|
my god can you people stop caring so much about LoL and other games having more viewers? (because of the split of 5 players most tournaments in Dota 2 and LoL have less money too, although of course there those million tournaments)
where is the problem... it does NOT mean that SC2 is dying or whatever... there also is no other RTS with so many viewers as SC2 has.
SC2 will definitely get a lot better with each addon and i'm sure of that. Alone because of all UI related things that Blizzard intentionally left out so that we even more want to buy their addons. I must say i'm a bit worried though that game play wise HotS won't change as much as i hoped. It doesn't even matter if SC2 at the moment is very balanced (and imo it is at the highest level, BL/infestor being imba doesn't matter as much as we think, Zerg are not dominating in Korea). Both BW and TFT for WC3 changed a LOT of things game play wise, which made both of them really fun and refreshing to play.
I like lots of the things the OP mentions. Worst things spectator wise for me are Forcefields and Fungal Growth (although at the moment they are both necessary, need to change a lot of unit stats and add new spells).
|
LoL and DOTA2 both give out $1mil in prizes.
Of course it isn't dead, but it isn't number one, or even number two. DOTA2 isn't even out yet, and is arguably already bigger.
"second most wildly successful esport that surpassed all expectations."
This is just plain wrong. During beta and previews 2008-2010, we expected so much more. We expected the whole world to explode like Korea did with BW. So no, SC2 has not "surpassed all expectations". It hasn't even come close to half of them; one of the biggest being custom game support - which in Warcraft 3 SPAWNED A GENRE, a genre that is now bigger than SC2. Just imagine what could have come from SC2's amazing engine...
Dota is arguably bigger? Fuck man, streetfighter IV has twice as many viewers on twitch right now. It's hyped, and I think it's a great game, but the jury is definitely still out. Dota2 might be a solid case study in how $60 and a bad ui aren't the real reason sc2 is a tough game to get into. I hope it isn't, but I'm not holding my breath.
LoL gives out $1mil, split five ways for events that occur far less frequently with a decent amount of money being fronted by the riot to supplement what sponsors bring. Popularity snowballs, so if you can put a number forward that is more attractive, that number will grow. The sponsorship money is the real measure of success.
I'm not sure where you were in 2008-2010, but I don't remember many people around here going on about how sc2 players were going to be global celebrities. We all hoped, but everyone I've talked to was very surprised by what 2011 brought. And it's not like LoL, popular as it is, has its players on ESPN.
Ok, say whatever you want... can't wait to see how magically they are going to fix the problems stated in the OP and many other places.
I agree with almost everything Gretorp said. I've been one of those obnoxious "remove warpgates" kids since the wol beta. But since the hots beta, blizzard has been unprecedentedly responsive to the community. I mean, what are we really imagining here? 72 hours of #savehots and they patch in all of our wildest dreams the next morning? Even if they dropped everything and worked on wol gameplay issues, it'd be several weeks before we they launched anything. That, and they've decided to wait until they're comfortable with hots units before the go work on wol stuff. I don't agree with that decision; I think it'd be a lot more efficient to work on your platform, and then work on your expansion, but as long as both get tended to eventually who honestly gives a fuck?
We've got that and a ui update, which is a good one, and they've all said that deadspace is to leave room for future improvements. We'll probably see in client streaming and reworked chat channels before the end.
I support savehots. Blizzard needs to hear that people haven't given up on these things. But I don't support all this doom and gloom, sc2 is already dead bullshit. I don't even think it's possible to know that sc2 has peaked. Gamers are fickle, fickle people. Things can change on a dime. It's already been said that LoL nearly died after it launched. Dota2 could explode, sc2 could too. So instead of bitching, we should go boost those viewership numbers and put a few extra bucks into the industry.
Chins up lads; we still have a lot to be happy about.
Edit: Not all of my text made it into the post for some reason ><
|
After a cursory review of the posts in this thread (17 pages is a little much to be re-reading the same sentiments)
it seems like the issues come down to several re-occurring themes.
