|
On May 07 2009 07:56 Archerofaiur wrote:
-Protoss lack any healing. This detracts from the enjoyment of playing Protoss dramatically. The argument that no healing makes Protoss unique and special is a weak one at best.
Don't play em, besides IMHO you are wrong.
And have you played beta to judge the game already? If you have, I take this question down, but I truly doubt that 
|
whats the problem? play 2on2 and go zealot/medic, thats imba enough!
|
On May 08 2009 04:49 RA wrote:Don't play em, besides IMHO you are wrong. And have you played beta to judge the game already? If you have, I take this question down, but I truly doubt that
Well that statement was my personal opinion. I cant justify it with emperical evidence. You know I feel bad. I really should have developed the OP better. Kinda did a weak job and for that I appologize. Maybe next time Ill make it a 57 page thesis :-P
Ok so allot of people dont like protoss to have healing but the overwhelming reason is that it would be imbalanced. To all of those people I have this question.
Hypothetically speaking, if Blizzard did put protoss healing in the game and the game was still balanced would you still have a problem with it?
Meaning is the threat of imbalance your only thing against P healing.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Personally I think healing has no influence on toss balance whatsoever, it's not like we are gonna take SC1 toss and give them medics (that can also heal carriers, somehow).
|
On May 08 2009 05:48 Archerofaiur wrote:
Hypothetically speaking, if Blizzard did put protoss healing in the game and the game was still balanced would you still have a problem with it?
I'm kind of on the fence on this issue. Don't really have strong feelings either way. The only time I really feel screwed over because of Protoss lack of healing is when my units get hit by Plague. So yeah, I'd be happy with Protoss either way in SC2 if there is no Plague-equivalent; though I would much rather the Protoss had healing if there is a Plague-equivalent :p
|
If Blizzard were to remove shields (or the regeneration of) altogether, it might make sense and have a chance of becoming reasonably balanced. Otherwise, with your current suggestion, Protoss get the equivalent of repair, medic heal (both covered by your 'heal', apparently) and regeneration (which shields currently do).
Of course, without shields, Protoss are Terrans (slight exaggeration), and without shield regeneration, shield is health.
|
No one is suggesting removing shields.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
Don't you think it's messing a bit with racial differentation?
In SC:
Zerg can regen all their HP, but no heal.
Toss can regen their shields, but no heal. Have shield batteries.
Terran can't regen anything, but can repair and heal.
SC2:
Zerg can heal their full HP. Have limited healing.
Terran same as in SC.
Toss can regen their shields very quickly.
I mean, if you add healing to toss, they are essentially like terrans except even better since they heal the shield portion on their own and at an extremely rapid pace.. I dunno, I don't see the need for it at all tbh.
|
I really don't see why you would give healing to protoss, it's just not really useful, just see how little shield battery is used in BW
|
On May 08 2009 08:11 MaD.pYrO wrote:
I really don't see why you would give healing to protoss, it's just not really useful, just see how little shield battery is used in BW
yes but they are stationairy, and healing the shields aren't as good as healing the HP.
|
On May 08 2009 07:03 Archerofaiur wrote:
No one is suggesting removing shields.
No, not exactly. You are, however, suggesting that the importance of shields be downplayed significantly. If Protoss gained the ability to regenerate health, you're making the necessity of keeping shields up much, much smaller, considering as how a unit that loses either can now regain either.
Edit, targeted to above: Nitpicking aside, what is the difference between hp and shields? Does one get lost at a faster rate than another? Why is healing health necessarily better than shields? (Okay, I'll concede EMP and similar skills, but-- oh sh, Plague.)
|
On May 08 2009 08:04 FrozenArbiter wrote:
Don't you think it's messing a bit with racial differentation?
In SC:
Zerg can regen all their HP, but no heal.
Toss can regen their shields, but no heal. Have shield batteries.
Terran can't regen anything, but can repair and heal.
SC2:
Zerg can heal their full HP. Have limited healing.
Terran same as in SC.
Toss can regen their shields very quickly.
I mean, if you add healing to toss, they are essentially like terrans except even better since they heal the shield portion on their own and at an extremely rapid pace.. I dunno, I don't see the need for it at all tbh.
See thats the point I was hoping to argue in this thread. Good Diversity vs. Bad Diversity. To quote Blizzard "Different is not better. Better is Better." You could give Terran and Zerg flyers and give Protoss only really good Anti Air. It would be racially different and unique. But would it be fun?
The health system was the most racially different in vanilla SC. Then they added Biological healing to Terran. I would argue that even though both Terran and Zerg could now heal biological units the benefits far outwiegh the racial differentiation.
|
How is not giving Protoss the best of all worlds promoting bad diversity? Your example, obviously, is bad (hilariously game breaking, my mind went further with giving the Terrans/Zerg ONLY flyers), but I couldn't say the same about the topic at hand.
