|
Northern Ireland26411 Posts
Naruto laying it down! I hope this happens so I can do an epic cheerful or whatever they're called
|
Austria24422 Posts
On August 02 2013 20:35 NarutO wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 02 2013 20:20 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:15 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 20:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:51 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:44 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? You got the skeleton of it right, so that's better than I expected. But, honestly, do you want a medal for straw-maning my arguments instead of replying to the full post which I took the time to write out? Edit: you can actually read the core of my arguments in the OP of this thread. Might be useful. On August 02 2013 19:37 DarkLordOlli wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? As long as the game is still being figured out, that is the smart way to go about things, yes. So you both think this thread is unnecessary? How could you possibly think that after reading what we have written? Ok, is there something in your mind you'd want to change in SC2? Yes, I, like Scarlett and Major, think the msc will be next to be nerfed. But I'm not clever enough to think of a good nerf. There's the safety argument: nexus cannon shuts down all aggression from the moment the msc is out until the 9 minute mark. Then there's the mobility argument, it allows P to snipe zerg bases for free with recall (actually not that big of a problem). Third is the soul train argument (time warp), but it's not a common build either. So I'm guessing that if the Nexus cannon will get nerfed, it will likely be either range (but seige tanks and protecting vital buildings and mineral lines) or duration (60 seconds is forever in SC2 terms). I'd suspect it's more likely going to be duration to allow for more timings, but I don't know the implications because it's beyond me. As for range, from a T perspective it will either allow early tank pushes again or it will allow you to threaten the natural and try to run into the main, forcing an additional sentry from the P. Would blizz risk another era of 111 (is it even viable without the nexus cannon in the age of viable stargate play with oracles?) I honestly do not know. That's why I'm just waiting for someone smarter to start the discussion, and I'll wait until I know I can contribute something useful to it. Ok, now I see, we're talking about apples and oranges. You care about balance and you want it to be perfect. I want the game to be more diverse and more options existed (ofc, with balance in mind). But sadly, there is no Designated Design Discussion Thread. Therefore I post my suggestions here, which I think is acceptable, since it also affects balance. its better if we stop talking to each other. Please support my campaign for actual balance discussion then! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=423668Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:19 NarutO wrote:On August 02 2013 20:15 DarkLordOlli wrote:
I don't see why it should be nerfed. I personally find it to be in a close to perfect state right now. It rewards intelligent use, it promotes protoss aggression by helping defense at home and allowing you to recall, depending on how you want to use it, as well as give an extra bit of strength in engagements with timewarp.
Duration of Nexus cannon I could see but what would that change really? First thing that comes to mind is 1gate expands in PvP where you use photon overcharge to stall for time until your production kicks in. It was made to help Protoss in Protoss vs Zerg but as I'm no good on the field of PvZ, I will let others talk about it. In Protoss vs Terran it rewards and promotes insanely greedy play as in high rewards with little risk as it shuts down basically every early agression of paired with detection of any sort (cannons, robo, stargate oracle). This means Terran not only cannot apply pressure early, but the midgame timings Terran has don't work out as well because the greed paid of by then. In addition to that (and I think thats the bigger threat) it made blink allin insanely more powerful and severe to Terran as well as promotes early gate aggression due to giving vision to the wall making you lose your wall. You can see its power combined with a 10 gate in Bomber vs Rain on Whirlwind for example. I can agree with that. How would you go about changing it if you could? I'd also say that if protoss didn't have the core as it is now then terran would outgreed protoss heavily, like they did in beta and at the start of HotS before people figured out how to use their core. PvT was hell back then, terran would always have a faster third and delay yours for ages while your only advantage was heavy upgrades. On some maps it was downright impossible to take a third (Star Station, Whirlwind) at a reasonable time. Only smart players like Seed used their core well to defend drops, etc. and that's why they had good winrates. So the core is definitely needed and I personally don't see how you could change it in a way that couldn't be easily exploited, especially by terran. While Terran could agreed Protoss in WoL, I feel like Protoss got their fair share of being greedy themselves now. They actually can skip the amount of sentries that were needed to defend in WoL and the mothershipcore still stands strong, also they are allowed faster upgrade and/or tech if they so wish due to it. The problem I see is that right now, Terran cannot safely be greedy themselves. For Protoss there really are two options, be greedy from the start or scout and decide if you want to take your early game safety into midgame and punish a greedy Terran or if you want to play a lategame. There is no choice for Protoss to be greedy