|
On May 28 2013 04:08 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2013 02:22 sibs wrote:
I keep looking at win rates once every week or so, and what exactly happened to TvP? It looked like protoss got a hang of it finally by going really greedy builds, but that lasted about a week T is absolutely smashing protoss for the past 12~ days or so.
PvT 65–96 (40%) !!!
Where are you getting those stats from? Anyway, there's a limit to how greedy you can be with only 2 bases to work with, and the Terran will always take their third earlier. In practice, Terrans are often like ~40 supply ahead in the midgame, and most Protoss players aren't Parting and simply cannot win from there.
Most likely from: http://aligulac.com/results
|
Poland485 Posts
On May 28 2013 14:37 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2013 02:09 keglu wrote:On May 28 2013 02:03 Topdoller wrote:On May 28 2013 01:53 Bagi wrote:
Please point out games where they do this, and not just games where they do regular aggressive builds but outmultitask their opponent and get ahead in macro because of it.
Btw Innovation has a 30% winrate against protoss according to TLPD. Does anyone care if Innovation has a 30% winrate v Protoss?. Just because he is flavor of the month doesn't mean he is a god like player. Lets put it in perspective hes won nothing of note in SC1 or SC2 so far. Poster 2 post above you brought up Innovation ridicoulus winrate in TvP. Also innovation is most consistent player in Korea right now - 3 GSL in a row he is Top 8. Erm... Soulkey?
What about him?
|
On May 28 2013 23:57 keglu wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2013 14:37 Wingblade wrote:On May 28 2013 02:09 keglu wrote:On May 28 2013 02:03 Topdoller wrote:On May 28 2013 01:53 Bagi wrote:
Please point out games where they do this, and not just games where they do regular aggressive builds but outmultitask their opponent and get ahead in macro because of it.
Btw Innovation has a 30% winrate against protoss according to TLPD. Does anyone care if Innovation has a 30% winrate v Protoss?. Just because he is flavor of the month doesn't mean he is a god like player. Lets put it in perspective hes won nothing of note in SC1 or SC2 so far. Poster 2 post above you brought up Innovation ridicoulus winrate in TvP. Also innovation is most consistent player in Korea right now - 3 GSL in a row he is Top 8. Erm... Soulkey? What about him?
Hasn't Soulkey been as consistent as Innovation recently? Granted I still think Innovation wins the final but SK has been just as consistent recently.
|
Poland485 Posts
On May 29 2013 00:31 Wingblade wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2013 23:57 keglu wrote:On May 28 2013 14:37 Wingblade wrote:On May 28 2013 02:09 keglu wrote:On May 28 2013 02:03 Topdoller wrote:On May 28 2013 01:53 Bagi wrote:
Please point out games where they do this, and not just games where they do regular aggressive builds but outmultitask their opponent and get ahead in macro because of it.
Btw Innovation has a 30% winrate against protoss according to TLPD. Does anyone care if Innovation has a 30% winrate v Protoss?. Just because he is flavor of the month doesn't mean he is a god like player. Lets put it in perspective hes won nothing of note in SC1 or SC2 so far. Poster 2 post above you brought up Innovation ridicoulus winrate in TvP. Also innovation is most consistent player in Korea right now - 3 GSL in a row he is Top 8. Erm... Soulkey? What about him? Hasn't Soulkey been as consistent as Innovation recently? Granted I still think Innovation wins the final but SK has been just as consistent recently.
I checked and Soulkey was ro8 *2 and final now, Innovation ro8,ro4, final, so similiar in GSL. Innovation dominates hard in Proleague recently from what i know.
|
On May 28 2013 14:22 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2013 07:05 Fat_Elephant wrote:
What do you guys think about removing the Swarm Host upgrade of making the locusts last longer and making it intrinsically applied? Even if you ignore the gameplay implications of how powerful that makes the unit ... removing an upgrade is NEVER a good thing because it removes CHOICE from the player. That is why removing the Siege upgrade for Terrans was a bad thing ... even it it might have been necessary to make Blizzards stupidly aggressive balance work.