Every race has their own unique way of healing, but I wouldn't say any of them are distinctly better than the others. However, if one race were to be given every way of healing, I might have to argue otherwise.
|
On May 08 2009 08:55 Yenzilla wrote:
How is not giving Protoss the best of all worlds promoting bad diversity? Your example, obviously, is bad (hilariously game breaking, my mind went further with giving the Terrans/Zerg ONLY flyers), but I couldn't say the same about the topic at hand.
Every race has their own unique way of healing, but I wouldn't say any of them are distinctly better than the others. However, if one race were to be given every way of healing, I might have to argue otherwise.
See maybe this is where we differ. Alot of you seem to consider shields healing. I dont consider shields healing at all. Healing heals hit points.
|
Huge HP/Attack, and now healing? No thanks.
|
I don't feel that Protoss needs healing. The strength of their individual units, not to mention their high HP values make it so they shouldn't require healing. I have to side with the fact that it will just make them overpowered. ZvP, for example, at least in the VERY late game, depends on slowly weakening the Protoss army. If it can regenerate to full health, then the Zerg's actions will be almost futile, and lose the game unless they can conjure up an army 2-3 times the size, to kill the P's army, deal with any reinforcements, then win the game.
|
On May 08 2009 01:32 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2009 00:40 Yenzilla wrote:
Which still leaves all high HP protoss units under the category of mechanical. Would be sort of pointless to give the race healing abilities to use on high templar, no?
As an alternative, you might want to try to get repair taken away from the Terrans. "It's not like marines use them." Ok, let's say the High Templar gets Hallucination back, and you give the Nullifier the following ability: Reconstruct (can be auto-cast) Energy cost: 1 per 1 HP healed Range: 2 Targets: Mechanical, biological Compare it with the Medic's heal from SC1 now: Medic costs 50min 25gas 1 supply, Nullifier costs 50min 100 gas 2 supply Medic heals 2 HP per 1 energy, Nullifier heals 1 HP per 1 energy Medic heals ground biological units, Nullifier heals biological, mechanical, ground and air units In other words the Nullifier costs twice as much and is half as efficient, take however many resources the Terran spends in medics in SC1 and multiply that times four to see how much the Protoss needs to spend to keep all his units healed up. It's a huge expense, and probably isn't worth it to heal all your army with it; you'll save it for your more expensive and slow to produce units such as the Colossus and the Carrier.
On an Energy to Heals ratio, yes the medic is more efficient. But don't forget the advantages Reconstruct has. It's ranged, and does double the Heals per Second.
On May 08 2009 03:16 Krikkitone wrote:
The Protoss HAVE Heal, its very just expensive and takes Micro+macromanagement
eg. to heal a Zealot, you need a Gateway, 100 minerals, an extra damage dealing unit, and it takes ~20-30 sec.
1. do suffiient damaage to your already damaged zealot to engage the emergency teleport home
2. use the Gateway+100 minerals to teleport him back to the battle field
The real problem is Plague.... and hopefully if Blizzard goes with this "Disease" it will not have the same problem.
1. Did I miss an ability here? I've never heard of an emergency teleport
2. Gateways don't teleport existing units. The create them at their location. The way it is described may have confused you. It's like how all Protoss buildings are teleported to their location. They are pre-constructed then ported to the location your workers choose.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
I think Krikkit is making a joke out of the fact that Zealots get "teleported back to aiur" when they die (lore wise).
|
On May 08 2009 09:18 Clow wrote:
Huge HP/Attack, and now healing? No thanks.
Protoss basic units have more HP than basic units from other races. They are also more expensive, both in supply and in resource cost. I don't see the Zergs crying because their Zerglings have 35 HP, while the Marauder has 125 HP. Hint: Zerglings are not supposed to beat Marauders 1 on 1. Add up the HP of 4 zerglings, and you get 140 HP. How much HP does a Zealot have in SC2?
100 HP and 50 shields. gasp! It's just like 4 zerglings!
Stop it with the stupid 'omg Protoss are OP they have so much HP' comments, you just make yourself look bad. It's fine if you don't like Protoss, just don't base your arguments around the assumption that they're overpowered when they quite clearly aren't in SC1, at least in high level play.
|
On May 08 2009 10:10 DeCoup wrote:
On an Energy to Heals ratio, yes the medic is more efficient. But don't forget the advantages Reconstruct has. It's ranged, and does double the Heals per Second.
Medic's Heal also has range 2 btw. Also, I've no idea where you got the idea that Reconstruct heals twice as much per second. I just made the ability up, and I didn't intend it to have that property :p
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