1. Make HotS into Broodwar (people either are suggesting removal of SC2 units or addition of BW units/mechanics)
2. Something is hard (for me) or is disliked (by me) therefore everyone else finds it hard or does not like it.
3. Blizzard doesn't know how to design/balance games
4. And then some perhaps legit complaints thrown in.
The designers/developers cannot implement every suggestion made by every player. That just makes a mess of a game. They have to have a overriding idea and design/develop towards that, while being on the lookout for anything egregiously wrong. It is a function of one not being able to please all of the people all of the time.
As an analogy, it is like that episode of the Simpson's where Homer learns he has a half-brother who owns a car company. He is given the task, as the "average" guy to design a car, and he comes up with a lot of cool ideas. But when the engineers (who are trained to design cars and had designed cars) implemented all of his ideas, what resulted was a bloated, ugly, overpriced monstrosity.
I'm not suggesting there aren't legitimate balance concerns with the introduction of new units/abilities, but obviously this is what the lengthy Beta period is for. And as far as I can tell, the designers are listening, maybe not to the level some seem to expect (or think they are somehow owed.) but more than is really required.
|
On October 21 2012 12:55 mcdrewbie wrote:
After a cursory review of the posts in this thread (17 pages is a little much to be re-reading the same sentiments)
it seems like the issues come down to several re-occurring themes.
1. Make HotS into Broodwar (people either are suggesting removal of SC2 units or addition of BW units/mechanics)
2. Something is hard (for me) or is disliked (by me) therefore everyone else finds it hard or does not like it.
3. Blizzard doesn't know how to design/balance games
4. And then some perhaps legit complaints thrown in.
The designers/developers cannot implement every suggestion made by every player. That just makes a mess of a game. They have to have a overriding idea and design/develop towards that, while being on the lookout for anything egregiously wrong. It is a function of one not being able to please all of the people all of the time.
As an analogy, it is like that episode of the Simpson's where Homer learns he has a half-brother who owns a car company. He is given the task, as the "average" guy to design a car, and he comes up with a lot of cool ideas. But when the engineers (who are trained to design cars and had designed cars) implemented all of his ideas, what resulted was a bloated, ugly, overpriced monstrosity.
I'm not suggesting there aren't legitimate balance concerns with the introduction of new units/abilities, but obviously this is what the lengthy Beta period is for. And as far as I can tell, the designers are listening, maybe not to the level some seem to expect (or think they are somehow owed.) but more than is really required.
in general you are right, but which balanced and well designed games did they make? c&c, battle for middle earth and dawn of war? oh yes sry they were big and well balanced esports titles...
|
|
|
Wer e still waiting on a reply mr rock
|
Gretorp, you're so damn right. But Blizzard won't care
|
On October 21 2012 06:36 HolydaKing wrote:
SC2 will definitely get a lot better with each addon and i'm sure of that. Alone because of all UI related things that Blizzard intentionally left out so that we even more want to buy their addons.
This. It was not an accident that those features were left out of WoL. Blizzard has built SC2 around three separate games, not one, and they're not exactly idiots when it comes to making money. I don't think it's possible for SC2 to die before LotV.
On October 21 2012 06:36 HolydaKing wrote:
I must say i'm a bit worried though that game play wise HotS won't change as much as i hoped.
The WoL metagame shifts at the drop of a patch, so I wouldn't be too worried about that.
|
what sc2 needs is
more units that do aoe to
1) encourage splitting
2) discourage deathballing
3) make for more interesting unit relatinonships were unit a beats unit b until unit b reaches critical mass (think muta - sair in BW)
more dodgeable/delayed attacks to
1) create tension
2) reward thinking ahead
3) allow for more micro
nukes are one of the only good example for this in sc2. fungal and emp are instant without projectile for reasons i never understood. very bad design decision from the start, since the engine would easily support such things.
fixes:
- give emp a visible projectile and bigger aoe
- make fungal target a specific area and take some delay to build up a slowing/damaging effect there
- create other abilities with such mechanics
less abilities that make it impossible to get away from a big engagement
a) no slow on marauders
b) no fungal insta-rooting
c) forcefield needs to be reworked
fixes:
- fungal should work like suggested above. NO ROOTING
- replace slow on marauders with an anti-armor ability, maybe with small aoe, to make them give synergy to marines but not work as a pure core unit any more
- give hydras more speed off creep
- rework forcefield, maybe into an ability that pushes units away with a force wave
more harass options
pretty much self-explanatory. right now i think the thing that limits harass isnt the lack of options, but the harass defense being way too good for all the races.
fixes:
- get rid of queen anti-air and take back the range upgrade for its anti-ground attack.