That would be true if you removed the upgrade and merged the cost of the upgrade in that of the tech itself. In case of a "mandatory" upgrade (I'm no pro, but I wouldn't use swarm hosts without the upgrade), if you remove the upgrade you still have the choice between teching to an unit or not doing so: diversity and strategic depth is not lost. What you actually do is increase the strength of opting for that choice and you increase the threat that the possibility of such choice places on the opponent.
In this specific case, I don't find it a good idea. While I find SH somewhat underwhelming in ZvT and ZvZ, I suspect that faster and more effective SH would probably be a little too much for ZvP.
|
only reason SH are good in zvp is because protosses are inexperienced against them. they actually aren't good without some kind of split map mass spine scenario in a very defensive position, which in turn allows protoss to freely take their half of the map, harass all over the place with speed prism and get their dream 200/200 army. then both players camp for 50 minutes because protoss can't attack into a static defense SH viper position and zerg can't fight without their position.
i think SH desperately need some kind of change to make them a viable aggressive option (imo zerg needs way more aggressive potential in general) if we don't want 50 min spine camp infestor BL style being the most efficient way to play all over again. because as we saw in WOL - even completely disregarding game balance aspects - that just results in BORING AS FUCK games.
|
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre.
|
On May 29 2013 12:38 larse wrote:
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre.
I agree with this.
A few problems I have identified are:
1. blink stalker works counter intuitive in the protoss deathball.
the power of blink stalkers come from the mobility and speed but the protoss deathball cannot afford the stalkers to be somewhere else.
I think out of all the sc2 tournament matches, only one toss has ever pulled his other units quite far back while using stalkers to snipe the ghosts that tries to emp/snipe the HTs.
2. Protoss drops only comes at late game.
The excess amount of minerals and the amazing scaling of upgrades for zealots makes protoss drop only available in late game where at least 3 bases are secured.
3-3 zealots drop/warp in must be one of the most annoying thing to deal with, the amount of attention required for the protoss to drop is much lesser than terran drop or zergling run by.
This is due to the chargelot not able to catch up with the scvs/drones without their charge. With their extremely high durability, having 8 chargelot can often bring down a zerg/terran tech structures with little attention.
Unlike terran which requires some micro with positioning and pick up, those chargelots are warped to do some damage and die.
the difference between chargelot and speedling run by is that speedling drops/runby can:
choose to chase scvs or not
split and burrow
their low health but high dps questions the player whether he has enough amount of bring down that tech structure before the enemy army kills them off.
3. Power of the ball
I really honestly think that the power of the deathball is why protoss is not entertaining to watch. Chargelot, HTs/DTs morph into archons, Stalkers and sentries are all very interesting units to each of their own. But in a deathball situation, these units (other than HTs) suddenly becomes merely meatshield and provide little extra DPS.
if we look at zerg or terran, every ling banelings muta are important for the engagement, just like terran where the marines marauders mines and medivac are all extremely important. There are no high priority units that either break or make the engagement.
In a way protoss deathball function is similar to that of a Terran mech army, where once you lose the army, it becomes hard to rebuild.
But the terran mech is only available in certain maps due to tanks function and to win with mech you need to be extremely careful with positioning with siegning and unsieging and is much more immobile and vulnerable to timings AND actually needs to respond to whatever toss/zerg is building because of the lack of anti air. For example in the MVP vs stephano game, MVP sac-ed all the tanks because stephano has muta and he has no anti air. It just doesn't happen to protoss army because it is so well rounded overall.
