoming hit, especially from large groups. Avoidance might also need to come down across the board, and many talents and abilities would need to be redesigned. This is a major change that isn’t the kind of thing we can crowbar into 3.2 with a clean conscience. It is almost certainly the future for the block stat.

Q. With strength on tanking gear currently providing a very minimal benefit and still using up a lot of stats on items, do we have plans to improve how this stat works for tanks?

A. Strength is good for dps and threat. It’s not a super mitigation stat (through block) but we also don’t know that it needs to be. We have made some big improvements to Prot warrior dps in Lich King, but too many players still view the primary role of the tank to stack avoidance and mitigation and then complain when their threat is low because they avoided all dps stats. Now, we do think the game of survival is more fun than the game of the threat management, but we also need to get players out of the mindset that it’s okay for tanks to ignore dps stats and just do trivial damage. They don’t need to top the charts, but their damage should be a meaningful component of damage done. We’re willing to change the way the game works to accomplish this goal.

Community Team: Let’s jump over to the topic of player-versus-player interaction. Discussions on the survivability of warriors in PvP have been ongoing.

Q. Do we have any plans to make warriors less reliant on healers in PvP conflicts?

A. We have taken small steps with Enraged Regeneration and increasing the healing on Bloodthirst. We don’t want the warrior to be great at healing as say a Shadow priest or death knight. On the other hand, we want healing to be a major part of the PvP experience. We’re okay with the occasional all-dps Arena team, but they need to be rare or a major chunk of the game just gets marginalised.
Not related to PvP, we do think warriors have too much downtime when levelling. Healing may not be the solution to that, but we think it needs a solution.

Q. With strength being the stat that provides the most benefit in dps scenarios, do we have plans to implement PvP gear like cloaks and rings that have strength instead of attack power?

A. Doing that just means the item isn’t of any interest to say leather or mail wearers, which means we have to create twice as many kinds of rings. The problem is that some classes value Strength and some value Attack Power. Things would work better if some valued Strength and some valued Agility, and Attack Power was a useful secondary stat to both. This has the added benefit of solving the whole problem where leather and mail look attractive to warriors. If leather had Agility on it and plate had Strength on it, then it’s pretty clear who is getting what item. Strength for rogues and Agility for warriors wouldn’t be junk stats, but they wouldn’t be as attractive as the other stat. Again, this is a big change. We wouldn’t just gut rogue dps by stripping Attack Power off all of their gear.

Pitanja i Odgovori klase Druid

Wryxian je objavio nove serije Q/A odredjene klasa sa developerom Ghostcrawler-om. Ovoga puta radi se o klasi Druid, a na vama je da pročitate sledeći veliki artikl.
Quote from: Wryxian (Source Class Q&A Series: Druid)
Today we continue our class Q&A series with Greg "Ghostcrawler" Street and the development team, in which we're taking a look at each class and answering some of the top questions brought forward by their communities. Next up, we take a look at the most asked questions from the druid class and find out more about the design philosophy and expectations for the class, as well as what may lie in store for it in the future.

Druid Q&A with the Voice of the Class Design Team, Ghostcrawler

Community Team: We’d like to start things off by asking a question that players often ask in regard to the very purpose of each class. In this case, we’re looking specifically at the druid, which has one of the widest ranges of play styles in World of Warcraft because of the variety offered from the different talent trees.

Q.  Where do druids fit into the larger scope of things currently and where do you see them going from this point forward?

Ghostcrawler: Much like the paladin and shaman, the original World of Warcraft druid was intended to be a healer for end-game content. Bears could tank Upper Blackrock okay. But honestly, nobody took cats, bears or moonkin very seriously at level 60. In Burning Crusade, this changed a little. Bears could tank a lot more content, and might have even been overpowered in the endgame if it weren’t for Sunwell Radiance. Cats were probably underpowered. You still saw them, but they were there mostly for buffs or because they could slip easily from tanking to dps in a world before dual-spec. They were great for Zul’Aman for example. There were some great Balance druids, but still a lot of Oomkin. Our philosophy at this point in the game was that hybrid classes needed to give up a lot of their power, especially on the dps-side of things, in order to justify their versatility and massive buffs. In Lich King, we set out to change this and make sure all four types of druid had a PvE role in heroic dungeons and raiding. And yes, this meant four roles, because if we were going to let cats do credible dps or bears be able to tank anything in the game then we wanted players to have to commit to one extreme or the other. You can remain a half-bear, half-cat if you want to as well, but you won’t be as good at either extreme and my experience is players rarely choose that route.