- NO FUNGAL ROOTING
- nerf repair, maybe also nerf PF
- make warpgates only be able to warp in at warp prisms, not pylons, make them able to still work as gateways after converting to warp gates
more transitions in late game
all the races max out way too fast and reach a state where they have everything and got nothing worth to tech to
fixes:
- buff carrier and buff BC and/or nerf corruptors and vikings anti-air
- increase build time all across the board for tech structures
- either increase time for upgrades or give them 5 tiers instead of 3
- lower supply cost for some units
there you go. i fixed it. now someone make a custom map or a good mod because with the ignorance blizzard displayed ever since start of WoL beta there is no way they will ever fix this game
|
On October 21 2012 06:36 HolydaKing wrote:
... It doesn't even matter if SC2 at the moment is very balanced (and imo it is at the highest level, BL/infestor being imba doesn't matter as much as we think, Zerg are not dominating in Korea)...
i want to see winrate for zerg after they get bl/infestor out. that would be a good measure of just how imbalanced it is - the only reason they are losing is that they suck until they get that comp, because they have no good units for midgame since hydras are too expensive and slow
|
Respectfully disagree with the original poster.
First on protoss two base timing attacks being too powerful vs zerg...we don't have any other option. One base attacks don't work because queens and spines are too powerful and too easy to make. Macro games don't work because inject larvae and zerg creep scales exponentially. For all the talk of mothership countering zerg...in reality there are very few perfect archon toilets in actual late-game PvZ. Zerg definitely has the advantage vs late game protoss.
On forcefield being too strong... The issue should never really be on strengths since that can be infinitely rebalanced by weakening/strengthening other units, but rather on how fun it is. Forcefield is fun and should stay. The problem with protoss two base timing attacks, is not forcefield (which is a little overrated as each sentry costs 100 gas which really hurts colossi/upgrades/air/twi-light tech). But rather the warp-gate mechanic and the colossi. Rally distance provides a significant advantage to the defender and when you remove that, you can win based on very slight unit advantages. I myself like the idea that warpgate be a 'local spell' only to start with, and then only becomes a 'remote' spell after a significant upgrade.
Colossi are too one-dimensional. By being so fast and having such good range they can determine a battle from afar. They either dominate a battle without AA, or are dominated from AA. It's too simplistic and this unit should be removed from the game and replaced with a proper siege units that is not vulnerable to AA, but has a proper weakness and is very slow (like the reaver  ).
If colossi/WP were addressed, then protoss could be properly buffed. The stalkers should not be buffed...yes they are cost ineffective, but if buffed nobody would build any other unit and we would have stalker deathballs. The zealot is the main reason early games protoss has so many problems with zerg/terran. Vs terran they are kited by marine/marauder in perpetuity. The zealot is ultimately a hp tank for stalkers now, or a building destroyer. Vs zerg, they're a joke because of how fast zerg units move on creep and how effective queens/spines/roaches are vs zealots. The best fix IMO for the zealot is not speed (their slowness makes them unique). Not hp (units with too much hp are boring in RTS games because they reduce the importance of front-loaded damage/positioning). But attack...maybe slight...at just one more point of damage...but I think it could be enough. Then to balance against late game chargelots (which are OP), the base movement speed bonus should be removed and the charge cool-down perhaps doubled (making this more of a strategic/manual ability). This will help so terran...so in turn, slow has to (and should) be removed from the game (if not the marauder itself which overlaps too much with factory tech).