|
On May 29 2013 13:39 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 12:38 larse wrote:
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre. I agree with this. A few problems I have identified are: 1. blink stalker works counter intuitive in the protoss deathball. the power of blink stalkers come from the mobility and speed but the protoss deathball cannot afford the stalkers to be somewhere else. I think out of all the sc2 tournament matches, only one toss has ever pulled his other units quite far back while using stalkers to snipe the ghosts that tries to emp/snipe the HTs. 2. Protoss drops only comes at late game. The excess amount of minerals and the amazing scaling of upgrades for zealots makes protoss drop only available in late game where at least 3 bases are secured. 3-3 zealots drop/warp in must be one of the most annoying thing to deal with, the amount of attention required for the protoss to drop is much lesser than terran drop or zergling run by. This is due to the chargelot not able to catch up with the scvs/drones without their charge. With their extremely high durability, having 8 chargelot can often bring down a zerg/terran tech structures with little attention. Unlike terran which requires some micro with positioning and pick up, those chargelots are warped to do some damage and die. the difference between chargelot and speedling run by is that speedling drops/runby can: choose to chase scvs or not split and burrow their low health but high dps questions the player whether he has enough amount of bring down that tech structure before the enemy army kills them off. 3. Power of the ball I really honestly think that the power of the deathball is why protoss is not entertaining to watch. Chargelot, HTs/DTs morph into archons, Stalkers and sentries are all very interesting units to each of their own. But in a deathball situation, these units (other than HTs) suddenly becomes merely meatshield and provide little extra DPS. if we look at zerg or terran, every ling banelings muta are important for the engagement, just like terran where the marines marauders mines and medivac are all extremely important. There are no high priority units that either break or make the engagement. In a way protoss deathball function is similar to that of a Terran mech army, where once you lose the army, it becomes hard to rebuild. But the terran mech is only available in certain maps due to tanks function and to win with mech you need to be extremely careful with positioning with siegning and unsieging and is much more immobile and vulnerable to timings AND actually needs to respond to whatever toss/zerg is building because of the lack of anti air. For example in the MVP vs stephano game, MVP sac-ed all the tanks because stephano has muta and he has no anti air. It just doesn't happen to protoss army because it is so well rounded overall.
umm... Davie just posted a test on Warp prism STARTING OFF WITH THE UPGRADED SPEED
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/8920191947?page=1
Any thoughts, guys?
|
|
|
|
|
On May 29 2013 15:09 SsDrKosS wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 13:39 ETisME wrote:On May 29 2013 12:38 larse wrote:
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre. I agree with this. A few problems I have identified are: 1. blink stalker works counter intuitive in the protoss deathball. the power of blink stalkers come from the mobility and speed but the protoss deathball cannot afford the stalkers to be somewhere else. I think out of all the sc2 tournament matches, only one toss has ever pulled his other units quite far back while using stalkers to snipe the ghosts that tries to emp/snipe the HTs. 2. Protoss drops only comes at late game. The excess amount of minerals and the amazing scaling of upgrades for zealots makes protoss drop only available in late game where at least 3 bases are secured. 3-3 zealots drop/warp in must be one of the most annoying thing to deal with, the amount of attention required for the protoss to drop is much lesser than terran drop or zergling run by. This is due to the chargelot not able to catch up with the scvs/drones without their charge. With their extremely high durability, having 8 chargelot can often bring down a zerg/terran tech structures with little attention. Unlike terran which requires some micro with positioning and pick up, those chargelots are warped to do some damage and die. the difference between chargelot and speedling run by is that speedling drops/runby can: choose to chase scvs or not split and burrow their low health but high dps questions the player whether he has enough amount of bring down that tech structure before the enemy army kills them off. 3. Power of the ball I really honestly think that the power of the deathball is why protoss is not entertaining to watch. Chargelot, HTs/DTs morph into archons, Stalkers and sentries are all very interesting units to each of their own. But in a deathball situation, these units (other than HTs) suddenly becomes merely meatshield and provide little extra DPS. if we look at zerg or terran, every ling banelings muta are important for the engagement, just like terran where the marines marauders mines and medivac are all extremely important. There are no high priority units that either break or make the engagement. In a way protoss deathball function is similar to that of a Terran mech army, where once you lose the army, it becomes hard to rebuild. But the terran mech is only available in certain maps due to tanks function and to win with mech you need to be extremely careful with positioning with siegning and unsieging and is much more immobile and vulnerable to timings AND actually needs to respond to whatever toss/zerg is building because of the lack of anti air. For example in the MVP vs stephano game, MVP sac-ed all the tanks because stephano has muta and he has no anti air. It just doesn't happen to protoss army because it is so well rounded overall. umm... Davie just posted a test on Warp prism STARTING OFF WITH THE UPGRADED SPEED http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/8920191947?page=1Any thoughts, guys?
David Kim (and all the other lunatics at Blizzard) havent realized yet that "more more more" only makes the game "more and more and more unstable" for the non-professional players. Watching the game of Innovation vs. Soulkey from their recent Proleague encounter in the ace match really showed that the game is already at the limit of "what is watchable" with drops happening at several places constantly and an army approaching as well; the observer didnt know which fight to focus on and as a result jumped far too fast to "enjoy" any of it visually. Progamers and competitive players dont need to watch stuff - they just have to know what is happening - but spectators and casual players do need / want to watch.
