|
White-Ra lost and I am sad. I think everyone agrees that the current state of sc2 PvP is broken in a sense that 4warpgate rushing is so dominant. It takes away a lot of the lategame economy management and transition we see in other matches. Let us compare this to bw PvP. In bw, the player who was doing a 4gate dragoon rush has to face a player with the defender's advantage. Hence, 4gate dragoon in bw was defendable. After that, bw lategame PvP is all about army composition, army positioning, economy management, harassment drops. This was what made bw PvP an awesome matchup from a spectator's point of view. Now we shall look back at the state of sc2 PvP. The 3 stalker rush build was a step in taking sc2 PvP in the right direction. However, it is an extremely volatile build as evidenced by the White-Ra vs San game. 3 stalkers can not possibly scout every pylon placement in that short amount of time. Perhaps it was San's brilliance in that he saw foreign PvP players preferring 3 stalker rush during the world vs korea showmatch and adjusted his strategy by bringing out 2 probes. Now I suggest something that can be done to bring back the defender's advantage and weaken the 4warpgate rush. ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/brukB.jpg) I apologise for the poorly sized picture. The circle around the nexus represents the range of workable pylons usable as warp locations. Of course it should not affect warp prisms. This range can be tweeked by blizzard as they see fit. Perhaps even an upgrade on the cybernetics core can be implemented to improve the range. If this is implemented, I feel that it will definitely bring back the defender's advantage negated by warpgates and we can see further PvP development. Of course, this will affect other matchups, perhaps ZvP the most. I feel that if this is implemented, zergs will have a very very happy time droning up when they scout a 4gate rush. Therefore, I propose that the discussion of this topic be about the disadvantages of implementing the above system in all the protoss matchups,
On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please.
On March 30 2011 21:49 XDsCrazy wrote:
I got an interresting idea, offensive pylon is strong but is not the real problem. putting pylon near the choke so you can warp in on top of the ramp is actually the real thing that make PvP 4 gate fest.
So why not do the following.
You can warp in unit in pylon range like now BUT now you CANT warpin unit in an enemy pylon range .. (can say it create a disturbance or something)
So you can defend from up the ramp warpin with pylon, defend 4 warpgate with sentry/immortal whatever you want to open with.
what you guys think ?
If you have any suggestions about how to fix PvP, feel free to post.
Edit: Can a mod bring this to the SC2 forums? I originally wanted to post my thoughts but some suggestions from other TLers have also been posted and I want to bring all the suggestions together.
Edit2:
Poll: Would this suggestion bring PvP into the correct step?You are a cock sucking faggot. (42) 75% No. (10) 18% Yes. (4) 7% 56 total votes Your vote: Would this suggestion bring PvP into the correct step? (Vote): Yes.
(Vote): You are a cock sucking faggot.
(Vote): No.
 
|
Thinking how to improve one's play rather than improving the game would be a good starting point improving a matchup...
and these kind of threads as far as i know are unacceptable here. if you want to discuss the game do so. if you want to discuss the rules of the game and balance take it to blizz..
|
I'm a zerg player thank you.
|
You can't remove proxy pylons from the game, sorry. Almost all toss gateway aggression relies heavy on it, + DT warp ins etc.
I don't play much toss, but I can't see why white-ra didn't simply 4gate himself. To me as a spectator it seems people lose a whole lot more games from not being able to defend a 4gate cuz of build than players lose pvps because they did an uneconomical opening.
|
Hmm, although this would solve many of the early game problems of PvP, I don't like the idea of so drastically restricting offensive warp-in capability, as it is one of the main characteristics of the protoss race. I think making the warp-in cooldown longer further away from the warp gate would be a better solution. That way, if protoss wants to be really agressive and do a super fast warp gate rush, they'll have to proxy their warp gates, making it easier to scout and more risky for the attacker.
Or maybe even keep your suggested mechanic, but center it around the warp gate instead of the nexus? Centering it around the nexus feels a bit too arbitrary to me. What if protoss somehow loses his nexus? Should he not be able to warp in and at least try to do a last ditch attack?
I like the thought behind it, and I agree that something needs to be done, but I'm not sure if this is the best idea.
|
It's not that this isn't a bad idea, but posting about potential changes you'd like to see on these forums really won't get you anything more than either constructive criticism or theorycrafting.
Post it on the Battle.net forums so that Blizzard can see your ideas. They'll be the ones that can help change things if they see this fit.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES51132 Posts
SC2 PvP=BW ZvZ imo.
if it gets farther than 4gate then the game is 90% auto recommend.
|
|
|
ive been suggesting a similar change for quite some time.
but imho :
1. range should be way bigger (like sensor tower range,maybe even bigger)
2. a 2nd warpgate research should be added that allows full map pylon either as a "warpgate research lvl2" at the cybercore or at the council where the other gateway upgrades are.