In PvP the story is quite different of course. Once Resto druids got enough tools in Burning Crusade, they were very difficult to counter in Arena matches. Cyclone, Feral Charge and running and hotting made druids frustratingly slippery. We wanted to chill this out a little in Lich King, largely by pushing Feral Charge farther away and making Tree of Life a real option in PvP. Unfortunately, high tree armor and dispel-at-your peril hots have still kept druids difficult to counter in PvP. Feral druids have always had a place in PvP, but were never as dominant as the Resto druids. There is a little bit of a chicken and egg problem here because while some druids only want to PvP as Feral, others were happy to respec to Resto for PvP. Balance druids seemed even less viable than Feral, which is not ideal and something we want to improve. We tend to take a longer view on some of these things than do the players. We’ve had other balance issues that we’ve wanted to address in PvP first, and getting every spec of every class viable has had to take a back seat on occasion.
Q.  What is it that makes them unique compared to all other classes?

Ghostcrawler: Forms is the big answer. The druid versions are more meaningful than other class equivalents in the game, such as Stances or Presences. One could argue they are too meaningful, because players sometimes don’t want to use any other form but “theirs.” Perhaps the most unusual facet of the druid forms is that they use three different resource systems depending on the form, and these are not reset when they shift. A leveling druid can shift out of cat form to heal themselves, then shift into bear form while their mana regenerates.

Druids also have a couple of other interesting qualities. They actually fit four distinct roles into the class, even though two of the roles share a talent tree. They have some unusual utility spells, including Revive and Innervate. While druids no longer bring many unique buffs, they still pack a lot of them onto one character. Raids are still happy to get druids because of their benefit to the group. Druids also have unique travel abilities, from Travel, Aquatic, and Flight form, to the Moonglade teleport.
It’s also worth mentioning that druids can be only one race each on the Horde and Alliance side. They have the least racial diversity of any class in the game.

Community Team: Let’s take a look at the Balance talent tree. Eclipse is a crucial talent for players who are looking to perform a damage dealing role and invest in the Balance tree. There has been a lot of discussion though regarding the gameplay it provides as there is a lot of randomness involved. The buffs to a solar rotation were very well received, but the lunar rotation still has to wait for a critical strike to happen as well as an additional random proc to occur which can lead to some long gaps of nothing happening. Then when these finally fall into place players have complained about threat issues which force them to slow down or having to move to avoid something which ruins the procs they have and significantly hurts their overall damage.

Q. What are our thoughts on how Eclipse is functioning and do we have any plans to change how this talent works?

Ghostcrawler: The goal of the Eclipse talent in the first place was to give moonkin a more dynamic rotation that involved the player paying attention and responding to the environment rather than falling into a monotonous rotation. The Eclipse in 3.2 should less strongly favor one half of the Eclipse over the other since the cooldowns are independent. Ultimately however the problem we are trying to solve is that Wrath and Starfire are just too similar. In PvP you get a little bit of interest out of the fact that they are in different schools, but in PvE by the time talents are factored in, the two spells just become fairly quick (but not instant) nukes and it’s easy to math out which one to use and which one to ignore. Long-term to fix this problem we need to add another spell, separate out Starfire and Wrath from each other a little more, or make one of the other spells, like Moonfire or Insect Swarm, more dynamic. I’ll give a couple of example of caster rotations that “work” in our opinion: Destruction warlocks want to Immolate before they Conflagrate, Frost mages can proc a Brain Freeze and throw out a fast Fireball.