Blizzard ... you are doing it WRONG! Speed is NOT the solution; it is the problem.
|
Austria24422 Posts
^ Completely disagree. You can't design a game around spectators.
|
|
|
The earlier buffs to protoss in WOL needs to be reverted, because with changes in the heart of the swarm they are no longer justified. The warp prism buff is only acceptable if there are offsetting forces elsewhere.
The +1 range on immortals was for dealing with the 1-1-1, which is now completely dead due to the mothership core. Keeping it around makes no sense as it only gives toss an more than fair advantage.
The cost reduction on toss upgrades really need to be reversed. Protoss can now play super super greedy thanks to the nexus cannon without fear of being allined. Good players now can get double upgrades off one gate after 14 nexus, while teching to colossus, without being heavily punished. If terran does the same thing off one rax, they will die to any two-base timing.
Observers are too cheap, and now since protoss do not need to invest in as much gas in stalkers to hold off cloaked banshee due to the nexus cannon, the cheaper observer is no longer justified. Cost need to returned back to what it was at WOL release
|
Austria24422 Posts
On May 29 2013 16:38 5unrise wrote:
The earlier buffs to protoss in WOL needs to be reverted, because with changes in the heart of the swarm they are no longer justified. The warp prism buff is only acceptable if there are offsetting forces elsewhere.
The +1 range on immortals was for dealing with the 1-1-1, which is now completely dead due to the mothership core. Keeping it around makes no sense as it only gives toss an more than fair advantage.
The cost reduction on toss upgrades really need to be reversed. Protoss can now play super super greedy thanks to the nexus cannon without fear of being allined. Good players now can get double upgrades off one gate after 14 nexus, while teching to colossus, without being heavily punished. If terran does the same thing off one rax, they will die to any two-base timing.
Observers are too cheap, and now since protoss do not need to invest in as much gas in stalkers to hold off cloaked banshee due to the nexus cannon, the cheaper observer is no longer justified. Cost need to returned back to what it was at WOL release
Like... literally everything in this post is wrong. Except that immortal range was buffed to deal with 1/1/1.
|
On May 29 2013 15:50 Rabiator wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 15:09 SsDrKosS wrote:On May 29 2013 13:39 ETisME wrote:On May 29 2013 12:38 larse wrote:
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre. I agree with this. A few problems I have identified are: 1. blink stalker works counter intuitive in the protoss deathball. the power of blink stalkers come from the mobility and speed but the protoss deathball cannot afford the stalkers to be somewhere else. I think out of all the sc2 tournament matches, only one toss has ever pulled his other units quite far back while using stalkers to snipe the ghosts that tries to emp/snipe the HTs. 2. Protoss drops only comes at late game. The excess amount of minerals and the amazing scaling of upgrades for zealots makes protoss drop only available in late game where at least 3 bases are secured. 3-3 zealots drop/warp in must be one of the most annoying thing to deal with, the amount of attention required for the protoss to drop is much lesser than terran drop or zergling run by. This is due to the chargelot not able to catch up with the scvs/drones without their charge. With their extremely high durability, having 8 chargelot can often bring down a zerg/terran tech structures with little attention. Unlike terran which requires some micro with positioning and pick up, those chargelots are warped to do some damage and die. the difference between chargelot and speedling run by is that speedling drops/runby can: choose to chase scvs or not split and burrow their low health but high dps questions the player whether he has enough amount of bring down that tech structure before the enemy army kills them off. 3. Power of the ball I really honestly think that the power of the deathball is why protoss is not entertaining to watch. Chargelot, HTs/DTs morph into archons, Stalkers and sentries are all very interesting units to each of their own. But in a deathball situation, these units (other than HTs) suddenly becomes merely meatshield and provide little extra DPS. if we look at zerg or terran, every ling banelings muta are important for the engagement, just like terran where the marines marauders mines and medivac are all extremely important. There are no high priority units that either break or make the engagement. In a way protoss deathball function is similar to that of a Terran mech army, where once you lose the army, it becomes hard to rebuild. But the terran mech is only available in certain maps due to tanks function and to win with mech you need to be extremely careful with positioning with siegning and unsieging and is much more immobile and vulnerable to timings AND actually needs to respond to whatever toss/zerg is building because of the lack of anti air. For example in the MVP vs stephano game, MVP sac-ed all the tanks because stephano has muta and he has no anti air. It just doesn't happen to protoss army because it is so well rounded overall. umm... Davie just posted a test on Warp prism STARTING OFF WITH THE UPGRADED SPEED http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/8920191947?page=1Any thoughts, guys? David Kim (and all the other lunatics at Blizzard) havent realized yet that "more more more" only makes the game "more and more and more unstable" for the non-professional players. Watching the game of Innovation vs. Soulkey from their recent Proleague encounter in the ace match really showed that the game is already at the limit of "what is watchable" with drops happening at several places constantly and an army approaching as well; the observer didnt know which fight to focus on and as a result jumped far too fast to "enjoy" any of it visually. Progamers and competitive players dont need to watch stuff - they just have to know what is happening - but spectators and casual players do need / want to watch. Blizzard ... you are doing it WRONG! Speed is NOT the solution; it is the problem.