You can't discuss protoss changes too much without discussing core zerg concepts. Zerg play as is now, is broken vs protoss. It is not right that zerg can/should/do getaway with three fast bases so fast in the game. This puts protoss position to do all-or-nothing timing attacks...our alternatives are to be overrun by a superior economy. Zerg needs to be designed so you should be harvesting more gas before you get your third. You should be building more macro-hatches and less expansion hatches. You should as zerg actually have to build static defense vs protoss/terran. To that end, I would love to see the speed of inject larvae nerfed, creep movement speed bonus nerfed, while macro-hatch build times (on creep) buffed. Perhaps even a special type of static defense structure that is very gas dependent (like high templar) to encourage zerg to mine gas earlier and more often).
|
Well if it makes anyone feel better i just did a race distribution search on sc2 ranks and zerg's in GM have a big 38% (436) to be exact, while toss has a 33.8% (388) and terran's in last place with a measly 26.7% (306). The point of this is that there's more zerg's and toss at a steady 35% overall from bronze to GM and Terran holding out at 25% overall. So if blizzard wants to balance something they need to balance that more than anything. That's just down right sad  .
|
4713 Posts
On October 21 2012 23:17 Fungal Growth wrote:Respectfully disagree with the original poster. First on protoss two base timing attacks being too powerful vs zerg...we don't have any other option. One base attacks don't work because queens and spines are too powerful and too easy to make. Macro games don't work because inject larvae and zerg creep scales exponentially. For all the talk of mothership countering zerg...in reality there are very few perfect archon toilets in actual late-game PvZ. Zerg definitely has the advantage vs late game protoss. On forcefield being too strong... The issue should never really be on strengths since that can be infinitely rebalanced by weakening/strengthening other units, but rather on how fun it is. Forcefield is fun and should stay. The problem with protoss two base timing attacks, is not forcefield (which is a little overrated as each sentry costs 100 gas which really hurts colossi/upgrades/air/twi-light tech). But rather the warp-gate mechanic and the colossi. Rally distance provides a significant advantage to the defender and when you remove that, you can win based on very slight unit advantages. I myself like the idea that warpgate be a 'local spell' only to start with, and then only becomes a 'remote' spell after a significant upgrade. Colossi are too one-dimensional. By being so fast and having such good range they can determine a battle from afar. They either dominate a battle without AA, or are dominated from AA. It's too simplistic and this unit should be removed from the game and replaced with a proper siege units that is not vulnerable to AA, but has a proper weakness and is very slow (like the reaver ). If colossi/WP were addressed, then protoss could be properly buffed. The stalkers should not be buffed...yes they are cost ineffective, but if buffed nobody would build any other unit and we would have stalker deathballs. The zealot is the main reason early games protoss has so many problems with zerg/terran. Vs terran they are kited by marine/marauder in perpetuity. The zealot is ultimately a hp tank for stalkers now, or a building destroyer. Vs zerg, they're a joke because of how fast zerg units move on creep and how effective queens/spines/roaches are vs zealots. The best fix IMO for the zealot is not speed (their slowness makes them unique). Not hp (units with too much hp are boring in RTS games because they reduce the importance of front-loaded damage/positioning). But attack...maybe slight...at just one more point of damage...but I think it could be enough. Then to balance against late game chargelots (which are OP), the base movement speed bonus should be removed and the charge cool-down perhaps doubled (making this more of a strategic/manual ability). This will help so terran...so in turn, slow has to (and should) be removed from the game (if not the marauder itself which overlaps too much with factory tech). You can't discuss protoss changes too much without discussing core zerg concepts. Zerg play as is now, is broken vs protoss. It is not right that zerg can/should/do getaway with three fast bases so fast in the game. This puts protoss position to do all-or-nothing timing attacks...our alternatives are to be overrun by a superior economy. Zerg needs to be designed so you should be harvesting more gas before you get your third. You should be building more macro-hatches and less expansion hatches. You should as zerg actually have to build static defense vs protoss/terran. To that end, I would love to see the speed of inject larvae nerfed, creep movement speed bonus nerfed, while macro-hatch build times (on creep) buffed. Perhaps even a special type of static defense structure that is very gas dependent (like high templar) to encourage zerg to mine gas earlier and more often).