Community Team: Another aspect of Balance talent tree that has seen a number of discussions lately is the survivability of Moonkins while in a Player vs. Player setting. Many players agree that they have a very low survivability rate and that a spell like Typhoon doesn’t provide enough help to prevent classes like Death Knights and Rogues from doing some serious damage to them.

Q: How do we feel Moonkins are doing in PvP and do we have plans to improve their survivability?
Ghostcrawler: We don’t think Moonkins are quite there yet, though we’ll see how they look after 3.2 ships. Some of their problems are not limitations with the spec so much as they are ramifications in other parts of the PvP environment, such as some classes being able to burst them down too quickly. Of the casters, and as of this writing, only Frost mages really seem to be a potent PvP force, but it requires multiple forms of CC and escape mechanisms to get there. We really don’t want to go down the road of every caster needing that many unique tools – it homogenizes the classes and makes the mage tools less compelling. We understand some players are desperate to play Balance in PvP, but our priority is on getting underperforming classes viable before we worry about the second or third spec of classes that already have a strong PvP presence. We’ll get there.

Community Team: Players have also been discussing how they feel the overall playstyle of a Moonkin is just not very exciting. The best damage dealing rotation for them requires very few spells and a deep Balance spell like Starfall doesn’t help them very much.

Q. Are there plans to make any changes to the general spell rotation for deep Balance/Moonkin Druids?

Ghostcrawler: As I mentioned above, we do want to improve the spell rotation of Balance. We think the spells are interesting when considered alone (expect for perhaps Starfire and Wrath) but they don’t necessarily play together in interesting ways. You don’t try to save up a Starfall for example for great synergy with another spell. We have no problems with Starfall itself -- it is an AE with smart targeting that doesn’t require channeling. It is basically just bonus damage. Often players with a gripe about Starfall are wishing that it still proc’ed stuns with Celestial Focus or was a stealth remover. But those uses meant players saved Starfall for only those specific situations instead of using it when they needed extra damage, which was the original intent.

Community Team: We are going to switch gears from the ranged caster damaging druids to the up close and personal Feral talent tree.

A number of players have brought up questions regarding the over-arching goal of the feral talent tree. In the past they were able to change forms regularly and cast spells and then go back into a Feral form to continue playing. Once we merged their gear with rogues this playstyle was significantly reduced in effectiveness. As it currently stands, even with the low mana pool, they feel their mana regeneration is very poor in comparison to other hybrid classes like Shaman and Paladins which in turn continues to minimize feral druids’ ability to cast spells which they feel is pushing them further and further away from the hybrid playstyle.

Q. What are our intended goals for the playstyle of feral druids?

Ghostcrawler: The druid class overall is intended to be flexible, and we feel that it is. What we don’t want is a class that can do all things with a single spec -- do damage like a rogue, then tank if the MT falls down, then battle rez the MT and heal her back up, etc. That might sound like a lot of fun, but that’s because you’re fulfilling the role of half the raid all on your own (which means it’s less fun for everyone else watching you be a superstar). Every cat worth their salt will shift out to cast Rebirth or Innervate. But in order to justify cats doing credible melee damage, we felt like they had to give up some of their ability to tank, cast, and heal. Note than you can still take a more hybrid-focused build. Players don’t often do that though because they’d rather do one thing really well. Now I will say that long term something we’d love to do is get rid of shifting costs altogether. We want to see druids in lots of different forms -- more on this in a minute.

Community Team: In order to provide the best damage possible, the rotation for a Feral druid is quite complex. While this is okay in itself, it is nearly impossible to pull off in a PvP scenario so they end up using just Mangle, which they feel drastically hurts their value. To be the most effective they also rely heavily on someone else like another druid or an Arms warrior.

Q. What are our thoughts on the complexity of the Feral druid damage dealing rotation?

Ghostcrawler:  If you want to do the best damage possible, you need to be able to master a complex rotation. This is one of the features that attracts players to the Feral spec. However, it’s also pretty forgiving. If you just Shred, you’re going to do decent damage. If you Shred and try to keep up Savage Roar, it’s going to be better. If you can also manage your Mangles and Rips and Rakes, then you have the potential to do very high damage (assuming you don’t have to move around much and can reach the target’s back).