Occasional "OMG this player is so fast that the observer can't catch all the drops." is fine and even entertaining.
Having such situation nearly every game is not.
It's OK for "unwatchable games" to happen between top players like Innovation vs Soulkey, but not between some mediocre guys in Code B or foreigner scene IMO. As for WP speed, until making multiple WPs become standard, I think it's not that hard for the observer to follow the game.
|
Austria24422 Posts
Also remember HerO's PvZ in WoL. It was the most amazing thing to watch BECAUSE you could hardly keep up with everything - sometimes not at all. It would be an incredible shame to remove the possibility for a player with such amazing multitasking to perform at their best.
|
On May 29 2013 16:43 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 16:38 5unrise wrote:
The earlier buffs to protoss in WOL needs to be reverted, because with changes in the heart of the swarm they are no longer justified. The warp prism buff is only acceptable if there are offsetting forces elsewhere.
The +1 range on immortals was for dealing with the 1-1-1, which is now completely dead due to the mothership core. Keeping it around makes no sense as it only gives toss an more than fair advantage.
The cost reduction on toss upgrades really need to be reversed. Protoss can now play super super greedy thanks to the nexus cannon without fear of being allined. Good players now can get double upgrades off one gate after 14 nexus, while teching to colossus, without being heavily punished. If terran does the same thing off one rax, they will die to any two-base timing.
Observers are too cheap, and now since protoss do not need to invest in as much gas in stalkers to hold off cloaked banshee due to the nexus cannon, the cheaper observer is no longer justified. Cost need to returned back to what it was at WOL release
Like... literally everything in this post is wrong. Except that immortal range was buffed to deal with 1/1/1.
Explain. I have gone some distance to say why i am right... now it's your turn.
|
On May 29 2013 16:19 DarkLordOlli wrote:
^ Completely disagree. You can't design a game around spectators.
That is exactly what Blizzard is trying to do. Spectators and progamers was the focus which David Kim recently admitted to have in SotG ...
+ Show Spoiler +It was already quite obvious from the get go with all the changes they introduced since the game is basically designed around MASSIVE ARMIES and those will overwhelm a casual player, so any opposing opinion of "a game is designed for fun" can only be wrong. The neat "if you dont get that super harrassment you lose" mechanics / units which were in the game from the start made it pretty much clear.
On May 29 2013 16:43 Orek wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2013 15:50 Rabiator wrote:On May 29 2013 15:09 SsDrKosS wrote:On May 29 2013 13:39 ETisME wrote:On May 29 2013 12:38 larse wrote:
The first reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is that they add two other very a-move units, immortal and colossus, to the already a-move protoss BW composition, which is zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon. Plus colossus can stand upon other units. This creates Protoss's 'panacea unit composition' with the most a-move units in the game: zealot, dragoon (stalker), archon, immortal, and colossus. So it's a 5 unit-type ground deathball. And the problems come from here. In BW, even though zealot, dragoon (stalker), and archon are kinda a-move as well. But the lack of immortal and colossus, plus the presence of shuttle and reaver, make protoss composition less a-move and more multitasking.
