| Forum Index > Closed |
|
ishyishy
United States826 Posts
If you dont like this game then dont play it. Your complaining and bickering will not change anything, much less help anything. If you do like this game, then again, there is no purpose of this thread. Get used to a new game, get away from f'ing sc1, and like it or leave. User was warned for this post | ||
|
BWILLdur
United States100 Posts
| ||
|
arsenic
United States163 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:05 Jerubaal wrote: You're making a huge assumption that the relative weakness of gateway units is because of warpgates and not some other design reason. It seems to me that if gateway units were buffed too much, along with protoss splash, it would be too much. Also, you don't really think that if they just removed warpgate and buffed gateway units that wouldn't cause huge problems, like the one I just mentioned. We should also be careful about what we mean when we say 'weak'. You can argue that neither the zealot or the stalker are weak. Zealots are basically 4 slow zerglings (with the benefit of not losing 25% of their dps for every 35 damage done) and stalkers have exceptional health despite mediocre dps. Their weakness is a design problem, not a balance problem in my opinion. And OP, I'd like for you to explain how you think this situation has contributed to the percieved current weakness. After all, we've discussed these pointes before, but they were discarded because Protoss found ways to win regardless. When I watch Protoss lose games, I don't necessarily think, if only warpgate units were stronger. I do think it may affect the general inflexibility of the race though. Thank you for understanding. The OP makes some huge assumptions about unit strength and how that it is because of Warp-ins that this has come about. I see no necessary correlation or any evidence to prove that this is the case and in fact, I would argue that with the tools that Protoss has, they have the ability to be even more cost efficient than most other races (FF, Blink) even with just Gateway units. Buffing Gateway units and keeping all else the same would really be nonsensical as this would simply ruin ZvP. As I said in an earlier post, Protoss early game is already very strong and can trade very well with Zerg. If you have good FF's, you can usually come out way ahead in early engagements. If you also buff Protoss GW units and keep FF the way it is, the GW units will simply demolish all Zerg early/mid game. In addition, with the "weakened units", their late game is still pretty strong with later tech (HT, Robo Tech). If you buffed GW units, again the late game compositions will simply be out of control. Any kind of buff would have to be tempered by nerfs to several other facets of Protoss gameplay (early - late). Also, anyone who is saying that Shield Batteries are a good idea haven't really thought about its implications in an offensive setting. Sure, it might be great defensively and allow for some better PvP, but in a contain scenario, it'd be flat out ridiculous (especially against Zerg). =/ | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:03 Eps wrote: I don't see how people can just say Stalkers suck when compared to the other race's alternatives. They're not meant to be compared to Roaches or Marauders. Neither unit can shoot up, and Stalkers are one of the fastest non-upgraded land units straight out of production. You can't compare units of different races that play different roles simply as is without looking at the bigger picture. This has been debated since the game came out and the simple answer is that it's true that certain units do well in certain situations and not so well in other situations. It just so happens that the situation that stalkers do not do so well in is a fair fight. The groaning has died down as pros maneuver themselves into situations where the stalker can do well, namely with sentry support and blink. My question then is, what happens when you look at the bigger picture and it sucks? | ||
|
rUiNati0n
United States1155 Posts
| ||
|
Meteora.GB
Canada2479 Posts
| ||
|
Sevenofnines
United States167 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:19 arsenic wrote: Thank you for understanding. The OP makes some huge assumptions about unit strength and how that it is because of Warp-ins that this has come about. I see no necessary correlation or any evidence to prove that this is the case and in fact, I would argue that with the tools that Protoss has, they have the ability to be even more cost efficient than most other races (FF, Blink) even with just Gateway units. That assumption is easy enough to test. Play against the best Toss practice partner you know and have him not use Warpgates at all. Or play it yourself without using Warpgates. Maybe you guys could still trade efficiently with gateway units. I however, seriously doubt it. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
It would be even more cool if it were a ground robotics unit - maybe available after core or forge, and could have a phase mode/zone like the warp prism? Maybe it could transfer shields OR energy? This would also help against Ghosts, since they would have to decide to EMP the shield battery or the casters. Then again, it would fit as an ability for the sentry - the name and unit design fits perfectly. Maybe give hallucination to the warp prism or back to the HT? | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
| ||
|
tehemperorer
United States2183 Posts
