|
On May 09 2010 01:33 Liquid`NonY wrote:
The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. It shows up as a loss in my Match History but I don't have a loss on my ladder record. So maybe it just didn't record...? I don't know who my opponent was so I can't check his profile. If I try to load the score screen for the game, I get an error.
Mabye blizzard just killed the game or something. Can't se why score screen would give an error if the match played out
|
On May 09 2010 01:43 SLTorak.Hobo wrote:
He doesn't deserve to win yet the person with no units flying in a corner doesn't lose? I cannot honestly understand how people can justify flying off a building with the intention of AFKING till the other guy quits when you know you can't land and continue to play. I posted all I can in this thread I don't wanna reiterate myself every other post but basically it comes down to this. Say no to stalemates, be the better man if you are a terran who is floating to win..grow some balls and try to land and play the game as intended.
He doesn't deserve to win because he base traded a Terran and didn't account for the possibility of liftoff. I consider that poor play.
Just out of curiosity, how many of you guys are Zerg or Protoss players?
|
The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol.
Your game lasted nine hours!
Although it may not always be the best option, we need a restart mechanism in order to prevent this kind of thing from happening.
TheTuna,
For god's sake, if you're going to base trade a Terran, just hide a void ray or a mutalisk somewhere. There's no point rewarding sloppy play by cutting some slack for players who base trade a Terran and don't account for the fact that Terran buildings can lift off.
This is wrong because sometimes base-trading a Terran is all you can do.
In the game that we're all thinking of NonY didn't have any choice. His nexus was taken out by an early reaper harass and he didn't have the resources to build a new one, so all that was left to do was go all-in with his probes and stalkers.
|
On May 09 2010 01:09 The Hurricane Kid wrote:
How bout if we make terran buildings not count as a building when it is lifted up?
Being the newb I am, I really hope I wont accidentally press L after selecting CC at the start of the game 
if the terran only has a rax and no army or any way to get an army and the toss player has 5 zealots ofc he should win. That is kind of the hole point with the reveal mechanism, that players shouldn't be able to hide buildings just to draw out a match they can't win.
Just because the Terran has no way to win the game doesn't mean the Terran doesn't have any way to make it a draw. However, there is no draw option so there is stalemate. They aren't hiding the buildings, they are just keeping them out of reach. It's kinda different from hiding buildings, because as long as they are attackable, it is just delaying match they can't win BUT can lose.
I however do agree with NonY that "I float away and force a draw"-mechanic is very stupid, but currently game goal is clearly to destroy all buildings, floating or not.
If they change the game to force terran buildings to land eventually, Im happy with that, but currently, if neither of you can destroy the other's buildings, it's a draw. Or stalemate afk to the disconnect to be prescise, but still... If you cannot destroy opponents buildings, why should you win? Because you could win IF the opponent is a total retard(or like... has a soul and lets you win the game you would've won if it wasn't for what could be considered as a design flaw in the game)?
Hey, I should win my every game!
|
On May 09 2010 01:33 Liquid`NonY wrote:
The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. It shows up as a loss in my Match History but I don't have a loss on my ladder record. So maybe it just didn't record...? I don't know who my opponent was so I can't check his profile. If I try to load the score screen for the game, I get an error.
Nony vs. Nony's Pride
0 - 1
there's a loss on your record for you
|
On May 09 2010 01 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 09 2010 01 end_of_the_skype_highlighting:39 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:38 Vip3ra wrote:On May 09 2010 01:30 TheTuna wrote:On May 09 2010 01:27 Vip3ra wrote:On May 09 2010 01:12 arb wrote:
I dunno if its been mentioned yet but fuel is so stupid lets just imagine this scenario :
after both cheese , reaper zealot whatever terran loses everything but his rax or cc, toss has about 5 zealots and a pylon/gate left but no money or probes for a nexus.
obviously toss cant win and terran cant win, so adding fuel is gonna punish terran even though protoss has no way of killing him anyway.