or not, because when not playing an allin, its always the best option as its safe. I don't like the take on the game that Terran can be GREEDY without punishment, but right now we are forced into a safemode (if we don't want to flip the coin) while still not being able to punish the greed of the significant other. Personally I would love if the MSC somehow didn't provide highground vision to other units and/or couldn't fly. I realize that this is a big nerf to it and I'm pretty okay with making up in another point for it. Buff its speed and/or range to cast photon overcharge or other spells. I really couldn't care less, what I am really worried is blink allin as this build usually puts you ahead, no matter the response of Terran (if played well) and oracle+MSC or early gate + MSc pressure. All of the problems really come from it granting vision and the timewarp. How to really nerf/buff? Not sure. I am totally fine with it being defensively amazing with photon overcharge and timewarp, no one forces me into the engagement, yet when he decides to be aggressive, I am FORCED to respond and for example blink allin, which is and was strong to begin with, gets completely frustrating when even the scv pull due to Timewarp is of no use (in addition to that, comes faster and without robo = more stalkers). The sentry already got a free hallucination so if you would need to start iwth that to blink allin, that would be great (just a suggestion ofcourse).
That's a lot to think about. Not granting vision for example would massively weaken any type of gateway based aggression without observer for example. Not flying could possibly make early scouting too difficult. I'm sure you know this but lots of protoss players were having trouble figuring out what terran was doing if they opened with a gas until they realized that they could use their core to scout. If you take that away then protoss has to get a super quick sentry or open 1 gate expand into robo or even 1gate robo expand against a gas terran. That could be exploited, etc. etc. You're not new to the game, you know where I'm going with this.
What's most interesting to me is that I agree with you that blink allins are really strong but it's been a long time since I've actually seen one in Korea while in WoL 3 gate observer was probably the most frequently used all in on some maps (CK, Antiga)
Also I really really wanna see that showmatch. I'd also cast it with Wombat. I'm sure he'd agree. We only need a stream.
|
On August 02 2013 20:48 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:35 NarutO wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On August 02 2013 20:20 DarkLordOlli wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:15 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 20:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:51 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:44 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? You got the skeleton of it right, so that's better than I expected. But, honestly, do you want a medal for straw-maning my arguments instead of replying to the full post which I took the time to write out? Edit: you can actually read the core of my arguments in the OP of this thread. Might be useful. On August 02 2013 19:37 DarkLordOlli wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? As long as the game is still being figured out, that is the smart way to go about things, yes. So you both think this thread is unnecessary? How could you possibly think that after reading what we have written? Ok, is there something in your mind you'd want to change in SC2? Yes, I, like Scarlett and Major, think the msc will be next to be nerfed. But I'm not clever enough to think of a good nerf. There's the safety argument: nexus cannon shuts down all aggression from the moment the msc is out until the 9 minute mark. Then there's the mobility argument, it allows P to snipe zerg bases for free with recall (actually not that big of a problem). Third is the soul train argument (time warp), but it's not a common build either. So I'm guessing that if the Nexus cannon will get nerfed, it will likely be either range (but seige tanks and protecting vital buildings and mineral lines) or duration (60 seconds is forever in SC2 terms). I'd suspect it's more likely going to be duration to allow for more timings, but I don't know the implications because it's beyond me. As for range, from a T perspective it will either allow early tank pushes again or it will allow you to threaten the natural and try to run into the main, forcing an additional sentry from the P. Would blizz risk another era of 111 (is it even viable without the nexus cannon in the age of viable stargate play with oracles?) I honestly do not know. That's why I'm just waiting for someone smarter to start the discussion, and I'll wait until I know I can contribute something useful to it. Ok, now I see, we're talking about apples and oranges. You care about balance and you want it to be perfect. I want the game to be more diverse and more options existed (ofc, with balance in mind). But sadly, there is no Designated Design Discussion Thread. Therefore I post my suggestions here, which I think is acceptable, since it also affects balance. its better if we stop talking to each other. Please support my campaign for actual balance discussion then! http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=423668Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:19 NarutO wrote:On August 02 2013 20:15 DarkLordOlli wrote:
I don't see why it should be nerfed. I personally find it to be in a close to perfect state right now. It rewards intelligent use, it promotes protoss aggression by helping defense at home and allowing you to recall, depending on how you want to use it, as well as give an extra bit of strength in engagements with timewarp.