3. each warpgate should have a small "warpin" radius itself so its possible to proxy warpgates (for example if you really want that DT in the enemy base asap)
this way P keeps all their mid/lategame power, doesnt lose any of its early game production/defensive power and still pvp is fixed.
plus it has much good side effects on the game like rushdistance affecting P as much as other races (which is a huge problem on big maps).
yeah it nerfs the 4gate on bigger maps and also nerfs voidray/gate pushes abit(robo builds mostly unaffected cause prism still works as before) but i think thats a very small price to pay for a overall better game.
|
Croatia9547 Posts
On March 30 2011 21:12 HeaDStrong wrote:
Thinking how to improve one's play rather than improving the game would be a good starting point improving a matchup...
I agree with this.
If you compare it to BW of course you'll see SC2 left a lot to be desired, but it's completely different game so a lot of BW game concepts simply doesn't apply in SC2 (ie. defender's advantage).
So instead of trying to endlessly change SC2 until you get another BW, improving one's play is much better choice here.
|
On March 30 2011 21:15 halvorg wrote:
You can't remove proxy pylons from the game, sorry. Almost all toss gateway aggression relies heavy on it, + DT warp ins etc.
I don't play much toss, but I can't see why white-ra didn't simply 4gate himself. To me as a spectator it seems people lose a whole lot more games from not being able to defend a 4gate cuz of build than players lose pvps because they did an uneconomical opening.
I never said proxy pylons were removed. Pylons can still be proxied but not as closed to the enemy base. I do not claim to know why White-Ra did not 4gate himself however, when both players 4gate, it is an extremely unforgiving solution where 1 mistake is punished heavily. This makes PvPs decided so fast. Also, 4gate vs 4gate is a battle of unit control and not about economy management. You might as well play a game of street fighter.
On March 30 2011 21:16 Garm wrote:
Hmm, although this would solve many of the early game problems of PvP, I don't like the idea of so drastically restricting offensive warp-in capability, as it is one of the main characteristics of the protoss race. I think making the warp-in cooldown longer further away from the warp gate would be a better solution. That way, if protoss wants to be really agressive and do a super fast warp gate rush, they'll have to proxy their warp gates, making it easier to scout and more risky for the attacker.
Or maybe even keep your suggested mechanic, but center it around the warp gate instead of the nexus? Centering it around the nexus feels a bit too arbitrary to me. What if protoss somehow loses his nexus? Should he not be able to warp in and at least try to do a last ditch attack?
I like the thought behind it, and I agree that something needs to be done, but I'm not sure if this is the best idea.
Perhaps the area around the nexus can be permanent so when a player loses his nexus, the area to warp in units will still be there. This may also make for interesting situations where 1 player maps a nexus in a random location on the map and is granted the ability to warp in units in that area. Although defender's advantage is removed during the lategame, the purpose of bringing back defender's advantage early game against 4warpgate rush is still there.
|
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please.
|
On March 30 2011 21:25 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:12 HeaDStrong wrote:
Thinking how to improve one's play rather than improving the game would be a good starting point improving a matchup... I agree with this. If you compare it to BW of course you'll see SC2 left a lot to be desired, but it's completely different game so a lot of BW game concepts simply doesn't apply in SC2 (ie. defender's advantage). So instead of trying to endlessly change SC2 until you get another BW, improving one's play is much better choice here.
if the game has flaws why not do a good suggestion like this? in my opinion as i wrote above this would have positive effects on the game overall and at the same time vastly improve the without a doubt most hated matchup in the game.
|
On March 30 2011 21:18 Synystyr wrote:
It's not that this isn't a bad idea, but posting about potential changes you'd like to see on these forums really won't get you anything more than either constructive criticism or theorycrafting.
Post it on the Battle.net forums so that Blizzard can see your ideas. They'll be the ones that can help change things if they see this fit.
I guess I'll try the bnet forums next.
On March 30 2011 21:25 2Pacalypse- wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:12 HeaDStrong wrote:
Thinking how to improve one's play rather than improving the game would be a good starting point improving a matchup... I agree with this. If you compare it to BW of course you'll see SC2 left a lot to be desired, but it's completely different game so a lot of BW game concepts simply doesn't apply in SC2 (ie. defender's advantage).So instead of trying to endlessly change SC2 until you get another BW, improving one's play is much better choice here.
Alot of protoss players do not like playing PvP because they feel it is too volatile a matchup and are sometimes not able to display the full extent of their abilities.
On the topic of defender's advantage, it is seen in the non-PvP matchups with buildings such as stargates and robo support bay.
|
On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please.