how is that fair? if protoss cant kill terran because he lifted he obviously doesnt deserve the win in the first place if the terran only has a rax and no army or any way to get an army and the toss player has 5 zealots ofc he should win. That is kind of the hole point with the reveal mechanism, that players shouldn't be able to hide buildings just to draw out a match they can't win. But the point of the game is to destroy all enemy buildings, no? A draw is a draw. The issue is that there needs to be a mutual draw or restart mechanism so that situations like this can be ended quickly; I have no problem with drawing itself. Well terran is the only race that can force a draw this way, every other race will get its buildings reveled and any army the other person has will be able to end the game. And yes you could get the same situation with an island. But i bet 95% of all matches that end in a stall if because terren hides buildings in the air Yes, but this is the way the racial mechanic is supposed to work. Terran buildings burn to death at low health instead of healing like Protoss or Zerg structures, so they get the ability to fly. The issue is not the ability of Terrans to force a draw, but rather that there is no official draw mechanic in place. @Shikyo-This can easily be avoided, just don't base trade Terrans. Also, let's say Terrans and Protoss are both reduced to a single building in the red with no workers. The Terran player will lose, because his building will burn down. But wait, why should one race be able to win in a situation where another one can't?
Yeah, this can easily be avoided, just don't play vs Terran! That works too! Or, don't play SC2! That works as well! And also, don't turn your computer on! That way you can avoid it too!
You sometimes can't decide if you're going to base trade a terran.
About the chess argument, it might hold true for TvT, but as long as white and black pieces are the same, it really is a horrible argument in this context.
|
8751 Posts
On May 09 2010 01:39 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:38 Vip3ra wrote:On May 09 2010 01:30 TheTuna wrote:On May 09 2010 01:27 Vip3ra wrote:On May 09 2010 01:12 arb wrote:
I dunno if its been mentioned yet but fuel is so stupid lets just imagine this scenario :
after both cheese , reaper zealot whatever terran loses everything but his rax or cc, toss has about 5 zealots and a pylon/gate left but no money or probes for a nexus.
obviously toss cant win and terran cant win, so adding fuel is gonna punish terran even though protoss has no way of killing him anyway.
how is that fair? if protoss cant kill terran because he lifted he obviously doesnt deserve the win in the first place if the terran only has a rax and no army or any way to get an army and the toss player has 5 zealots ofc he should win. That is kind of the hole point with the reveal mechanism, that players shouldn't be able to hide buildings just to draw out a match they can't win. But the point of the game is to destroy all enemy buildings, no? A draw is a draw. The issue is that there needs to be a mutual draw or restart mechanism so that situations like this can be ended quickly; I have no problem with drawing itself. Well terran is the only race that can force a draw this way, every other race will get its buildings reveled and any army the other person has will be able to end the game. And yes you could get the same situation with an island. But i bet 95% of all matches that end in a stall if because terren hides buildings in the air Yes, but this is the way the racial mechanic is supposed to work. Terran buildings burn to death at low health instead of healing like Protoss or Zerg structures, so they get the ability to fly. The issue is not the ability of Terrans to force a draw, but rather that there is no official draw mechanic in place. @Shikyo-This can easily be avoided, just don't base trade Terrans.
Whether or not the Terran buildings' ability to fly should allow them to force games into a draw is up for debate here too. In the opinion of many people, it's a shitty side effect that ought to be removed.
|
8751 Posts
On May 09 2010 01:46 ilnp wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:33 Liquid`NonY wrote:
The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. It shows up as a loss in my Match History but I don't have a loss on my ladder record. So maybe it just didn't record...? I don't know who my opponent was so I can't check his profile. If I try to load the score screen for the game, I get an error. Nony vs. Nony's Pride 0 - 1 there's a loss on your record for you
Truth
|
On May 09 2010 01:34 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:33 floor exercise wrote:On May 09 2010 01:12 arb wrote:
I dunno if its been mentioned yet but fuel is so stupid lets just imagine this scenario :
after both cheese , reaper zealot whatever terran loses everything but his rax or cc, toss has about 5 zealots and a pylon/gate left but no money or probes for a nexus.
obviously toss cant win and terran cant win, so adding fuel is gonna punish terran even though protoss has no way of killing him anyway.
how is that fair? if protoss cant kill terran because he lifted he obviously doesnt deserve the win in the first place Oh how terribly unfair to add a system wherein the player who still has attacking forces will win the game But the issue is that he doesn't deserve to win, because he didn't make units capable of killing flying buildings. For god's sake, if you're going to base trade a Terran, just hide a void ray or a mutalisk somewhere. There's no point rewarding sloppy play by cutting some slack for players who base trade a Terran and don't account for the fact that Terran buildings can lift off.