Just because Protoss doesn't have anything other then 2 and 3 base (pre hive/pre BL) timings doesn't mean the race shouldn't be reworked, in fact that is the very reason why the race should be re-worked. Because it is forced into such a shitty and one dimensional role, and because games often wind up as 10-15 minute no attack macro fests.
I also disagree about sentries, FF is not fun at all, and it is fundamentally broken as a mechanic. It doesn't matter if its fun, its way too hard to balance and it is one of the main reasons why GW armies have been nerfed and pigeon holed into oblivion.
You say the mechanic is fun, well what is fun about a fire and forget spell? A spell that once cast your role in the fight ends. Fact of the matter is, FF can block off certain areas of the map for a brief period of time with just a few clicks and there is nothing you can do about it if you're on the opposing end.
FF limits micro, once cast there is very little you can do. And don't talk about pre-splitting, baiting and other stupidities like that. You can do pre-splitting, and baiting against storms as well, you can probably do it against blinding cloud, but you also have the added benefit of being able to split and move out of those even after they are cast. FF removes that possibility.
And too add insult to injury, FF limits the size and build of maps, maps need to have bases be slightly compact together with the 3rd not too far from the nat and main, otherwise Protoss becomes useless, they can't reliably take a 3rd if its not possible to forcefield and control the space. You also can't make the map too open, if the map is too open then it becomes open to abuse from zerg against all races, but especially against Protoss, who critically rely on FF for the majority of the early and mid game to survive, not even the feared Immortal, Sentry push would be of much use if the maps where so open that you didn't have a proper choke in which to cuddle and FF around.
Lastly you also can't have the map too full of chokes, otherwise zerg will whine and bitch till tomorrow because of FFs everywhere preventing them from doing anything (this is partially also due to the design of zerg, but it deserves a entire topic of its own).
FF is part of the reason why 2 base timings are so good. As others have so finely pointed out, notice how 90% of the timings use sentries, no sentries no timing. Also notice how, on certain maps in the past, if they where built in a certain way, either too closed or too open, protoss would either be too strong or too weak vs zerg on that map. Yes WG is a huge culprit here, but so is FF.
For the better of the game, this stupidity, this abomination of what you call a "fun spell" needs to be removed or re-worked into something else, preferably something that can encourage micro for both sides, before and after the spell is cast. And while we are at it, the WG could use a re-work as well, a hefty one at that.
My favorite idea would be to have standard GWs produce units at a faster rate, then WG, and WG produces units a bit slower and it also takes more time to warp in, proportional to how far the warping in happens from the WG. That way PvP gets a partial fix because they receive proper defenders advantage. Protoss get a new sort of macro mechanic to play with and raise their skill cap, to see how efficient they can be at judging the situation and changing GWs to WGs and vice verse. And lastly GW units can be buffed and become much more useful, you could have better posturing and pressuring by Toss, you could have small move outs of units, just like you see small 8 marine attacks from time to time, and all that without worry from the toss of losing his army.
However how to buff GW units, and possibly how to adjust zerg and terrans in response, how the new balance of power relationships will work merits a whole new thread with lots of feedback, brainstorming and testing of its own.
|
On October 22 2012 00:19 Destructicon wrote:
... If you remove forcefields...where does that leave charge-less zealots?
Plus without forcefields, how does protoss hold off 4gate? Roach/ling/baneling all ins? Three rax? We as protoss are toast without FF.
I'm not sold on two-base sentry timing attacks being the problem. I actually believe this might still be worked out in the metagame. For example, a number of times when protoss two-base/sentry attacks a zerg, the zerg is on three base, has built few military units, few if any spines, lots and lots of drones, built lots of overlords and invested in a lot of upgrades. That's not being honest....that's drone cheese and we as protoss have to have a way to punish this or zerg just dominate this matchup. If zergs build more macro-hatches, more spines, less upgrades and more military units they can fend off these attacks. Especially with spine placement guarding the chokes from forcefields (spines > sentries).
A sentry attack is really nothing without warp-in. Again, sentries are super expensive at 100 gas, so if you have a lot of them, then the rest of your army will be VERY weak. To overcome this and to make the timing attack work, protoss needs to be able to warp in reinforcements immediately.
