|
On May 08 2010 20:33 DarQraven wrote:
The Protoss, while not in a position of luxury, still has a means to meet the engame condition while the Terran does not.
Both players would want to kill each other but neither can. How hard is that to understand?
On May 08 2010 20:33 DarQraven wrote:
What's a Terran going to do with only a CC?
What is protoss going to do with only ground units and couple unpowered buildings? OBVIOUSLY NOTHING.
On May 08 2010 11:16 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Also, I know terran had a similar advantage in bw where if both players went all in proxies vs each other the terran is supposed to be ahead. There is no "advantage".
|
On May 08 2010 20:55 Piste wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 11:16 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Also, I know terran had a similar advantage in bw where if both players went all in proxies vs each other the terran is supposed to be ahead. There is no "advantage".
Of course there is.
If both players go allin on any map right now, and have armies of equal strengh, terran wins, because he can lift off and run his buildings away. Terran does not even need anti-air units to kill all the enemy buildings. And since killing the buildings is the game's goal, this is like allowing one team to move their basket in a game of basketball.
I am not saying that those mechanics need to be changed, but the current state is just stupid. At least if I have anti-air units, I want the map to allow me to shoot any floating buildings in all corners etc. And bring back island expansions like in SC1.
|
On May 08 2010 20:55 Piste wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 20:33 DarQraven wrote:
The Protoss, while not in a position of luxury, still has a means to meet the engame condition while the Terran does not. Both players would want to kill each other but neither can. How hard is that to understand? Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 20:33 DarQraven wrote:
What's a Terran going to do with only a CC? What is protoss going to do with only ground units and couple unpowered buildings? OBVIOUSLY NOTHING. Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 11:16 Pyrrhuloxia wrote:Also, I know terran had a similar advantage in bw where if both players went all in proxies vs each other the terran is supposed to be ahead. There is no "advantage".
You didn't understand. The Protoss only has no means to win as long as the Terran avoids playing to win. As soon as Terran starts 'playing by the rules', he loses. There is literally no way the Terran could win this game.
I don't mean that as "it's extremely unlikely" either, I mean it literally.
The Terran has no more ways of winning, only of avoiding conflict and stalling endgame condition.
It's basically abusing the second part of the endgame conditions, "be the last player in the game'. You're banking on the other player getting fed up and leaving.
|
On May 08 2010 10:23 cujo2k wrote:
yes terran should have fuel in their buildings. it's epicly retarded that they can float buildings and force a stalemate when they have no units
and a well - put shot can make-em explode, just like the death star in starwars
|
i got replay pack from artosis and in one of his games length was 9 hours long i was like wtfduge and found out that can happen artosis lost but killed all units that could build and nexus and left his buildings floating in corner of map for 9 hours! both must have gone to bed or somthing lol
|
i consider it BM, but if you play for a base trade then why haven't you planned ahead and hidden a probe with enough minerals to build a nexus?
|
On May 08 2010 11:13 fuzzehbunneh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 11:07 dinoman1989 wrote:
Why is a stalemate such a bad thing that it ought to be avoided? If a game reaches a point where neither play can possibly kill the other, then it was so equally played by both players that a stalemate and a DRAW really is the only equitable outcome. there's playing to a draw and theres lifting off your stuff once youre beat so you can hide in the corner
But if you don't have the capability to make air units to counter this then he obviously played to the draw, no?
As in, he wasn't beat, because you couldn't beat him.
|
On May 08 2010 21:33 hoovehand wrote:
i consider it BM, but if you play for a base trade then why haven't you planned ahead and hidden a probe with enough minerals to build a nexus?
Because you never play for a basetrade.
|
How about an additional condition for losing/winning the game.
You lose the game if you have:
- A command center, no army units, below 50 minerals and no workers left
Or
- Only buildings and cant create any new units
|
On May 08 2010 21:37 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 21:33 hoovehand wrote:
i consider it BM, but if you play for a base trade then why haven't you planned ahead and hidden a probe with enough minerals to build a nexus? Because you never play for a basetrade.