Community Team: Feral druids have also complained a bit about their lack of utility in the PvP environment.

Q. Do we have plans to provide more utility for Feral druids such as a more reliable interrupt?

Ghostcrawler: Feral druids have Bash (which they can improve through talents), Maim and the Feral Charge stun. We think their tools are sufficient for PvP and there are other melee classes that can handle it in PvE. It’s not a strength of the spec for sure, but we’re okay with that. We don’t want all melee to be identical.

Community Team: Bear tanks have often felt inferior compared to the other tanks.

Q. How do we feel druid tanks are doing and do we have any immediate changes planned?
Ghostcrawler: We think bears have felt inferior because for a long time we basically said “You are designed to be inferior.” Sometimes old perceptions die hard. Bears are not inferior tanks in Ulduar and it’s possible their survivability is too high in 3.2.

Community Team: Savage Defense has been the source of a number of debates as players feel it is somewhat lackluster and doesn’t provide enough of a benefit, especially in PvP.

Q.  Do we have any plans to change and/or improve Savage Defense?
Ghostcrawler: We’re pretty happy with Savage Defense for now. It accomplishes its goals, which were to make dps stats more useful on leather and to keep bears from hitting the armor cap so easily. You might consider it lackluster if you’re counting on it saving your life, but it does account for a lot of damage over the course of a boss fight.

Q. Are there any plans to change the functionality or cooldown of the Cat form charge to better align it with the Bear form version?

Ghostcrawler: We’re happy with the distinction. We don’t want to duplicate every ability since the druid has access to both forms.

Q. Can you give us the reasoning behind why the Bear form swipe is 360 degrees while the Cat version is only 180 degrees?

Ghostcrawler: The bear change was just a quality of life issue. A bear can wipe the raid if they can’t pick up incoming adds. The cat is much less likely to wipe the raid by not being able to Swipe all the adds. We don’t need for cats to be an awesome AE spec. We just want them to have something to do on big packs that everyone else is AE’ing, which is what cat Swipe gives them. On the other hand, if there is a perception that bears can’t manage adds, they aren’t going to be used on a lot of fights.

Community Team: On to the last of the talent trees now, Restoration.

Q. Can you describe for us what the intended identity and versatilities of the Tree of Life druids are supposed to be?

Ghostcrawler: This is a pretty philosophical answer here. If you only read one answer in this Q&A, you might want to check out this one.

The strength of the Resto druid is in heal-over-time spells. They can also do some decent single-target healing through Nourish or group healing through Wild Growth. The tree pretty much used to be a PvE mechanic since “rooting yourself” in PvP to benefit from ToL greatly limited the druid’s crowd control and escape abilities. We made enough changes to the talent to get trees into PvP in Lich King… arguably too well.

Druids overall have a strong niche. We are at a little bit of a crossroads with the Tree of Life however. We are currently wondering if druids sacrifice too much just to be as good as a healer as everyone else. What I mean is that if druids were good healers in caster form but great healers in Tree form, then there might be a decision there. However, we pretty much assume that healing druids are in Tree form nearly all of the time and balance around that. We don’t think it would be fair for them to be the best healers just for taking that talent.

In addition to having to give up utility in order to heal as a Tree of Life, we have become less enamored with druids locking themselves into one form. In fact, you really never see the basic tauren or night elf druid form (you know, the one that actually shows off the awesome armor art) because all druids are in cat, bear, tree, or moonkin form nearly 100% of the time. I’m not saying we would just cut Tree of Life from the game. It’s been around awhile and for better or worse, it’s part of World of Warcraft now.

However, we could see taking the druid in a direction where shifting was much more common and easy to do. Maybe you only go into tree form for certain spells but leave for other spells -- this didn’t work previously because of the high cost of shifting, but in the absence of power shifting, we’d love to get rid of the costs completely. Another way to go would be to make Tree of Life form a cooldown, more like Metamorphosis. You shift into tree when you need a healing boost, but you don’t stay in it all the time. Now, I am totally waving my arms here. This is not the kind of change you are going to see in the next patch. But it is something we’re thinking about long term, and the kind of thinking we’d love to have more feedback on from the community.

