EPTAmerican Protoss carrying
Chinese Protoss who!?
[NASL] Day 7-2 - Page 53
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Tournaments |
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
American Protoss carrying Chinese Protoss who!? | ||
|
Ezekyle
Australia607 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:06 HolyArrow wrote: Calling something "common" and "super-powerful" easily implies easiness of use. Force fields are common. They are super-powerful. That's not opinion, I'm stating facts. I also specifically said that force fields are not overpowered. It feels like you're trying to take offense here, because I never implied they were imbalanced. Furthermore, you seem to feel that, since I never explicitly stated it, I don't think that force fields require skill. They do. That doesn't make them any less powerful. On May 27 2011 15:06 HolyArrow wrote: Notice that he didn't ever acknowledge the fact that we actually see forcefields fail quite often as well, either with the Toss army not winning the engagement, or the forcefields actually hurting the Toss army more than helping it. This isn't because Toss players are so retarded that they can't use such a "easy" ability well - it's because it's actually not as easy people think. But Ezekyle only focused on the "soul-crushing" strength of the forcefield without acknowledging anything on the flip side. Hence, my interpretation of his post. Because I was talking specifically about situations in which force fields destroy an army. I also didn't mention the disappointment everyone experiences when someone going battlecruisers dies horribly, because it's completely irrelevant to my point. Why should I take failfields into account when I'm only talking about the effective ones? On May 27 2011 15:06 HolyArrow wrote: Also, he uses terms like "impossible odds" to describe the situation playing against a Protoss, and although it's not directly attributed to a XvP situation, it's easy to read between the lines and see that his post isn't just some objective analysis of what people think of forcefields. He's projecting tons of his own beliefs and opinions into it with some subtle (and not-so-subtle) rhetoric. I never said that playing against Protoss was a case of impossible odds. I said that people like seeing the underdog triumph against impossible odds, and that many people consider Protoss to be dominant. Clearly XvP isn't an impossible situation, since it's been won many times, so we can assume that either 1) I wasn't calling XvP a battle against impossible odds or 2) I'm an idiot who doesn't understand the words he's using. If you wish to believe the latter than I can't stop you, but that certainly wasn't what I was trying to say. I personally feel that Protoss is a balanced race. I also feel that they are a terribly designed race from a spectator's perspective, and the incredible power of force fields is one of the factors that contribute to that. Those are not mutually exclusive opinions, and saying that a race is poorly designed or boring to watch does not necessarily mean "I want it nerfed". I am not trying to insinuate or imply anything balance-related. I am trying to explain, with as few implications as possible so people can't misinterpret what I say, why not everyone finds Cruncher's force fields to be an impressive highlight of today's games. | ||
|
HolyArrow
United States7116 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:39 On_Slaught wrote: Ohh interesting results. American Protoss carrying Chinese Protoss who!? What do Chinese Protosses have to do with anything? | ||
|
HolyArrow
United States7116 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:46 Ezekyle wrote: Force fields are common. They are super-powerful. That's not opinion, I'm stating facts. I also specifically said that force fields are not overpowered. It feels like you're trying to take offense here, because I never implied they were imbalanced. Furthermore, you seem to feel that, since I never explicitly stated it, I don't think that force fields require skill. They do. That doesn't make them any less powerful. Because I was talking specifically about situations in which force fields destroy an army. I also didn't mention the disappointment everyone experiences when someone going battlecruisers dies horribly, because it's completely irrelevant to my point. Why should I take failfields into account when I'm only talking about the effective ones? I never said that playing against Protoss was a case of impossible odds. I said that people like seeing the underdog triumph against impossible odds, and that many people consider Protoss to be dominant. Clearly XvP isn't an impossible situation, since it's been won many times, so we can assume that either 1) I wasn't calling XvP a battle against impossible odds or 2) I'm an idiot who doesn't understand the words he's using. If you wish to believe the latter than I can't stop you, but that certainly wasn't what I was trying to say. I personally feel that Protoss is a balanced race. I also feel that they are a terribly designed race from a spectator's perspective, and the incredible power of force fields is one of the factors that contribute to that. Those are not mutually exclusive opinions, and saying that a race is poorly designed or boring to watch does not necessarily mean "I want it nerfed". I am not trying to insinuate or imply anything balance-related. I am trying to explain, with as few implications as possible so people can't misinterpret what I say, why not everyone finds Cruncher's force fields to be an impressive highlight of today's games. Fair enough. I misinterpreted you, and I apologize. I suppose I'm simply too much on edge because the TL forums are littered with thinly veiled and not-so-thinly veiled whining about Protoss and forcefields. It's been going on for ages and I'm really sick of it, so it has kind of infected my mind at this point. | ||