I don't think you really know enough to be discussing the warp gate mechanic, trust me it does much more for P than it takes away. | ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:05 Jerubaal wrote: You're making a huge assumption that the relative weakness of gateway units is because of warpgates and not some other design reason. It seems to me that if gateway units were buffed too much, along with protoss splash, it would be too much. Also, you don't really think that if they just removed warpgate and buffed gateway units that wouldn't cause huge problems, like the one I just mentioned. We should also be careful about what we mean when we say 'weak'. You can argue that neither the zealot or the stalker are weak. Zealots are basically 4 slow zerglings (with the benefit of not losing 25% of their dps for every 35 damage done) and stalkers have exceptional health despite mediocre dps. Their weakness is a design problem, not a balance problem in my opinion. And OP, I'd like for you to explain how you think this situation has contributed to the percieved current weakness. After all, we've discussed these pointes before, but they were discarded because Protoss found ways to win regardless. When I watch Protoss lose games, I don't necessarily think, if only warpgate units were stronger. I do think it may affect the general inflexibility of the race though. You say it, man. "Protoss found ways to win regardless." Go to the TL- front page where the IEM article about MC is. One line in there says that Protoss is UP at the highest level of play and that despite MC's wins in the past, he should not have won those tourneys in the first place. And I tell you why. Terrans have been doing fine all along the way. Nothing wrong with that. However Zerg and Toss as races have gone through a lot of Ups and Downs as races. For a long time Zergs were perceived to be "weak" and broken. And indeed Zergs got destroyed by so many timing pushes Ps and Ts were throwing at them. Looking back at those times I believe that a lot of this perceived "imbalances" were due to Zerg having the overall hardest learning curve in terms of basic macro, knowing when to drone and what units to build depending on the very little information you get from scouting. In the end lots of pushes were nerfed and the hard training for Zergs paid off: they learned their race, figured out how to hold timing attacks and mastered their race. When MC won his first GSL, it was the BitByBit.Prime-Season where one-base allins were the cookie cutter strategies per se. And MC won mostly because he had timings and FF abuse that other players had no answer to. Yet. After that Protoss had again a harsh time as maps changed and the game evolved. At that time Muta-Ling was very present and caused huge trouble for Protosses. But they found a solution called "6gate". Another timing push Zerg again had to take into account, learn to scout it and defend it. After that it was deathball time. And all the world screamed "imba-toss". Terrans didn't know when to make vikings and how many of them to kill colossi and when to make ghosts to fight off templars. Zergs thought that waiting passively for the Toss to max out and then suiciding Roaches, Hydras and Corrupters into the Deathball was the way to go. As we know now, it was not. But after some time, Terrans found the right combination of Medivacs and Vikings and Ghosts costing 100 gas made things easier as well. Zergs finally started using their brain and developped Roach/Ling aggression builds, Hydra/Roach drops, Banelings bombs, early 3 bases and finally Infestors and Broodlords. Since then the situation got worse and worse for Toss to a point where I don't watch SC2 anymore, but instead crave for BW-Vods. So what does this have to do with the topic? As some have stated: Gateway units suck compared to their Terran or zerg counter party. Not only in terms of cost-efficiency, but also in terms of viability. Imagine Protoss having good units for drops: Not only the dropped units would destroy your worker line but immediate reinforcements through warp-in would make Protoss drops more dangerous than any BFH-drop in the world. You can't split your units as Toss since they are bad, you can't benefit from multi-tasking and dropping. All Protosses have done so far is relying on timings. Now those timings have been figured out and Protosses are losing games left and right. The 1/1/1 is the ultimate proof that Gateway Units are made to get dumped into the trash can: You don't have HTs or Colossi out in time, so can't fight mass marines. The sole fact that Toss NEEDs one or both of these units to actually stay alive is a huge design blunder itself. They are not supporting the Protoss army as Medivacs or Ghosts do for Terrans or Infestors for Zerg, they are Core Units. Yet for being so important they are so fragile at times and Zs and Ts have found their ways to get rid of them. There is a reason why the best way for Ps against Z is to turtle get 3 bases and hope to kill the Zerg in one push. Without Colossi or HT there is almost no way to fight a Zerg. Even if you win an engagement (mainly through FF abuse), the next one the Zerg will probably come out on top. Just look at BW. There were ways for Protoss to be aggressive at certain times and move out. As of now, despite some cute DT or Phoenix harass there is almost now Protoss aggression. The risk of losing an engagment (which is easy with cost inefficient units) and being afterwards behind (your units cost more and are weaker, yet your economy is not better) is too big. If that is the game you want to watch, there you have it. I will look in here from times to times, get a glimpse of what is going on in the tournament scene and watch some TvT (great positional play coupled with harass) or TvZ (at least both races have their means to apply pressure and push eventually). But for me as a Protoss-player/fan SC2 is not really appealing to me, since it hurts to watch Protoss - and I am not talking about 1/1/1 here. And yes, this is a rant. Maybe some magic-toss will show a neat timing and own up everything. But then again: It will get nerfed or figured out. I can't remember any huge evolution or innovation in the way Protoss is played. Is this because Protoss players are dumb and stupid or is it due to desgin flaws? | ||