Note to other healers: this is why you are unlikely to see any kind of “Holy form” ever. Giving up healing to do damage works okay. Giving up everything to heal is lame.

Community Team: Both Tranquility and Healing Touch are meant to be strong healing spells but are generally viewed as very ineffective due to their lack of flexibility.

Q. Do we have plans to improve Healing Touch or Tranquility?

Ghostcrawler: Tranquility is a fine spell. You can use it in situations where high amounts of damage are coming in on one group. Ultimately, we’d like to get away from the concept of groups within raids, but that’s not super high priority. Having a talent that promotes a situational spell on a long cooldown though is a problem (for any spell, not just Tranquility).

Likewise, we think Healing Touch is fine. You use it at low levels and you use it with Nature’s Swiftness. Maybe you use it when healing a 5-player dungeon. Druids have a lot of heals and if we made Healing Touch more usable it would come at the expense of another heal like Nourish or Regrowth. The problem again is the talents. It doesn’t make sense to have so many talents support a situational spell.

But GC, you ask, if you know the talents are lackluster why haven’t you improved them? The answer is that Resto druids are in a really good spot now. If we changed the HT and Tranquility talents to boost other kinds of healing, then Resto druids might become too powerful. If we reduce Resto healing to compensate for these talents, then druids might have less flexibility in their talent builds. We would also suffer a lot of player backlash if we weakened spells just to make talents (which you may not be able to afford anyway) any better. We’ll suffer player backlash when we think the change is important. I’m not sure this one is. We’ll definitely rejuggle the talent tree long-term though.

Community Team: The next set of questions are related to the itemization for druids which was the source for a wide variety of questions. For one, Restoration druids feels that critical strike rating is not very helpful for them yet it is often present on the leather casting gear.

Q. Do we have plans to improve the usefulness of critical strike rating for restoration druids?

Ghostcrawler: Yes. We’re fine if some stats are slightly more attractive than others. The problem comes when some stats are considered junk because they are valued so much less than other stats. We don’t have a ton of stats to work with when you consider that things like Int and Spell Power basically improve at a linear rate with item level. That means we need for say Haste and Crit to be attractive to all casters. This is a problem with several classes, not just druids, and was largely caused by having too many scaling talents that over-inflate the value of some stats relative to others.

Community Team: Tanking druids have regularly expressed complaints on how their tanking gear was homogenized but statistics like Block and Parry do not help them and defense provides a very marginal benefit.

Q. Do we have plans to make these statistics more helpful for them since they are on a wide variety of tanking gear?

Ghostcrawler: We think it’s interesting that a bear and a warrior tank might look at the same piece of gear and place different values on it. That’s one of the elements that makes looting interesting and rewards players who understand their class. You shouldn’t take a ring because it says “TANK” on it. You should take it because it benefits you. And really, when players say “wide variety of tanking gear” they really mean rings, neck, cloak, and possibly trinkets. Currently we’re in a world where tanks emphasise Stamina and Armor as much as they possibly can, which makes other stats feel lame by comparison. But that will likely not always be the case, and we kind of doubt it will be as much of an extreme in the Coliseum.

Q. Have we considered providing more tanking leather and to prevent extra loot clutter possibly finding ways for Balance and Restoration druids to use solely cloth item since they often use them already?

Ghostcrawler: No. Druids are a leather-using class. We are just going to have to make three types of leather (melee, ranged and healing). You have to understand that even though we have pushed bears and cats farther apart, we still consider them to be part of the same spec. We can’t get into the business of itemizing for niches within a particular spec or we’re just going to have too many items per tier. I can see the argument for having tanking and dps leather and making the casters use cloth. That’s just a different design and we currently like for certain classes to be associated with certain types of armor. We like that druids look different from say priests or mages (even ignoring the forms thing). We like that we can kit druid tier piece armor to look a certain way.

