|
On August 11 2012 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird.
I get the sense you're dodging my response, because I'm right.
There are no spectators on the ladder, and literally every other cheese in the game involves more skill, and is more entertaining to watch for both sides. Of course there's a different standard between ladder and tournament maps. This game is an e-sport, try to consider what that means for a moment. If you can't comprehend this, I see no reason to bang my head against a wall.
|
On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too.
6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg.
The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard.
|
On August 11 2012 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird.
Look they accept what others have put as the standards for a tournement map, but that doesn't mean they wanna accept that standard for ladder maps.
They wanted the balance in the WCS to mirror that of which pros were used to in other tournements. But balance on ladder is wastly different.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On August 11 2012 04:42 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird. I get the sense you're dodging my response, because I'm right. There are no spectators on the ladder, and literally every other cheese in the game involves more skill, and is more entertaining to watch for both sides. Of course there's a different standard between ladder and tournament maps. This game is an e-sport, try to consider what that means for a moment. If you can't comprehend this, I see no reason to bang my head against a wall.
Really? I think you're insulting me, mischaracterizing my statements and putting words in my mouth, and generally being intellectually dishonest. If you want to continue this part of our conversation, we can do it via PM.
There are also no spectators in tons of tournaments, especially in the preliminary rounds. That doesn't mean GOM decides to use depot-less maps for Code B all of a sudden. Depot-less maps are good. Edit: Depot-less maps are bad. lol what a typo
On August 11 2012 04:44 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird. Look they accept what others have put as the standards for a tournement map, but that doesn't mean they wanna accept that standard for ladder maps. They wanted the balance in the WCS to mirror that of which pros were used to in other tournements. But balance on ladder is wastly different.
But WHY? Why is the standard different for tournament maps? From what I can tell, the maps without the low-ground wall-off are just... well, they're better. Everyone likes them better. Except, I guess, mass cannon rushers and the like. I don't see why tournaments should have the awesome maps and Ladder should have the worse version of the maps. I GET that Blizz has a double standard between ladder and tournaments. I'm fully aware of this. I'm saying it's bad.
|
On August 11 2012 04:47 Blazinghand wrote:
Really? I think you're insulting me, mischaracterizing my statements and putting words in my mouth, and generally being intellectually dishonest. If you want to continue this part of our conversation, we can do it via PM.
No. I've been perfectly honest and reasonable. I'd think you were the troll, but I've seen countless ad hominem trains that start with such accusations, so you get the benefit of the doubt, whether you deserve it or not. I've done nothing but explain things clearly, and you continue to put blinders on. I have no reason to carry on discussion with someone who doesn't want to talk and who won't listen to reason.
|
On August 11 2012 04:37 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. But my point isn't that Blizzard considers, it okay, it's that Blizzard DOESN'T. The WCS maps have depots on it. If Blizz considered low-ground walls to be okay, yeah, it's all good-- no low ground depots. The issue is that they hold ladder maps to some different standard than tournament maps, which is disappointing and weird.
I don't know if it could be said clearer. ^^ But it was a good discussion.
I guess the new question is, could we come up with something to replace the depot that Blizzard is okay with having on ladder? (Just for the sake of discussion, because the original topic was alternatives to depot.)
I don't think they'd accept a re-skin functional equivalent, such as the destructibles with tooltips I was proposing earlier. And I don't think they'd accept unbuildable pathing (which I would continue to argue is an inferior solution). They might eventually create their own functional equivalent, officially instituting it with the developer seal of quality™ which could then populate ladder maps and tournament maps alike. Much as they work over tournament maps for their own ladder editions.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On August 11 2012 04:51 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:47 Blazinghand wrote:
Really? I think you're insulting me, mischaracterizing my statements and putting words in my mouth, and generally being intellectually dishonest. If you want to continue this part of our conversation, we can do it via PM.
No. I've been perfectly honest and reasonable. I'd think you were the troll, but I've seen countless ad hominem trains that start with such accusations, so you get the benefit of the doubt, whether you deserve it or not. I've done nothing but explain things clearly, and you continue to put blinders on. I have no reason to carry on discussion with someone who doesn't want to talk and who won't listen to reason.