An analogy to put warpgate in perspective. Imagine if two players spawn right next to each other but were separated by an impenetrable wall. One player had with an upgrade researched the ability to walk through this wall from their base, so the wall turned into a one-way gate. Problematic? Of Course...once the research could be done, the defender would constantly have to have the same # of defending units or more cost effective units to protect himself. That or the defender gambles that the opposition won't attack and plays for the late-game in which he knows his superiorly balanced units would prevail. Warpgate (at least remove warp-ins) are broken and are the reason protoss is so messed up. It's not forcefields. If warrpgate is removed or localized or made a late game upgrade...then protoss should NOT be buffed to compensate. Rather the other races (which were buffed indirectly to hold of warpgate attacks) should be properly nerfed.
|
4713 Posts
Don't fool yourself, FF is equally a culprit in all this problem as is WG.
And again it doesn't matter how shitty Toss would be right now if you removed FF, the spell needs to be removed, its just too limiting, not only in regards to gameplay, but also map making and even the design of other units. And as I said already, if you remove and you have to remove FF and nerf WG, you also need to re-work and maybe just flat out buff GW unit for them to be competitive.
I haven't touched on how exactly to re-work GW units yet, because I myself have no idea yet how it should be done properly, it will obviously cause ripples and have wide spread implications in all MUs and could change the entire dynamic of the race. But believe me, it has to be done at some point, protoss and all MUs involving it, + all the maps are way too limited by FFs, its already becoming more of a hindrance and annoyance then a cool fun thing.
Some ways to test how to rebalanced GW units in the absence of FF and WG would be to create a custom map and tweak some of their stats, make stalkers more cost effective, maybe make zealots more damage or more tanky, or give them a very short duration, low CD to make them more tanky but also more skill based.
There are ways to make it work, its just not immediately apparent right now and it requires some testing and brain storming.
|
Small buffs to zealot and stalker run afoul of the large early attacks, primarily the 4gate. Anything making up for units being able to kite away from a gateway ball (Roach/MM/Gateway) buffs a zealot/stalker 4gate on any fast expands. That's a pretty hard limiting case, and another design challenge beyond just changing FF for a slow, buffing zealot/stalker health/damage and calling it a day.
Secondly, PvP will have to change drastically. I don't mind the shape it is in right now, and where we saw blizzard taking it with the mothership core (defend a meaty expansion build). FF on ramps shapes every PvP opening. If you aren't the strongest build out of the gates, you get a sentry and gain security. If you are, you skip the sentry and gain pressure. There are tradeoffs in between. So what you're suggesting also involves a huge balance fight over the strength of aggressive openings in PvP.
Both can be balanced through, but it will take time. Quite a few weeks of beta try-and-fail if I would hazard a guess, just to get data on the emerging troubles.
|
4713 Posts
Yes, I am aware of this, when changing the design of the game it will inevitably affect balance, and doing such sweeping changes to WG mechanics and FF would affect the core of Toss and and any match-ups it is involved in.
However here are a couple of little bits of logic that I was able to deduct, that would possibly help regarding this issue.
If FF is removed and WG changed to be slower in general then GW and proportionally worst the longer the distance from WG to target warp location, then any attack would have a more limited window in which it could do damage, and this becomes applicable in all MUs.
This would be because of a couple of reasons. Firstly if you want to sustain an WG attack to the same level as in the past you would need more WGs, and this would be proportional to the distance you are attacking over, this would logically require a certain number invested into the infrastructure to make the attack successful, increasing the time until an attack can hit and also potentially making it easier to scout/giving you a bigger window of time to react to the attack.
Secondly, you could still chrono WGs for added benefits, but long term this wouldn't be sustainable, and it would sap your economy.
So, committing for too long to a WG attack would need to be better thought out because if it fails you risk falling behind on economy since you are pouring additional resources into an attack.
Now, lets get into the nitty gritty of the attacks themselves.
In PvP, I agree it would be the MU that would change the most, but it might be for the better.
The attacking player would always need to invest more resources into WGs then the defending player, so he would need to do damage to stay relevant. The defending player could use his terrain advantage + his additional resources and chrono for either better tech to hold the attack, (robo), or more GWs of his own, so that his localized closer and faster production from the GWs can hold off the attack.