The second reason why Protoss is so boring to watch is the cliche, warpgate. In theory, it should create interesting plays and multitasking. But in practice and how the game turned out, warpgate gives too much incentives for all kinds of Protoss all-in plays. So we get a lot of 'kill your opponent in one big push or GG' type of play from Protoss. It's not back and forward, so it's boring. Another reason that warpgate doesn't produce interesting play in practice is that the nature of warpgate negates the existence of distance, which is one of the most important thing in a RTS game. The interaction effects and exchange of distance and time, distance and resources, plus different unit movement speed, etc are one of the reason that RTS is an interesting genre. I agree with this. A few problems I have identified are: 1. blink stalker works counter intuitive in the protoss deathball. the power of blink stalkers come from the mobility and speed but the protoss deathball cannot afford the stalkers to be somewhere else. I think out of all the sc2 tournament matches, only one toss has ever pulled his other units quite far back while using stalkers to snipe the ghosts that tries to emp/snipe the HTs. 2. Protoss drops only comes at late game. The excess amount of minerals and the amazing scaling of upgrades for zealots makes protoss drop only available in late game where at least 3 bases are secured. 3-3 zealots drop/warp in must be one of the most annoying thing to deal with, the amount of attention required for the protoss to drop is much lesser than terran drop or zergling run by. This is due to the chargelot not able to catch up with the scvs/drones without their charge. With their extremely high durability, having 8 chargelot can often bring down a zerg/terran tech structures with little attention. Unlike terran which requires some micro with positioning and pick up, those chargelots are warped to do some damage and die. the difference between chargelot and speedling run by is that speedling drops/runby can: choose to chase scvs or not split and burrow their low health but high dps questions the player whether he has enough amount of bring down that tech structure before the enemy army kills them off. 3. Power of the ball I really honestly think that the power of the deathball is why protoss is not entertaining to watch. Chargelot, HTs/DTs morph into archons, Stalkers and sentries are all very interesting units to each of their own. But in a deathball situation, these units (other than HTs) suddenly becomes merely meatshield and provide little extra DPS. if we look at zerg or terran, every ling banelings muta are important for the engagement, just like terran where the marines marauders mines and medivac are all extremely important. There are no high priority units that either break or make the engagement. In a way protoss deathball function is similar to that of a Terran mech army, where once you lose the army, it becomes hard to rebuild. But the terran mech is only available in certain maps due to tanks function and to win with mech you need to be extremely careful with positioning with siegning and unsieging and is much more immobile and vulnerable to timings AND actually needs to respond to whatever toss/zerg is building because of the lack of anti air. For example in the MVP vs stephano game, MVP sac-ed all the tanks because stephano has muta and he has no anti air. It just doesn't happen to protoss army because it is so well rounded overall. umm... Davie just posted a test on Warp prism STARTING OFF WITH THE UPGRADED SPEED http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/8920191947?page=1Any thoughts, guys? David Kim (and all the other lunatics at Blizzard) havent realized yet that "more more more" only makes the game "more and more and more unstable" for the non-professional players. Watching the game of Innovation vs. Soulkey from their recent Proleague encounter in the ace match really showed that the game is already at the limit of "what is watchable" with drops happening at several places constantly and an army approaching as well; the observer didnt know which fight to focus on and as a result jumped far too fast to "enjoy" any of it visually. Progamers and competitive players dont need to watch stuff - they just have to know what is happening - but spectators and casual players do need / want to watch. Blizzard ... you are doing it WRONG! Speed is NOT the solution; it is the problem. Occasional "OMG this player is so fast that the observer can't catch all the drops." is fine and even entertaining. Having such situation nearly every game is not. It's OK for "unwatchable games" to happen between top players like Innovation vs Soulkey, but not between some mediocre guys in Code B or foreigner scene IMO. As for WP speed, until making multiple WPs become standard, I think it's not that hard for the observer to follow the game.
The thing is that the top progamers are good enough to catch a Speed Medivac with Hellbats which switches between main and third, but a code B (or worse) player is less able to do that. So SPEED is the reason why it is harder to play and there will be a time when speed isnt manageable anymore. Introducing even more speed is bad ... really bad for the game at its "fun" and "lower" levels.
The only question is: Are we there now or not? Personally I think we are already wayyy too far beyond what is good for the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