That's understandable. I'm sorry if I was ambigous, but let me be clear: I do not get cheesed in every game on the ladder. Nor do I think cheese is an overpowered strategy. However, I find the inconsistency between Blizzard's Tournament and Ladder maps troubling. I do not believe the formats are sufficiently different to merit these changes.
|
On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard.
The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin.
There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line.
Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this.
|
On August 11 2012 04:47 Blazinghand wrote:
But WHY? Why is the standard different for tournament maps? From what I can tell, the maps without the low-ground wall-off are just... well, they're better. Everyone likes them better. Except, I guess, mass cannon rushers and the like. I don't see why tournaments should have the awesome maps and Ladder should have the worse version of the maps. I GET that Blizz has a double standard between ladder and tournaments. I'm fully aware of this. I'm saying it's bad.
They are a legacy if you will. From the game's early days. We had maps with a much shorter walk distance. Terrans could go baracks at 9. Protoss only needed 2 pylons to complete a walloff.
Blizzard havn't just sat around for these 2 years. I dare say that without futher testing we cannot say if the terrans bunker walloff is broken anymore. It is so much delayed at this point compared to back then. And no Nesteas game alone is not proof enough that it is still broken.
As for protoss, they still risk alot doing this block, leaving their base unprotected.
But either way we don't know for sure if the ability to block would still be abused with same succes. It has been too long for us to know for sure.
|
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall.
|
On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall.
You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey.
It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken.
EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517
The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall.
This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings.
|
On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings.
Oh i see. Hmm it doesn't seem like as big a problem and if anything it is not the kind of stuff we should be fixing for Blizzard.
|
On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings.
I want to see the queen that attacks the lowground walloff XD
This makes me realize that map design could deal with this situation anyway if there were overlord spots at the ramp / in the main base. With new overlord speed, you could fly to safe spot in the base while only 1-2 marines are out.
Would overlord spot inside the main base be imba? Terran can just lift a building, it'd be much more uncomfortable for protoss.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On August 11 2012 06:06 EatThePath wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings. I want to see the queen that attacks the lowground walloff XD This makes me realize that map design could deal with this situation anyway if there were overlord spots at the ramp / in the main base. With new overlord speed, you could fly to safe spot in the base while only 1-2 marines are out. Would overlord spot inside the main base be imba? Terran can just lift a building, it'd be much more uncomfortable for protoss.
An overlord spot in the main base exists already on certain maps like Shattered Temple. It made the map more interesting, but certainly not imbalanced.
All things considered, I don't think the 3 rax marine/scv allin is currently a main problem being dealt with by the low ground depot, just because in a lot of ways it's not as strong a strategy as it used to be. Players of all races have learned what the low ground wall means, and the supply calldown onto it is pretty obvious. The queen range buff helps a lot with being able to target marines in the back, and with longer rush distances protosses have more room to kite with stalkers and other races have more time to repair.
It's certainly still possible, but I don't think it's the main target of the low-ground depots. I think they're more to prevent offensive wall-offs, such as the pylon and bunker wall-offs.
|
No just no. The good thing about a supply depot is that it can be destroyed. This would permanently change the configuration of the map and prevent walling.
|
On August 11 2012 06:11 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 06:06 EatThePath wrote:On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings. I want to see the queen that attacks the lowground walloff XD This makes me realize that map design could deal with this situation anyway if there were overlord spots at the ramp / in the main base. With new overlord speed, you could fly to safe spot in the base while only 1-2 marines are out. Would overlord spot inside the main base be imba? Terran can just lift a building, it'd be much more uncomfortable for protoss. An overlord spot in the main base exists already on certain maps like Shattered Temple. It made the map more interesting, but certainly not imbalanced. All things considered, I don't think the 3 rax marine/scv allin is currently a main problem being dealt with by the low ground depot, just because in a lot of ways it's not as strong a strategy as it used to be. Players of all races have learned what the low ground wall means, and the supply calldown onto it is pretty obvious. The queen range buff helps a lot with being able to target marines in the back, and with longer rush distances protosses have more room to kite with stalkers and other races have more time to repair. It's certainly still possible, but I don't think it's the main target of the low-ground depots. I think they're more to prevent offensive wall-offs, such as the pylon and bunker wall-offs.