Then defend your base. Problem solved.
|
On May 08 2010 21:39 gillon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 21:37 Slunk wrote:On May 08 2010 21:33 hoovehand wrote:
i consider it BM, but if you play for a base trade then why haven't you planned ahead and hidden a probe with enough minerals to build a nexus? Because you never play for a basetrade. Then defend your base. Problem solved.
Oftentimes you plan early aggression because you just wanna expand. But when you arrive at your enemy's base you find yout that he is killing the rocks and going inside your base / dropping you with all he has. At this point you cannot win if you are zerg or protoss. The terran is going to kill all your buildings and float his away. The only chance is to remain in the game longer.
|
On May 08 2010 21:37 Koffiegast wrote:
How about an additional condition for losing/winning the game.
You lose the game if you have:
- A command center, no army units, below 50 minerals and no workers left
If this is an OC, you can still win if the map has island expos.
|
I think that this is a problem if they are just going to float them off the map to win an elimination game. I think that fuel is a good option because they need some way to limit the air time - I mean not too short because I think floating to your expansion is a good idea.
|
Nony failed to destroy the Terrans base so did not deserve to win.
The Terran has the opportunity to build back up (if he has 50 or more minerals) Nony does not. Why should the Terran lose? He is just being patient waiting for Nony's concentrating to lapse so he can land and rebuild!
I see nothing wrong with this.
And how about instead of QQing, remember to avoid base races with Terran.
|
On May 08 2010 13:09 Bob300 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 10:36 Sadist wrote:On May 08 2010 10:34 Zealot Lord wrote:
Hmm.. maybe have it so that if the Terran player does not have a single building landed/built on the ground within a certain duration of time it will be auto-loss? I would think its quite fair - and shouldn't be hard to implement either. the terran shouldnt lose. It should just be a draw. Really........ then when your about to lose liftoff and free draw... no lose. great idea 
If you're about to lose then the other person could just build air units to kill you. The situations people are describing are when they have no air units and no income to kill the floated buildings, hence they are unable to win just as the terran is, its a draw.
|
The problem is that there isn't a stalemate check. While flying a Terran building away is the most common form of stalemate, it isn't the only one (building stranded on island can happen to any race). The crux of this entire debate is that once a stalemate position has been reached, it boils down to who leaves the game first. Which I think we can all agree is stupid.
I support a simple stalemate check [roughly is it possible for at least one player to attack the other? No ==> stalemate]. Make it happen Blizzard.
|
Yeah, put it this way, if there's a Terran lifted with no army and a Protoss running around the map waiting for the Terran to float back in, if the power went out(!!!), they'd call the game in the Protoss' favour, no?
/agree
|
On May 08 2010 10:21 fatduck wrote:
Doesn't solve all stalemates, anyway - you could have one player with static d and the other with not enough units left to kill it, etc.
First post, been lurking for awhile but had to jump in on the ignorance in this thread...
Terran static defense cannot hit ground, so he takes off to where his turrets can protect him. this is not too far from forcing a stale mate by putting your nexus behind cannons the T cannot break or your hatch behind spine crawlers etc...
to take the flying buildings away is to give an advantage to the other two races in being able to "force" a stalemate while the terran is stuck on the ground behind turrets.
What if the terran had two marines and a barracks while protoss had a mined out nexus and two cannons?
Should the terran win?
|
One of the game tips on a loading screen says something like this:
You are victorious when the opponent has no buildings left or when you are the last player in the game.
I vote for removing the spaces around maps, otherwise deal with it. 
|
On May 08 2010 21:45 Slunk wrote:Show nested quote +On May 08 2010 21:37 Koffiegast wrote:
How about an additional condition for losing/winning the game.
You lose the game if you have:
- A command center, no army units, below 50 minerals and no workers left
If this is an OC, you can still win if the map has island expos.
Good point,
so lets stick to the idea of, you lose when you are:
Unable to kill the opponent in any way, while the opponent can. That is basically the case when you have buildings around the map floating with no possibility making anything, while your opponent has army units. Perhaps some additional conditions have to be implemented, but imo it can't be done otherwise and is fair.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