I'm going to go a bit farther and theorize a bit on GW vs WG. Lets say both players have the same income and lets say the attacker has managed to setup his infrastructure to attack. To setup his attack using the new WGs it will take slightly longer due to more resources involved in building said infrastructure, that buys the defender some additional time. When the battle itself starts, the defender should have a smoother reinforcement stream.
His GWs are producing units/reinforcements at a faster smoother rate, they come out at small equal intervals, the attacker has WGs, they have longer production cycle and distance factor, while he might have the resources to warp in immediately, he might not be able to either because of the CD being longer. Or the longer CD makes it that instead of warping in 4 stalkers in say every 30 seconds, he needs to warp in 5 stalkers but only ever 40 or 45 seconds. Its those couple of seconds difference in reinforcement rates that should help the defender hold an attack.
In TvP, if FFs don't exist any more there is nothing to stop SCVs from repairing short of killing them, knowing this you could build supply depos between bunkers to create a wall (similar to how its done in TvZ), thus zealots can't get surface area on the bunkers, can't stop the SCVs from repairing, and it forces stalkers to move closer to the bunkers and risk taking damage/dying. Terrans should in theory be better of then zergs against new GW units from protoss, and conc shells instead of being a luxury used to punish toss for being on the map outside of a choke, could become a necessity for bio just so it can escape.
TvZ, this is where it could get a bit more complicated. Seeing as 4 gate might be more common, zergs will need to use their superior scouting from overlords to spot for signs of an incoming attack or just plain teching/eco play from the zerg.
If they spot the attack or signs of an attack they respond and prepare how they have since now, cut drone production and switch quickly into lings and roaches.
If however, the buffed GW units are too strong more drastic measures might be needed. One idea I've entertained would be to make Hydras hatch tech, make their speed upgrade lair take (along with range), and possibly move roaches to Lair.
The benefits of this would be Hydra's superior DPS and kiting abilities that allow them to hold some of the earlier pressures much easier. Speed upgrade for hydras at lair tech makes sense, because by that stage the big hitters like storm and colossus haven't come out to dominate the field and make them irrelevant. Slow hydra busts won't be a risk against protoss and terran, Toss should be able to hold because of defender's advantage + stronger GW units, while terran could hold using their sim cities, terrain, siege tanks etc.
I know it sounds good on paper, and I am fully aware that it actually needs a lot of back and forth testing and tweaking to numbers before we actually get it right, but the concept seems much, much better then the current WGs we have, or the scenarios FFs force out. I'm also aware that, the other suggestion I made, move Hydras to hatch and roach to Lair comes with its own set of consequences, but I'm too tired and its too late for me to explore those at this time, I might continue this discussion tomorrow.
However again, I believe removing FFs and tweaking WGs, while undoubtedly will change things up massively, I don't believe it will be as extreme as some people make it out to be, or that it would impact the MU's negatively, of course there will be consequences that need to be addressed, and re-balances that need to be made.
|
Gretorp your thoughts and others are right on and I hope that Blizzard picks up on this immediately. The power behind spellcasters has caused the current stagnation in the game. Keep up the good analysis and casting Gretorp!
|
Forcefields and warpgate just never felt right. Essentially you're giving Protoss the arbiter's recall and stasis block (both very late game abilties) right from the early game.
|
a good designed MsC that works well defensively is a nice stepping stone to remove the needed early game FF without buffing zealot and stalker (so chargelot/blinkstalker doesnt become OP). then give the sentry another guardian shield/shield battery/whatever non-micro-preventing midgame spell and there you go, FF is removed without having to change a lot.
then make warp-ins only available at WARP-prisms and not pylons and make warp-prism warp in range small enough so you cant warp in 20 zealots/stalker with one warp-prism but still big enough so you can harrass with it. make warpgate research have the effect that gateways produce faster (+ the old "make it into warpgates"). that way early game proxy gates etc. wont become OP but mid- and lategame gateways produce faster. defenders advantage finally available vs P (which includes a much better, less coinflippy PvP mirror MU).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