You make it sound like it's always the protoss players idea to force a base trade. It's pretty presumptuous to assume that they simply elect to trade bases rather than be forced into it by either the opponents actions or just the result of the flow of the game (ie getting caught out of position and having no logical response but to counter)
What part of choosing terran comes with the privilege of being able to force stalemates so easily? I sincerely doubt we would find that in any notes or documents detailing the design of the terran race either in sc or sc2.
Why does terran deserve to not be held to the same standard as the other 2 races in the event of an elimination race or base trade? Why is it considered fair for the terran to initiate an attack that will likely result in base trading knowing that he has the advantage of just floating if it comes down to that.
Is it not a fair argument that it probably is not the other player that typically instigates these issues but the terran knowing he can just float? Forcing the terran to adhere to the same consequences as the other races would likely stop a lot of the situations where this happens in the first place.
Saying "just invest hundreds of minerals and gas into an air unit on the assumption that a terran will elect to backdoor you and destroy your base knowing he can just float his away" is not a reasonable excuse to allow it to happen in the first place.
I don't suggest that a player right now with just zealots "deserves" to win the game any more than the terran. Under the current rules a stalemate is just that
What I am saying is there are very reasonable ways to stop this situation from happening and for some reason you and the people arguing against it want to encourage it for some reason. Why? What is fun about stalemates? What is fair in one race being able to force them in so many situations? We have the opportunity to change it and you want to oppose that, I'm very curious why.
|
On May 09 2010 01:45 notuswind wrote:Show nested quote +The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. Your game lasted nine hours! Although it may not always be the best option, we need a restart mechanism in order to prevent this kind of thing from happening. TheTuna, Show nested quote +For god's sake, if you're going to base trade a Terran, just hide a void ray or a mutalisk somewhere. There's no point rewarding sloppy play by cutting some slack for players who base trade a Terran and don't account for the fact that Terran buildings can lift off. This is wrong because sometimes base-trading a Terran is all you can do. In the game that we're all thinking of NonY didn't have any choice. His nexus was taken out by an early reaper harass and he didn't have the resources to build a new one, so all that was left to do was go all-in with his probes and stalkers.
Yes, it sucks that he got caught in an unwinnable situation, but those happen sometimes. The other player was able to exploit his racial mechanic to win. Terran buildings burn down, while Zerg and Protoss buildings heal, so Terrans get liftoff. All of these are able to create unwinnable situations for another player.
And again, if a Terran initiates a base trade attack, a Protoss player can just chronoboost out a Void Ray or something and tuck it away to wipe out the floating Terran buildings. It's not that hard.
I would love to see a draw mechanic from Blizzard, but the Terran racial advantage of liftoff should not be neutered in this way.
|
On May 09 2010 01:43 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:43 SLTorak.Hobo wrote:
He doesn't deserve to win yet the person with no units flying in a corner doesn't lose? I cannot honestly understand how people can justify flying off a building with the intention of AFKING till the other guy quits when you know you can't land and continue to play. I posted all I can in this thread I don't wanna reiterate myself every other post but basically it comes down to this. Say no to stalemates, be the better man if you are a terran who is floating to win..grow some balls and try to land and play the game as intended. He doesn't deserve to win because he base traded a Terran and didn't account for the possibility of liftoff. I consider that poor play. Just out of curiosity, how many of you guys are Zerg or Protoss players?
I play zerg, I would assume you are terran? How can't you account for a terran lifting off? Thats silly. Obviously there is a chance he will it comes down to though who has the means to win if the game was played as intended. I am going to go with the assumption that Blizzard never intended lift off to be a mechanic for terran to use as a get out of jail free card for 9 hours. The fact is and it has been stated countless times for anyone who refuses to acknowledge it. IF the terran had landed his buildings and continued to play the game(As in try to win the game, not AFK he would of lost. That is an undeniable statement. Anyways, I am done clogging up this thread.