Duration of Nexus cannon I could see but what would that change really? First thing that comes to mind is 1gate expands in PvP where you use photon overcharge to stall for time until your production kicks in. It was made to help Protoss in Protoss vs Zerg but as I'm no good on the field of PvZ, I will let others talk about it. In Protoss vs Terran it rewards and promotes insanely greedy play as in high rewards with little risk as it shuts down basically every early agression of paired with detection of any sort (cannons, robo, stargate oracle). This means Terran not only cannot apply pressure early, but the midgame timings Terran has don't work out as well because the greed paid of by then. In addition to that (and I think thats the bigger threat) it made blink allin insanely more powerful and severe to Terran as well as promotes early gate aggression due to giving vision to the wall making you lose your wall. You can see its power combined with a 10 gate in Bomber vs Rain on Whirlwind for example. I can agree with that. How would you go about changing it if you could? I'd also say that if protoss didn't have the core as it is now then terran would outgreed protoss heavily, like they did in beta and at the start of HotS before people figured out how to use their core. PvT was hell back then, terran would always have a faster third and delay yours for ages while your only advantage was heavy upgrades. On some maps it was downright impossible to take a third (Star Station, Whirlwind) at a reasonable time. Only smart players like Seed used their core well to defend drops, etc. and that's why they had good winrates. So the core is definitely needed and I personally don't see how you could change it in a way that couldn't be easily exploited, especially by terran. While Terran could agreed Protoss in WoL, I feel like Protoss got their fair share of being greedy themselves now. They actually can skip the amount of sentries that were needed to defend in WoL and the mothershipcore still stands strong, also they are allowed faster upgrade and/or tech if they so wish due to it. The problem I see is that right now, Terran cannot safely be greedy themselves. For Protoss there really are two options, be greedy from the start or scout and decide if you want to take your early game safety into midgame and punish a greedy Terran or if you want to play a lategame. There is no choice for Protoss to be greedy or not, because when not playing an allin, its always the best option as its safe. I don't like the take on the game that Terran can be GREEDY without punishment, but right now we are forced into a safemode (if we don't want to flip the coin) while still not being able to punish the greed of the significant other. Personally I would love if the MSC somehow didn't provide highground vision to other units and/or couldn't fly. I realize that this is a big nerf to it and I'm pretty okay with making up in another point for it. Buff its speed and/or range to cast photon overcharge or other spells. I really couldn't care less, what I am really worried is blink allin as this build usually puts you ahead, no matter the response of Terran (if played well) and oracle+MSC or early gate + MSc pressure. All of the problems really come from it granting vision and the timewarp. How to really nerf/buff? Not sure. I am totally fine with it being defensively amazing with photon overcharge and timewarp, no one forces me into the engagement, yet when he decides to be aggressive, I am FORCED to respond and for example blink allin, which is and was strong to begin with, gets completely frustrating when even the scv pull due to Timewarp is of no use (in addition to that, comes faster and without robo = more stalkers). The sentry already got a free hallucination so if you would need to start iwth that to blink allin, that would be great (just a suggestion ofcourse). That's a lot to think about. Not granting vision for example would massively weaken any type of gateway based aggression without observer for example. Not flying could possibly make early scouting too difficult. I'm sure you know this but lots of protoss players were having trouble figuring out what terran was doing if they opened with a gas until they realized that they could use their core to scout. If you take that away then protoss has to get a super quick sentry or open 1 gate expand into robo or even 1gate robo expand against a gas terran. That could be exploited, etc. etc. You're not new to the game, you know where I'm going with this. What's most interesting to me is that I agree with you that blink allins are really strong but it's been a long time since I've actually seen one in Korea while in WoL 3 gate observer was probably the most frequently used all in on some maps (CK, Antiga) Also I really really wanna see that showmatch. I'd also cast it with Wombat. I'm sure he'd agree. We only need a stream.