|
sparC
Germany162 Posts
| ||
|
Evangelist
1246 Posts
Unless I'm spectacularly misunderstanding how shields work. Rather than blaming warp in mechanics (which are important to making races feel diverse) I'd prefer to do something mathematical. | ||
|
Bleak
Turkey3059 Posts
Warp-ins only available through Warp Prisms. Other then that, Gateways only produce as they do pre-upgrade, similar to how Terran produces. This change would stop PvP 4-gate vs. 4.gate, still allow warp-in to be used effectively when used in a smart way (attack+warp-in with prism behind the base, especially with w.prism getting buffed now), make some ridiculous Protoss timing pushes less effective (would help other races to defend) and overall would result in a better game imo. I'm surprised it has taken this long to notice how ridiculous and abusive warpgate mechanic is when it comes to being on the offensive timing pushes. Also, as the article mentioned, if you make warp-in only through warp-prisms, then you may buff gateway units to be stronger, and nerfing big hitters like Colossus a little bit to overall balance things out in a much wider way. Great post, OP. | ||
|
Jerubaal
United States7684 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:39 Sevenofnines wrote: That assumption is easy enough to test. Play against the best Toss practice partner you know and have him not use Warpgates at all. Or play it yourself without using Warpgates. Maybe you guys could still trade efficiently with gateway units. I however, seriously doubt it. Unit build times are balanced around warpgate. The last few patches seem to indicate that (hypothetically) if warpgates were removed, the gateway build times would be reduced. We're not seeing a direct connection between warpgates and the 'weakness' of gateway units. It always seemed to me that gateway units were meant to be weaker and the tier 3 aoe compensated for that. The sentry is there to compensate in the early game, but, as I said, that's not a balance issue, that's a desigin issue. | ||
|
roymarthyup
1442 Posts
| ||
|
MrBarryObama
Korea (South)141 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:44 tehemperorer wrote: What a stupid thread... If there's a shield battery, what makes you think I won't build one at my forward pylon too? Forward shield battery will not be as good as you think it will be. Let's say that the build time for a shield battery is the same as a gateway, which would be very reasonable as it is still faster than a forge+cannon and thus is easily completed before 4gate hits. That's 65 game seconds after the proxy pylon is already finished building. Now let us assume that the shield battery will start with 50 energy, like all casters, and has the same functionality as the BW shield battery. 2 shield pts per energy, unit is stunned while being regenerated. That's 100 additional shield pts upon completion, 2/3rds that of a zealots total HP. No, I don't see a shield battery being very useful at all except for holding choke points and preventing key units from being focused down. It would give protoss something extra to contain with, but the shield battery should need to sit around for a while to gain cost effectiveness; at that point, you've been contained for a time already where the shield battery was detrimental to your opponent's effort. | ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
On September 09 2011 05:04 Jerubaal wrote: Unit build times are balanced around warpgate. The last few patches seem to indicate that (hypothetically) if warpgates were removed, the gateway build times would be reduced. We're not seeing a direct connection between warpgates and the 'weakness' of gateway units. It always seemed to me that gateway units were meant to be weaker and the tier 3 aoe compensated for that. The sentry is there to compensate in the early game, but, as I said, that's not a balance issue, that's a desigin issue. I don't think anyone talks about balance here, at least that is not why I follow this thread, but because of design issues. And WG and its implications is an issue to me. | ||
|
0neder
United States3733 Posts
On September 09 2011 04:44 tehemperorer wrote: What a stupid thread... If there's a shield battery, what makes you think I won't build one at my forward pylon too? Warp gate is an awesome mechanic, do you know how hard it is as protoss to leave their base once speedlings are out? How hard it is to deal with multipronged drops when the fastest unit you have is a stalker with blink that just happens to be hard countered by a stim mm drop? I don't think you really know enough to be discussing the warp gate mechanic, trust me it does much more for P than it takes away. You could make it a robotics unit so it can't be warped in. If you tech you can defend warp-gate all-ins better. Getting rid of pylon warp-in is not necessary. We just have to make warp-gates slightly slower than gateways. | ||
|
roymarthyup
1442 Posts
when warpgates are in "defensive mode", cooldowns of unit buildtimes are reduced | ||
| ||
|
|
PiGosaur Cup
RSL Revival
Classic vs Creator
Cure vs TriGGeR
Kung Fu Cup
GuMiho vs MaNa
herO vs ShoWTimE
Classic vs TBD
WardiTV Korean Royale
CranKy Ducklings
RSL Revival
herO vs Gerald
ByuN vs SHIN
Kung Fu Cup
Cure vs Reynor
IPSL
ZZZero vs rasowy
Napoleon vs KameZerg
BSL 21
Tarson vs Julia
Doodle vs OldBoy
eOnzErG vs WolFix
StRyKeR vs Aeternum
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