Yes but those too have lost power as well from various nerfs, longer rush distances and generally more awareness on how to deal with it. Which is why at this point i think it would be worth trying to have the depots removed entirely in the HOTS transition, rather than trying to find an alternative.
|
Blazinghand
United States25553 Posts
On August 11 2012 06:16 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 06:11 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 06:06 EatThePath wrote:On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings. I want to see the queen that attacks the lowground walloff XD This makes me realize that map design could deal with this situation anyway if there were overlord spots at the ramp / in the main base. With new overlord speed, you could fly to safe spot in the base while only 1-2 marines are out. Would overlord spot inside the main base be imba? Terran can just lift a building, it'd be much more uncomfortable for protoss. An overlord spot in the main base exists already on certain maps like Shattered Temple. It made the map more interesting, but certainly not imbalanced. All things considered, I don't think the 3 rax marine/scv allin is currently a main problem being dealt with by the low ground depot, just because in a lot of ways it's not as strong a strategy as it used to be. Players of all races have learned what the low ground wall means, and the supply calldown onto it is pretty obvious. The queen range buff helps a lot with being able to target marines in the back, and with longer rush distances protosses have more room to kite with stalkers and other races have more time to repair. It's certainly still possible, but I don't think it's the main target of the low-ground depots. I think they're more to prevent offensive wall-offs, such as the pylon and bunker wall-offs. Yes but those too have lost power as well from various nerfs, longer rush distances and generally more awareness on how to deal with it. Which is why at this point i think it would be worth trying to have the depots removed entirely in the HOTS transition, rather than trying to find an alternative.
That's your opinion, and if that were Blizzard's opinion I'd be okay with it. No depots is a perfectly acceptable philosophical position. However, Blizz seems to think that one set of standards should apply on the ladder, and another set should apply on its own WCS tournament maps. I do not like this double-standard, and believe that they should do what they think is best for all their maps, as opposed to making some good and some bad. If they believe that is "no depots", so be it, but their inconsistent depot usage strikes me as bad and kinda mean to either ladderers or tournament competitors, depending on your own personal depot philosophy.
|
On August 11 2012 06:21 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 06:16 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 06:11 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 06:06 EatThePath wrote:On August 11 2012 05:57 Blazinghand wrote:On August 11 2012 05:48 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 05:18 EatThePath wrote:
The PvZ cannon wall is something both players can play out of, fail or success. If successful, the protoss is certainly ahead, but it's not auto-win. If fail, the protoss is behind, but not auto-lose.
Because it's really preventable, it's not the real issue with the depot. The other aggressive terran options with walling a ramp are a little more egregious.
The real reason for the depot is to prevent the rax + depot anti-scout wall. You wouldn't think that that from reading this thread. But hey. It sounds risky through, with the new queen range. I wanna see it in action before i can conclude if it is broken. EatThePath is talking about completely different strategy, that's based on the same fundamental low-ground ramp walling mechanic. He's talking about Geiko's venerable 3 rax build: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=223517The wall isn't built at the bottom of an enemy ramp, but at the bottom of your own ramp, so the queen range upgrade has no impact on it, unless you're the ballingest zerg player ever and proxy a hatchery to make a queen to harass his low-ground wall. This kind of all-in isn't as possible on depot maps because you can't deny the scout with just 2 buildings. I want to see the queen that attacks the lowground walloff XD This makes me realize that map design could deal with this situation anyway if there were overlord spots at the ramp / in the main base. With new overlord speed, you could fly to safe spot in the base while only 1-2 marines are out. Would overlord spot inside the main base be imba? Terran can just lift a building, it'd be much more uncomfortable for protoss. An overlord spot in the main base exists already on certain maps like Shattered Temple. It made the map more interesting, but certainly not imbalanced. All things considered, I don't think the 3 rax marine/scv allin is currently a main problem being dealt with by the low ground depot, just because in a lot of ways it's not as strong a strategy as it used to be. Players of all races have learned what the low ground wall means, and the supply calldown onto it is pretty obvious. The queen range buff helps a lot with being able to target marines in the back, and with longer rush distances protosses have more room to kite with stalkers and other races have more time to repair. It's certainly still possible, but I don't think it's the main target of the low-ground depots. I think they're more to prevent offensive wall-offs, such as the pylon and bunker wall-offs. Yes but those too have lost power as well from various nerfs, longer rush distances and generally more awareness on how to deal with it. Which is why at this point i think it would be worth trying to have the depots removed entirely in the HOTS transition, rather than trying to find an alternative. That's your opinion, and if that were Blizzard's opinion I'd be okay with it. No depots is a perfectly acceptable philosophical position. However, Blizz seems to think that one set of standards should apply on the ladder, and another set should apply on its own WCS tournament maps. I do not like this double-standard, and believe that they should do what they think is best for all their maps, as opposed to making some good and some bad. If they believe that is "no depots", so be it, but their inconsistent depot usage strikes me as bad and kinda mean to either ladderers or tournament competitors, depending on your own personal depot philosophy.