TY vs Protoss on Newkirk got raped by Blink with MSC. I understand the problems that evolve around a nerf, I am not saying my changes are ideal, just a few ideas on the fly. Thats Blizzards job to figure out :-)! I just feel the need to dumb down its aggressive potential so Terran at least can match greed if we scout it.
|
Northern Ireland26411 Posts
I'll go look on my hard drive later, I have a mammoth one about the MsC from beta, from my dark days of writing humongous walls of text.
|
I dunno..... I defended multiple MSC BLink stalkers all in VERY effectively with Mar marine and mine micro like really really good to the point that I'm using Mines as a reaction against any 4 gate or blink stalker or immortal push so far I have 100% success rate in defending lol I know that sounds crazy but man it works
|
On August 02 2013 21:01 Pirfiktshon wrote:
I dunno..... I defended multiple MSC BLink stalkers all in VERY effectively with Mar marine and mine micro like really really good to the point that I'm using Mines as a reaction against any 4 gate or blink stalker or immortal push so far I have 100% success rate in defending lol I know that sounds crazy but man it works
May I ask your level?
|
|
|
On August 02 2013 20:15 saddaromma wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:51 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:44 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:09 Ghanburighan wrote:
[quote]
And no-one in the world knows what to do in TvT after the banshee buff, as there are seemingly coin-flips galore there.
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? You got the skeleton of it right, so that's better than I expected. But, honestly, do you want a medal for straw-maning my arguments instead of replying to the full post which I took the time to write out? Edit: you can actually read the core of my arguments in the OP of this thread. Might be useful. On August 02 2013 19:37 DarkLordOlli wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:09 Ghanburighan wrote:
[quote]
And no-one in the world knows what to do in TvT after the banshee buff, as there are seemingly coin-flips galore there.
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? As long as the game is still being figured out, that is the smart way to go about things, yes. So you both think this thread is unnecessary? How could you possibly think that after reading what we have written? Ok, is there something in your mind you'd want to change in SC2? Yes, I, like Scarlett and Major, think the msc will be next to be nerfed. But I'm not clever enough to think of a good nerf. There's the safety argument: nexus cannon shuts down all aggression from the moment the msc is out until the 9 minute mark. Then there's the mobility argument, it allows P to snipe zerg bases for free with recall (actually not that big of a problem). Third is the soul train argument (time warp), but it's not a common build either. So I'm guessing that if the Nexus cannon will get nerfed, it will likely be either range (but seige tanks and protecting vital buildings and mineral lines) or duration (60 seconds is forever in SC2 terms). I'd suspect it's more likely going to be duration to allow for more timings, but I don't know the implications because it's beyond me. As for range, from a T perspective it will either allow early tank pushes again or it will allow you to threaten the natural and try to run into the main, forcing an additional sentry from the P. Would blizz risk another era of 111 (is it even viable without the nexus cannon in the age of viable stargate play with oracles?) I honestly do not know. That's why I'm just waiting for someone smarter to start the discussion, and I'll wait until I know I can contribute something useful to it. Ok, now I see, we're talking about apples and oranges. You care about balance and you want it to be perfect. I want the game to be more diverse and more options existed (ofc, with balance in mind). But sadly, there is no Designated Design Discussion Thread. Therefore I post my suggestions here, which I think is acceptable, since it also affects balance. its better if we stop talking to each other.
I agree, there should be a design thread (although there are problems with this idea, in that the fields overlap) and I would get behind such an idea.