|
L3g3nd_
New Zealand10461 Posts
| ||
|
dormer
United States1314 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:49 HolyArrow wrote: Fair enough. I misinterpreted you, and I apologize. I suppose I'm simply too much on edge because the TL forums are littered with thinly veiled and not-so-thinly veiled whining about Protoss and forcefields. It's been going on for ages and I'm really sick of it, so it has kind of infected my mind at this point. This has nothing to do with the game, and might sound a bit odd, but this is why I love HolyArrow -- I rarely see anyone on the forums say "Oh, sorry, I was wrong / I misunderstood." Polite posters make me happy :-p | ||
|
Coolwhip
927 Posts
 | ||
Shellshock
United States97274 Posts
| ||
|
doffe
Sweden636 Posts
On May 27 2011 15:46 Ezekyle wrote: Force fields are common. They are super-powerful. That's not opinion, I'm stating facts. I also specifically said that force fields are not overpowered. It feels like you're trying to take offense here, because I never implied they were imbalanced. Furthermore, you seem to feel that, since I never explicitly stated it, I don't think that force fields require skill. They do. That doesn't make them any less powerful. Because I was talking specifically about situations in which force fields destroy an army. I also didn't mention the disappointment everyone experiences when someone going battlecruisers dies horribly, because it's completely irrelevant to my point. Why should I take failfields into account when I'm only talking about the effective ones? I never said that playing against Protoss was a case of impossible odds. I said that people like seeing the underdog triumph against impossible odds, and that many people consider Protoss to be dominant. Clearly XvP isn't an impossible situation, since it's been won many times, so we can assume that either 1) I wasn't calling XvP a battle against impossible odds or 2) I'm an idiot who doesn't understand the words he's using. If you wish to believe the latter than I can't stop you, but that certainly wasn't what I was trying to say. I personally feel that Protoss is a balanced race. I also feel that they are a terribly designed race from a spectator's perspective, and the incredible power of force fields is one of the factors that contribute to that. Those are not mutually exclusive opinions, and saying that a race is poorly designed or boring to watch does not necessarily mean "I want it nerfed". I am not trying to insinuate or imply anything balance-related. I am trying to explain, with as few implications as possible so people can't misinterpret what I say, why not everyone finds Cruncher's force fields to be an impressive highlight of today's games. I really like how you approach this. Its somewhat what I myself feel is the "issue" with protoss. I wont say its imbalanced since I personally do not have the skill to make such an asumption nor do the topresults actually lean heavily towards any race. I do however completly agree that protoss feels, from a spectators point of view(and somewhat from a players aswell) pretty poorly designed. Forcefields can be used beautifully, I recall Alicia against some terran on xelnaga doing som awsome stuff that leaved me in aw but in most situationas FFs makes battles quite boring to watch. It can completly remove the option for micro for the opponent if used as they should and thus reducing the match to more one of decision making the microing skill. I do not think protoss is overpowered and FFs most certinly takes skill, its not like mmm micro is hard either nor is fungal etc so in relativity I certinly think they take skill. To be fair protoss is probably my worst race but in an semiopen field (non choke) I find forcefielding alot harder then alot of the micro needed by other races. But again, when used to perfection its an extremly powerful ability that can make battles look silly onesided and from a spectator the match terribly unintresting. I would very much want to see a complete rework of FFs in the upcoming expansion and maybe instead make the sentry stronger in other aspects. I have no solutions to this, Its extremly complicated to rework an ability that is so much necessery for the race (tbh protoss would be terrible midgame w/o FFs against both T and Z) without ruining it. an extreme example would be to completly remove FFs ---> you need to buff gateway units to be able to hold certain timings, mostly from terrans, and that would in turn probably make the 1gas 4gate more or less impossible for zerg to hold. I dunno what could be done but thats up to blizzard to decide but from my point of view its like t his. FFs make protoss less intresting to both watch and to play. | ||
|
Vapaach
Finland994 Posts
| ||
|
Art_of_Kill
Zaire1232 Posts
| ||
|
Sakkreth
Lithuania1096 Posts
| ||
|
Elvedeta
Portugal395 Posts
| ||
|
Zuor
Finland377 Posts
On May 27 2011 19:13 Art_of_Kill wrote: so white-ra finally lost his first game :-/ White-ra has lost to July already, like in week 1 or something. So that was his second loss. | ||
Adebisi
Canada1637 Posts
On May 27 2011 23:12 Zuor wrote: White-ra has lost to July already, like in week 1 or something. So that was his second loss. That was a WO because of DreamHack invitational yo. | ||
|
Dandel Ion
Austria17960 Posts
| ||
|
Gumbos
Canada55 Posts
| ||
|
Tommylew
Wales2717 Posts
| ||
|
Causality~
Norway150 Posts
| ||
|
ishboh
United States954 Posts
On May 27 2011 23:47 Tommylew wrote: how did the 3 games of White-ra vs Incontrol go? All collussus wars???? nope, actually i don't think they both got collosus in any of the games. definitely check out game 3 though, it was pretty awesome. -- Mr. Bitter is quite an awesome caster. I love how he can synergize with gretorp (i think that incontrol and gretorp aren't as good a casting duo as Mr. Bitter and Gretorp) | ||
| ||