Also note that if we buffed bear mitigation through more tanking-oriented leather that we’d just have to weaken them in other ways. In my experience, most bears end up with “tanking leather” anyway because they want to gem and enchant their bear gear differently. Having one set of gear that you wear as cat or bear isn’t really feasible in Ulduar.

Community Team: Many players have been discussing relics and how they feel they add a lot of clutter to loot tables since they can have a wide margin of effectiveness and always have a small number of players able to pick them up.

Q.  Do we have any plans to improve how players obtain relic items such as a relic token?

Ghostcrawler: The alternative to “clutter to loot tables” is that they go on vendors. We view vendors as an absolute last resort. They are there as a hedge against being very unlucky with drops and to give players motivation to do bosses even when that boss no longer drops any upgrades for them. When the best relics are available on vendors, then every druid will have those relics quickly. They essentially just become part of the core identity of the class rather than an upgrade that you get at some point along your progression. The best solution is probably something where a boss has a 10% (or whatever) chance to drop a relic in addition to its normal loot table.

Community Team: To wrap up this Q&A, here are a couple quick questions from the far corners of druid minds.

Q. Are there any plans for a 310% speed flight form?

Ghostcrawler: At this time we want to keep the 310% flying speed very rare – maybe 5% or less of all players. If we made a flight form that less than 1% of players had access to (since probably less than a tenth of those 5% would be druids) it’s hard to argue that’s a good use of art time.

Q. What do we think about making spells like Warstomp and Innervate usable while in forms?
Ghostcrawler: We like the fact that Innervate requires shifting. We want druids to shift more. Warstomp I could see an argument to allow in forms since it’s nice (but not mandatory) that racial benefits are useful to a variety of classes.

Q. Do we plans to alter how the GCD works for form changing so that shifting into a form is as easy as shifting out of one?

Ghostcrawler: As I mentioned, long-term we’d love to get druids shifting more often, which means shifting has to be less painful. I don’t know for sure that changing the GCD needs to be a part of that, but it could be.

Q: For the official word, do we have plans to update more druid form models at some point in the future?

Ghostcrawler:  I know for a fact that the current Travel Form and Aquatic Form are loathed by the artist who redid bear and cat. We do have plans to update additional forms at some point in the future.

Community Q&A

Evo jednog interesantnog Q/A seta sa poljskog sc2 fansitea:

1. Dustin said on BlizzCast #8 that the Banshee is a very powerful air-ground unit vs. ground defenses. What are the chances of Banshees against ground units? For example is it equal 5 Banshees against 5 Stalkers or the Banshees have to run if they notice Stalkers.

Yes, the Banshee can be a very strong anti-ground air unit but it is definitely not unstoppable. For example, Marines and Thors can be great ground counter units for Terran and Hydralisks for Zerg are also good. And just like the example in the question, Stalkers with blink ability and High Templars with psionic storm can be counter Banshees as well.

2.Zerg can move and regenerate faster on creep. Terrans have medivac, the mechanical units can be fixed by SCV. Do you think that is a good idea for Protoss to regenerate shields faster when they are near pylons?

Protoss currently has the Shield Battery ability on the Obelisk, which recharges the shield of the target friendly unit or area. This is an active ability that drains energy from the obelisk, but is a similar concept to the one suggested.

StarCraft’s approach of providing all three races with similar capabilities based on profoundly different mechanics is live and kicking in its sequel.

  • Zerg’s healing bonus is absolutely passive, always on and inherent into the very design of the Zerg.
  • Terran’s repair ability is the fastest, most focused way of handling retreat n’ regroup situations, but at the cost of resources.
  • Protoss “repair” is based on energy and depends on the amount of resources invested in the infrastructure beforehand.

3. Do you have any plans for Infested Protoss? If yes, what sort/kind of unit will it be?

Based on the lore, the Protoss do not become infested. The combination of the two result in a hybrid race.

This reverses the previous decision to allow the creation of Infested Protoss in the same way Infested Terran are created. In earlier builds, the Infestor could infest Protoss Gateways for this purpose.