|
8751 Posts
On May 09 2010 01:49 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:45 notuswind wrote:The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. Your game lasted nine hours! Although it may not always be the best option, we need a restart mechanism in order to prevent this kind of thing from happening. TheTuna, For god's sake, if you're going to base trade a Terran, just hide a void ray or a mutalisk somewhere. There's no point rewarding sloppy play by cutting some slack for players who base trade a Terran and don't account for the fact that Terran buildings can lift off. This is wrong because sometimes base-trading a Terran is all you can do. In the game that we're all thinking of NonY didn't have any choice. His nexus was taken out by an early reaper harass and he didn't have the resources to build a new one, so all that was left to do was go all-in with his probes and stalkers. Yes, it sucks that he got caught in an unwinnable situation, but those happen sometimes. The other player was able to exploit his racial mechanic to win. Terran buildings burn down, while Zerg and Protoss buildings heal, so Terrans get liftoff. All of these are able to create unwinnable situations for another player. And again, if a Terran initiates a base trade attack, a Protoss player can just chronoboost out a Void Ray or something and tuck it away to wipe out the floating Terran buildings. It's not that hard. I would love to see a draw mechanic from Blizzard, but the Terran racial advantage of liftoff should not be neutered in this way.
You can still win games with Terran liftoff if you have somewhere safe to lift off to and build up. It's only lifting off to force a draw that is a problem.
|
On May 09 2010 01 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 09 2010 01 end_of_the_skype_highlighting:49 TheTuna wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:45 notuswind wrote:The replay just ends at 9:06:07 with his CC still floating in the corner. Nothing happens the whole time except my Stalkers patrol. Your game lasted nine hours! Although it may not always be the best option, we need a restart mechanism in order to prevent this kind of thing from happening. TheTuna, For god's sake, if you're going to base trade a Terran, just hide a void ray or a mutalisk somewhere. There's no point rewarding sloppy play by cutting some slack for players who base trade a Terran and don't account for the fact that Terran buildings can lift off. This is wrong because sometimes base-trading a Terran is all you can do. In the game that we're all thinking of NonY didn't have any choice. His nexus was taken out by an early reaper harass and he didn't have the resources to build a new one, so all that was left to do was go all-in with his probes and stalkers. Yes, it sucks that he got caught in an unwinnable situation, but those happen sometimes. The other player was able to exploit his racial mechanic to win. Terran buildings burn down, while Zerg and Protoss buildings heal, so Terrans get liftoff. All of these are able to create unwinnable situations for another player. And again, if a Terran initiates a base trade attack, a Protoss player can just chronoboost out a Void Ray or something and tuck it away to wipe out the floating Terran buildings. It's not that hard. I would love to see a draw mechanic from Blizzard, but the Terran racial advantage of liftoff should not be neutered in this way.
If the liftoff was a researchable skill, this might make sense. As is, there's no way to defeat a Terran until like 5 minutes in, and your strategy might not even involve void rays or anything.
Oh, and repair is the thing that makes up for building burning, not liftoff. Oh another thing, Terrans aren't ever going to have just ONE burning building while the Protoss has one building and no units. Terran would have lifted his stuff off ages ago and would be able to force at least a stalemate. That's a nice argument in a vacuum but in reality it never happens, unlike Terran building liftoff stalemates.
|
United States47024 Posts
On May 09 2010 01:48 floor exercise wrote:
You make it sound like it's always the protoss players idea to force a base trade. It's pretty presumptuous to assume that they simply elect to trade bases rather than be forced into it by either the opponents actions or just the result of the flow of the game (ie getting caught out of position and having no logical response but to counter)
What part of choosing terran comes with the privilege of being able to force stalemates so easily? I sincerely doubt we would find that in any notes or documents detailing the design of the terran race either in sc or sc2.
Why does terran deserve to not be held to the same standard as the other 2 races in the event of an elimination race or base trade? Why is it considered fair for the terran to initiate an attack that will likely result in base trading knowing that he has the advantage of just floating if it comes down to that.
For the same reason that Terran is allowed to keep up with an opponent in terms of army production despite being a base down in SC1. It's the asymmetry of the races that makes the game interesting. This complaint is like saying "Terran on equal bases as Protoss and Zerg will win, that's not fair!" Of course it isn't--but the game was balanced around the fact that Terran able to maintain base parity with Protoss or Zerg will be able to win the game. Protoss and Zerg sometimes will not be able to stop Terran from taking bases, just like they won't be able to stop base-trade situations. Does this mean that it's poor design for Terran? Hardly.
|
TheTuna,
Show nested quote +The Tuna,
...
This is wrong because sometimes base-trading a Terran is all you can do.