|
I have an account on masters and I have an account on HIgh Diamond that I kinda screw around on with new stuff
|
On August 02 2013 21:19 Ghanburighan wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 20:15 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 20:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:51 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:44 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? You got the skeleton of it right, so that's better than I expected. But, honestly, do you want a medal for straw-maning my arguments instead of replying to the full post which I took the time to write out? Edit: you can actually read the core of my arguments in the OP of this thread. Might be useful. On August 02 2013 19:37 DarkLordOlli wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:20 saddaromma wrote:
[quote]
Oh fuck, look what they made of TvT, it used to be such a beautiful matchup with helbats dropping everywhere. Now its completely broken. Progamers are retiring, viewership is falling and players are not laddering anymore. Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? As long as the game is still being figured out, that is the smart way to go about things, yes. So you both think this thread is unnecessary? How could you possibly think that after reading what we have written? Ok, is there something in your mind you'd want to change in SC2? Yes, I, like Scarlett and Major, think the msc will be next to be nerfed. But I'm not clever enough to think of a good nerf. There's the safety argument: nexus cannon shuts down all aggression from the moment the msc is out until the 9 minute mark. Then there's the mobility argument, it allows P to snipe zerg bases for free with recall (actually not that big of a problem). Third is the soul train argument (time warp), but it's not a common build either. So I'm guessing that if the Nexus cannon will get nerfed, it will likely be either range (but seige tanks and protecting vital buildings and mineral lines) or duration (60 seconds is forever in SC2 terms). I'd suspect it's more likely going to be duration to allow for more timings, but I don't know the implications because it's beyond me. As for range, from a T perspective it will either allow early tank pushes again or it will allow you to threaten the natural and try to run into the main, forcing an additional sentry from the P. Would blizz risk another era of 111 (is it even viable without the nexus cannon in the age of viable stargate play with oracles?) I honestly do not know. That's why I'm just waiting for someone smarter to start the discussion, and I'll wait until I know I can contribute something useful to it. Ok, now I see, we're talking about apples and oranges. You care about balance and you want it to be perfect. I want the game to be more diverse and more options existed (ofc, with balance in mind). But sadly, there is no Designated Design Discussion Thread. Therefore I post my suggestions here, which I think is acceptable, since it also affects balance. its better if we stop talking to each other. I agree, there should be a design thread (although there are problems with this idea, in that the fields overlap) and I would get behind such an idea.
Well, balance is much more than just racial balance in my opinion. Like a different balance topic is whether ultralisks are overpowered vs marines and stuff like that. Or that the bunker upgrade is useless. Those are not really design questions, they focus on the powerlevel of such things and thus balance.
Design on the other hand is a much more vague concept. Like "should there be slow/root effects in the game". Not whether 30(+10vs armored) 4second dot+root is overpowered. Because balancewise this can be solved by making same spell not hit as much by making it a projectile and reducing the powerlevel slightly to 30flat damage.
(of course those topics overlap as well sometimes)
|
On August 02 2013 21:23 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2013 21:19 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 20:15 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 20:03 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:51 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:48 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:44 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:36 Ghanburighan wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:
[quote]
Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? You got the skeleton of it right, so that's better than I expected. But, honestly, do you want a medal for straw-maning my arguments instead of replying to the full post which I took the time to write out? Edit: you can actually read the core of my arguments in the OP of this thread. Might be useful. On August 02 2013 19:37 DarkLordOlli wrote:On August 02 2013 19:35 saddaromma wrote:On August 02 2013 19:23 Ghanburighan wrote:
[quote]
Well done, you couldn't say anything about the substantial arguments, so you cut out one sentence and take a swing at the MIRROR MU comment. Real good form. And for the record, hellbats needed to be nerfed but that doesn't mean it was done in the correct way. your substantial arguments: changing anything is bad because it can break the game and progamers will starve since they have no income. We shouldn't risk anything, leave the game as it is, and metagame will solve everything. Am I getting it right? As long as the game is still being figured out, that is the smart way to go about things, yes. So you both think this thread is unnecessary? How could you possibly think that after reading what we have written? Ok, is there something in your mind you'd want to change in SC2? Yes, I, like Scarlett and Major, think the msc will be next to be nerfed. But I'm not clever enough to think of a good nerf. There's the safety argument: nexus cannon shuts down all aggression from the moment the msc is out until the 9 minute mark. Then there's the mobility argument, it allows P to snipe zerg bases for free with recall (actually not that big of a problem). Third is the soul train argument (time warp), but it's not a common build either. So I'm guessing that if the Nexus cannon will get nerfed, it will likely be either range (but seige tanks and protecting vital buildings and mineral lines) or duration (60 seconds is forever in SC2 terms). I'd suspect it's more likely going to be duration to allow for more timings, but I don't know the implications because it's beyond me. As for range, from a T perspective it will either allow early tank pushes again or it will allow you to threaten the natural and try to run into the main, forcing an additional sentry from the P. Would blizz risk another era of 111 (is it even viable without the nexus cannon in the age of viable stargate play with oracles?) I honestly do not know. That's why I'm just waiting for someone smarter to start the discussion, and I'll wait until I know I can contribute something useful to it. Ok, now I see, we're talking about apples and oranges. You care about balance and you want it to be perfect. I want the game to be more diverse and more options existed (ofc, with balance in mind). But sadly, there is no Designated Design Discussion Thread. Therefore I post my suggestions here, which I think is acceptable, since it also affects balance. its better if we stop talking to each other. I agree, there should be a design thread (although there are problems with this idea, in that the fields overlap) and I would get behind such an idea. Well, balance is much more than just racial balance in my opinion. Like a different balance topic is whether ultralisks are overpowered vs marines and stuff like that. Or that the bunker upgrade is useless. Those are not really design questions, they focus on the powerlevel of such things and thus balance.