I like your suggestions alot. I think it will help fix PvP.
|
On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please.
I really, really love your 1st and 2nd options, definitely post them please! 3rd option I'm kind of split on. 4th option I just have to straight up disagree with you, I don't think that would be a good option.
|
On March 30 2011 21:36 Suc wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please. I really, really love your 1st and 2nd options, definitely post them please! 3rd option I'm kind of split on. 4th option I just have to straight up disagree with you, I don't think that would be a good option.
last option is not valid right now, more something for a expansion. but in my opinion the whole warpgate thing needs to be reworked at one point. gateways shouldnt be just a tiny step where maybe 1-3 units per games get made and warpgates shouldnt be a "autoupgrade" evryone rushes for where the only decision is how much crono you spend on it.
|
On March 30 2011 21:25 kyzers0ze wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:15 halvorg wrote:
You can't remove proxy pylons from the game, sorry. Almost all toss gateway aggression relies heavy on it, + DT warp ins etc.
I don't play much toss, but I can't see why white-ra didn't simply 4gate himself. To me as a spectator it seems people lose a whole lot more games from not being able to defend a 4gate cuz of build than players lose pvps because they did an uneconomical opening. I never said proxy pylons were removed. Pylons can still be proxied but not as closed to the enemy base. I do not claim to know why White-Ra did not 4gate himself however, when both players 4gate, it is an extremely unforgiving solution where 1 mistake is punished heavily. This makes PvPs decided so fast. Also, 4gate vs 4gate is a battle of unit control and not about economy management. You might as well play a game of street fighter.
Unrealistic expectation to think that you could implement this without simply removing proxy pylons, with all maps being of different sizes, and some maps (like scrap station, or close by air shattered temple) have very close bases.
Pvp is pretty much extremely unforgiving and reliant on unit control regardless of opening.
On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please.
1&2 are solid ideas, 3 would probably break the game.
|
On March 30 2011 21:29 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:25 2Pacalypse- wrote:On March 30 2011 21:12 HeaDStrong wrote:
Thinking how to improve one's play rather than improving the game would be a good starting point improving a matchup... I agree with this. If you compare it to BW of course you'll see SC2 left a lot to be desired, but it's completely different game so a lot of BW game concepts simply doesn't apply in SC2 (ie. defender's advantage). So instead of trying to endlessly change SC2 until you get another BW, improving one's play is much better choice here. if the game has flaws why not do a good suggestion like this? in my opinion as i wrote above this would have positive effects on the game overall and at the same time vastly improve the without a doubt most hated matchup in the game.
Yes because it's so much easier to say that the game is broken than tackling the problem head on and applying the current game rules and making your stuff work...
So many SC2 players are focused on fixing the game rather than fixing their game... So much lost potential actually solving problems and creating new strategies.
The game should only be fixed after people have been failing and failing and even failing some more to bring balance by their own means. If blizz ends up patching stuff every time people are unhappy SC2 will turn into a game with three space races that each gather minerals and have different unit and building models and skins.
|
On March 30 2011 21:38 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:Show nested quote +On March 30 2011 21:36 Suc wrote:On March 30 2011 21:28 niteReloaded wrote:
There are many elegant ways to tweak this, blizzard just needs to be willing to.
Anyone who reads this, please reply your thoughts, because I believe many of these ideas are good and could be used with no more than minor adjustments.
1st option, probably the most normal:
- Make the Warp-in duration depend on the distance from the closest Nexus. So if you're proxy warping, your stalkers take maybe 2-3 seconds longer to warp. There's the small defenders advantage, should be enough for top players.
2nd option:
- make the units more vulnerable during the warping-in phase. Should discourage the in-your-face warping on high ground
3rd option:
- make Gateways in Gateway mode produce units slightly faster than warpgates, like 5-10%, again, the goal is to reintroduce the defenders advantage
4th option, most work with balancing needed, but probably best for the game:
- re-do the whole paradigm of Protoss by moving the warpgate tech to a higher Tier, and also make the WarpGate have a downside to it, rather than just being an auto-upgrade.
Should I post these on the battle.net forums? Thoughts please. I really, really love your 1st and 2nd options, definitely post them please! 3rd option I'm kind of split on. 4th option I just have to straight up disagree with you, I don't think that would be a good option. last option is not valid right now, more something for a expansion. but in my opinion the whole warpgate thing needs to be reworked at one point. gateways shouldnt be just a tiny step where maybe 1-3 units per games get made and warpgates shouldnt be a "autoupgrade" evryone rushes for where the only decision is how much crono you spend on it.
Exactly my point.
Why couldn't warpgates and gateways function in a way that one is not clearly superior to the other? The game would be that much better if you could profit from carefully balancing and switching between them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