In the game that we're all thinking of NonY didn't have any choice. His nexus was taken out by an early reaper harass and he didn't have the resources to build a new one, so all that was left to do was go all-in with his probes and stalkers. Yes, it sucks that he got caught in an unwinnable situation, but those happen sometimes. The other player was able to exploit his racial mechanic to win. Terran buildings burn down, while Zerg and Protoss buildings heal, so Terrans get liftoff. All of these are able to create unwinnable situations for another player.
I was just pointing out that your "just don't base-trade with a Terran"-argument doesn't work because, sometimes, that's all you can do. It looks like you've conceded this point.
And again, if a Terran initiates a base trade attack, a Protoss player can just chronoboost out a Void Ray or something and tuck it away to wipe out the floating Terran buildings. It's not that hard.
Does it not occur to you that the Terran opponent may not always have the time and resources needed to get an air unit? This is not a real solution to the problem that we're discussing.
I would love to see a draw mechanic from Blizzard, but the Terran racial advantage of liftoff should not be neutered in this way.
This is a straw man because no one in this thread wants to neuter the Terran's ability to liftoff buildings. The only thing some people are considering is a possible [lengthy] time limit on how long Terran players can have their buildings in the air, is that so unreasonable?
|
I feel like its better to keep it as it is because the argument brings up too many questions that are only answerable using unanswerable questions like "what is fair?" or "who played better?". Its so much more concrete just to stay with the rule that winning means you killed all of your opponents buildings. We all know Terran can lift. A Terran victory through lifting could be orchestrated or it could be just dumb sleazy luck and manipulation of a gimmick. I have no problem saying i lost if i cant kill a floating building i knew my opponent was capable of lifting it off.
Instead of putting all your effort into trying to convince Blizzard liftoff is unfair maybe you should just put that effort into being vigilant about what your opponent is doing. If you hate losing to lift, then get good at avoiding the situations that lead to losing to it.
|
the game was definitely winnable for nony..if he just focused on draining down cc nrg rather than hunting scv's
|
Mellotron,
Instead of putting all your effort into trying to convince Blizzard liftoff is unfair maybe you should just put that effort into being vigilant about what your opponent is doing. If you hate losing to lift, then get good at avoiding the situations that lead to losing to it.
The same straw man, no one has a problem with Terran players being able to liftoff their buildings.
The issue that we're discussing is whether Terran players should be able to suspend their buildings in the air indefinitely in order to force a stalemate.
|
Mellotron again you can't account for every situation and say "Don't base trade, or make air units" Thats a garbage solution and answer. No one is debating whether its fair or not for a terran to lift off, the problem is when the Terran decides he wants to fly for the next 9 hours in a corner. No one can account for everything, there is a chance of it happening and you didn't lose, you were not out played simply put the Terran used a get out of jail free card and hid. Also I think a lot of Terrans are reading this and interpreting it as "OMG NERF LIFTOFFWTF" when in reality people just don't want that they just want to end stalemates. So no, its not better to keep 'as is', its obviously something that needs looked at when it can lead to a 9 hour mexican standoff. Also I will honestly say if I am in that sitaution I will not wait the 9 hours, I will leave and start a new game but that doesn't change the fact that this is something that needs to be addressed.
|
On May 09 2010 01:57 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2010 01:48 floor exercise wrote:
You make it sound like it's always the protoss players idea to force a base trade. It's pretty presumptuous to assume that they simply elect to trade bases rather than be forced into it by either the opponents actions or just the result of the flow of the game (ie getting caught out of position and having no logical response but to counter)
What part of choosing terran comes with the privilege of being able to force stalemates so easily? I sincerely doubt we would find that in any notes or documents detailing the design of the terran race either in sc or sc2.
Why does terran deserve to not be held to the same standard as the other 2 races in the event of an elimination race or base trade? Why is it considered fair for the terran to initiate an attack that will likely result in base trading knowing that he has the advantage of just floating if it comes down to that. For the same reason that Terran is allowed to keep up with an opponent in terms of army production despite being a base down in SC1. It's the asymmetry of the races that makes the game interesting. This complaint is like saying "Terran on equal bases as Protoss and Zerg will win, that's not fair!" Of course it isn't--but the game was balanced around the fact that Terran able to maintain base parity with Protoss or Zerg will be able to win the game. Protoss and Zerg sometimes will not be able to stop Terran from taking bases, just like they won't be able to stop base-trade situations. Does this mean that it's poor design for Terran? Hardly.
"It's the asymmetry of the races that makes the game interesting"
And pray tell, what part of stalemates is interesting?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