I completely agree, but there are also long posts that do not seem to touch on balance, or are orthogonal to it or ignore the current balance (Rabiator, I'm looking at you), which could have a home in TL.
|
I generally disliked the idea of air units being able to interact with ground units so early in the game, in a game ending manner too e.g. voidrays from early WoL days *shudders* as it brings the coin flippy nature where not enough AA = gg and enough AA but blindsided into a ground all in = gg. I mean comparing units from BW like the scout/wraiths all did pitiful damage where one skimming over to your mineral line wasn't exactly game ending. This also meant everything was always focused onto ground unit interaction til later mid/late game resulting in more early game stability.
Now with MsC.. it really restricts what T can do as you'll always need marines and perhaps mines (then you got the potential Oracles, voidrays etc). The thing has enough HP to scout for free, maybe kill a worker or two if not many marines are present while back home maybe a single sentry is guarding the P base? This along with the nexus cannon which stops any sort of early game aggression which is fair enough in terms of PvP but the developers forgot that in PvT, T requires to be aggressive to be on an even footing most of the time (with exception of SCV pulled all ins that are all too common these days). Not only that but MsC + old P all-ins are more devastating due to granting vision up cliffs + the time warps especially the blink stalker all in without the need of a Robo.
This is why I think Blizzard had it right with the earlier versions of MsC, something that travels along the nexuses. A defensive tool, instead of making it an offensive tool as well. I think it would of been more interesting as getting the MsC would allow Ps to macro safely but not allowing them to be aggressive at the same time. Instead of spells like time warp, it could act more like a shield battery with the nexii cannon. The recall ability would be something like taking units around the nexus that the MsC is floating above and takes them to another nexus, something to use when your base is about to get overrun or needs to be defended.
Need more diversity in PvT and something has to be done to the MsC which I think is the major reason why T openers or strats in general have become not even one but half dimensional.
|
And just going off tangent here with regards to protoss taking a third, to me every time I see PvZ or even PvT it feels like the protoss lacks a "proper" AOE unit since damage from gateway units are pitiful. By that I mean something that allows them to zone out or defend their base without having your entire army parked there spamming FFs or photon overcharge.
A unit something akin to a reaver (very slow/fragile but very impactful if used right) would I think personally make the game better as you cant really spam them in a death ball due to being fragile/very slow (making them alot vulnerable than the Colossus) BUT having one or two can really deter 12~15 roach pokes that if you dont have ALL your army there it could actually take out the base.
Which then again leads to the same old horse we all like to beat. This game needs more defensive "zone out" units and less "deathball" units that you just mass because it has literally no drawbacks not too e.g. Colossus..
|
DOn't get me wrong I'm not setting any standard here and I'm not that great of a player but I think this option definitely can be explored because it really hasn't.... especially because if they go the MSC they have no detection which delays their attack or they have to suicide into 4 mines by the time hits and you have bunkers up it weakens the attack so much because then afterward they have to wait for ob by that time you should be strong enough to take them
|
On August 02 2013 21:29 Pirfiktshon wrote:
DOn't get me wrong I'm not setting any standard here and I'm not that great of a player but I think this option definitely can be explored because it really hasn't.... especially because if they go the MSC they have no detection which delays their attack or they have to suicide into 4 mines by the time hits and you have bunkers up it weakens the attack so much because then afterward they have to wait for ob by that time you should be strong enough to take them
At high level Protoss can trigger the Mine with a Stalker, then use Blink to dodge the missile. This leaves you with a pure Marine defence against Stalkers, which is awful.