4. Question is about replays. Do you plan to create a feature to see what that player saw during the battle? It’s like if I was behind him while he was playing and I was watching his screen.

There are more advanced functions and options implemented in the current replay system. If you select a certain player in the replay, you can opt to see that player’s camera while he or she is controlling units, buildings, and spending resources. Additionally, you can select the options for all players’ Units, Army, Spending, Production, and APM status to view all statuses simultaneously in a replay.

Seeing the game through your opponents’ eyes can greatly improve your game when playing against your buddies, but seeing the game through the eyes of the game’s greats will do wonders for players trying to improve their game.

5. What will happen when we double push a hotkey of a group of buildings? (4 lairs for example at one hotkey) Our screen will move to the first lair in a group? Or to set point of all or maybe to the point where everything crosses? (Point of gravity)

When you designate multiple units or structures as a group and the units or structures are spread out in different places, selecting the group by double pressing the hotkey, your screen will go directly to the place that you have the largest amount of consolidated units or structures first. If you have the same amount of units or structures on different positions of the map, your screen will go to the closest one to your current location.

6. What is the status of a nuke? Range, cast time, power etc. And sub-question: will the air be contaminated for some time (10-20 seconds) and affects the units after the blast?

You can arm a silo with a Nuke at the Ghost Academy and it will take 60 seconds. Upon completion, a Ghost can call down a nuclear strike at a target location dealing up to 300 (+200 structures) damage to enemies in a large radius. There will be a period between the casting of the Nuke until the Nuke actually hits its target, in which the Ghost must stay alive. There will be no contamination for the ground or the air after the blast.

StarCraft 2 Nuke remains a single-hit, massive AoE attack, and it’s somewhat disappointing that Blizzard has not implemented an additional twist to this underused and powerful ability, such as:

  • Area contamination.
  • Permanent mutation bonus for biological Nuke survivors.
  • EMP effect that “stuns” mechanical units.

Nuke hitting a Terran Base

A creative tactical twist may push the Nuke out of  the “I pwned you” niche of abilities and create a more viable weapon for the Terran.

7. Several SCVs can repair buildings together. So why can’t they work together to build a new one? Sub-question: Does SCV have an ability (or is it planned) “Patrol and repair?”

In order to keep the game balanced, SCVs aren’t able to build structures together. SCVs can repair the damaged structure or mechanical units together, while also costing more resources. However, the SCV does have an auto-casting repair ability, so when you give a command to a SCV to patrol while auto repairing is activated, the assigned SCV will repair the structures or mechanical units around it automatically and will continue their patrol.

8. Question about Protoss drop. We can see that Protoss players often do reaver drops. Now when we don’t have this unit, we can drop Dark Templars, because Colossus are too weak for killing drones/SCVs/Probes (it’s a conclusion after watching many battle videos.) Is there any alternative tactic of drops by Protoss, or this element of a Protoss game was excluded.

Colossus is as great of a worker killer as the Reaver in the original StarCraft. The Colossus has 2 attacks with 23 damage each and gives splash damage, so it can kill drones and probes with a single shot and SCVs with two shots. If the Protoss player is trying to harass the enemy’s economy by killing workers, dropping Colossi from the Warp Prism right next to their base is a possible option, while Dark Templars can also be very devastating as well.

Having Colossi warped in on your worker line is bound to become an unpleasant yet common experience for enemies of the Protoss if Colossi keep their single-pass killing capability. Considering the fact that Colossi neither cheap nor easy to bring down in a toe-to-toe fight, backdooring Colossi are more than just suicidal worker drops, and have a lot of potential of wreaking even decently defended expansions and worker lines.

Blizzard nam je takodje prikazao June 2009 Comic Contest winners, koji su dobili i beta ključeve za StarCraft II spremne za aktivaciju tog momenta kada test krene!

Copyright © 2005 - 2014 AdriaCraft - Adriatic Gaming Community Fansite All right reserved / Sva prava zadržana.
Posetioci ovih stranica obavezuju se da će poštovati uslove iz Pravila o korišćenju web stranica Pročitajte tekst: Uslovi korišćenja.