Listen you may be willing to say "so be it" if blizzard removed the depots but alot of other players aren't. It would cause huge debate about the legitimity of their tournement. It already caused debate that the WCS map versions on other fronts were mostly "laddered" with only full expansions and nothing but rocks to block expansions. I assume they wouldn't wanna take the battle with the community at the time, and in that case i would say they would be right in not doing so, for the sake of the tournement. It simply isn't the place to make such a move.
The HOTS transision through would exactly be the place where Blizzard could be open about their intendsions on not bringing in depots. In any case i intend to push forward that change once the time comes.
|
On August 11 2012 04:53 Sumadin wrote:Show nested quote +On August 11 2012 04:42 iamcaustic wrote:On August 11 2012 04:33 Sumadin wrote:On August 11 2012 04:11 Blazinghand wrote:
No, of course not. However, I'm saying it's POSSIBLE. If the best play experience comes from this thing being impossible (as the pros, and blizzard seem to agree), why is Blizzard allowing it to be possible? It's not like people are gonna somehow not cheese on the ladder, but only pros are willing to cheese and abuse (as you implied) to win, and therefore only pro games need depots.
ANYONE CAN CHEESE. I did not say "everyone always cheeses". Please do not put words in my mouth, it is intellectually dishonest. The fact of the matter is, people cheese on the ladder. It happens all the time. I see tons of cheese. It's not like, as you implied, only pros abuse. There are plenty of arguments as to why cheese is allowed in this game. And Blizzards considers this a cheese like any other. If they kill the block what is next step? Should a spawning pool require 10 supply? Should terrans be forbidden from building a barracks out of 50 yards from a CC. They allow it because cheese is what generates part of the play experience for Starcraft. It keeps you on your toe. It just seems like Zerg consider this cheese something completely over all other cheeses. But really it is as much of a cheese as a 6-pool with simmilar risks. If this Block is denied it puts the protoss back too. 6-pool vs. T and P is generally game ending, regardless of the outcome. Successful 6-pool is a win for the Zerg, a failed one is likewise pretty much an auto-loss. With ramp blocking, this isn't the case at all; in the event a wall is blocked from being made, the T or P can just cancel their buildings and only be minimally behind. Alternatively, if it's successful it's often a straight loss for the Zerg. Cheese like that, IMO, is excessively strong -- and I say this as a Terran that occasionally uses ramp block in my ladder games vs Zerg. The opinion isn't just mine either, as tournaments go out of their way to also remove this kind of cheese from the game -- including tournaments run by Blizzard. The block is not an autowin for T or P even if it goes up. If that is what you assumed then i see why we are in conflict. It all comes down to how you deal with it. If Zergs wanna break it down their best shot is going 2 gas into a baneling nest. Get 7 banelings ASAP and go knock it down. The macro game is dead but the protoss won't have enough stuff to defend against the following allin. There are also other ways. If you got a scouting drone(Which you should have) then you can use it to make a hatchery outside the block somewhere on the map. Once done use it to make Zerglings and swarm his undefended mineral line. Either tactic through the game will be short. The macro game is gone once protoss and terran does this.
You're fine to disagree with it being an auto-win; that's your prerogative. Meanwhile, I'll continue to pick up free wins on the ladder with it, and see it continue to be banned in tournaments by virtue of the lowered neutral depot. The awkward theory-crafting you make doesn't change this.
On August 11 2012 06:14 PlacidPanda wrote:
No just no. The good thing about a supply depot is that it can be destroyed. This would permanently change the configuration of the map and prevent walling.
Both of these points have already been brought up and addressed within this thread. I encourage you to read through the comments. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