|
On August 02 2013 21:29 YyapSsap wrote:
And just going off tangent here with regards to protoss taking a third, to me every time I see PvZ or even PvT it feels like the protoss lacks a "proper" AOE unit since damage from gateway units are pitiful. By that I mean something that allows them to zone out or defend their base without having your entire army parked there spamming FFs or photon overcharge.
A unit something akin to a reaver (very slow/fragile but very impactful if used right) would I think personally make the game better as you cant really spam them in a death ball due to being fragile/very slow (making them alot vulnerable than the Colossus) BUT having one or two can really deter 12~15 roach pokes that if you dont have ALL your army there it could actually take out the base.
Which then again leads to the same old horse we all like to beat. This game needs more defensive "zone out" units and less "deathball" units that you just mass because it has literally no drawbacks not too e.g. Colossus..
yeah, though I believe the issue is less "colossus vs reaver". I think the problem is that either of those (and any Protoss) splash options is always a bigass tech unit.
There is no midgame tank, baneling, mine, Infestor, hellion, hellbat kind of tech which makes you save for little investment when not dealt with properly. It's always the T3 Colossus/Reaver which you have exactly 1,2,3 of. Those units are always hard to replace and to spread properly among your bases. Meanwhile with mines or banelings... you take a handful and that's the right amount, right?!
|
LOL! I go marauder and yea i've had that happen but I still come out on top I dont think you understand how this works though .... Think about it what is the first thing regardless of how good a protoss is regardless of what level they are go for in the initial attack of blink stalker..... They check front for a bunker then they use MSC to blink into main right? I bait this so hard as soon 4 mines waiting at the most opportune spot I plant my mines not at the edge because that will go off early and possibly lose a missile I keep them back a little so that when they do what's in their mine as "Dodging teh defense" they get Back handed with 4 missles cuts the stalkers down to less than half.... with the first attack being 7 MOST of the time LOL Instantly they are behind in everything and its pretty much a loss... they can't double blink is essentially what i'm saying you can't just plant them without thinking.... its not an EZ win its a well thoughtout plan that hasn't failed me yet.....
|
I think TheDwf knows very well how it works as well as I do and with a cc first you only have the option of bio and with a reaper build you will get a tank. If you try to keep your natural you will lose in any scenario. Also having 4 mines that early is unlikely.
I think you overestimate yourself by a huge margin
|
On August 02 2013 21:43 Pirfiktshon wrote:
LOL! I go marauder and yea i've had that happen but I still come out on top I dont think you understand how this works though .... Think about it what is the first thing regardless of how good a protoss is regardless of what level they are go for in the initial attack of blink stalker..... They check front for a bunker then they use MSC to blink into main right? I bait this so hard as soon 4 mines waiting at the most opportune spot I plant my mines not at the edge because that will go off early and possibly lose a missile I keep them back a little so that when they do what's in their mine as "Dodging teh defense" they get Back handed with 4 missles cuts the stalkers down to less than half.... with the first attack being 7 MOST of the time LOL Instantly they are behind in everything and its pretty much a loss... they can't double blink is essentially what i'm saying you can't just plant them without thinking.... its not an EZ win its a well thoughtout plan that hasn't failed me yet.....
Tell me more about this build allowing you to have Marines, Marauders and 4 Mines when they first Blink in your main at ~7'15...
|
I open with Marine / Hellion I don't always open FE I either do marine hellion drop FE according to what I see when i scout...and ofcourse map.... scout at 5 mins by then I already have my factory and a reactor up if i see some type of early aggression I go mines immediately with swapping rax and fact if blink stalker i go techlab immediately on my rax and bunk up I prioritize mines with marauder as secondary at first then I drop a CC and then drop another 2 rax when i can I find that this build is extremely safe against so many things... the only thing it is late on defending is ofcourse oracle.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
