|
On August 20 2013 07:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 07:53 Big J wrote:On August 20 2013 07:43 Plansix wrote:On August 20 2013 07:16 Grumbels wrote:
About that thread, I don't know why this 'redesign protoss' thing suddenly came up, I've seen lots of it the last few months on reddit. Is protoss in a particularly awful state at the moment that I don't know of? What has changed?
Reddit being reddit upvotes eye catching if bad suggestions that were taken from previous threads about the same topic, as if we need more evidence that one shouldn't do game design by community vote, so it's not really productive but still worth checking out for LaLush's contributions.
David Kim was on Climbing the Ladder the other day and did he give any indication whatsoever that they were going to replace warpgates, sentries and colossi with different mechanics? (hint: he didn't) At some point we have to give up complaining, it's one thing to do analysis/discussion of game mechanics, but quite another to try and create some sort of movement to get Blizzard to overhaul protoss design. Its been around forever, it will not die. Its is one of those endless discussion points that people bring up when they don't have much really to say. Its like saying "positional play" or "defenders advantage", which are just these vague overly broad comments people make about the game that don't really mean anything. Much like, "fix warpage", they will never go away as long at there are people complaining about SC2 rather than playing it. Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot "elegant solution" and "elegant design". Those come up a lot too in the land of balance buzzwords. dont forget "low skill cap", "antimicro spells", "free units", "macro boosts" I knew I missed some in there. You know what the best part is about the design arguments. When people complain about "anti micro spells" but then rant and rave about how good Dota 2 is. If you want to see a game that is filled with one way stuns, slows and other BS that takes one click, Dota 2 is your game. What a spell that damages people if they mirco their unit, play Dota 2, it has the ultimate anti micro spell.
But in MOBAland it's OK that you fight free units all the time and stun each other and have a low skill cap and that your units are a little clumsy and that there are fountain pulls and that the game completely snowballs if some carry gets fed like shit. And it's completely OK that the heros are asymetrically balanced. And why? Because in MOBAland the developers listen to the community and everything is always fine for as long as you have the feeling that some higher power is reading whatever crap you came up with today. Not to mention that in MOBAland you can finally behave like an animal and shit all over other people per microphon. Man, life in MOBAland is so much better.
|
On August 20 2013 08:19 Foxxan wrote:
so you guys are actually happy with protoss?
For the most part yes. I think it has a really fun mirror matchup, and both of the other matchups are pretty decent as well. There are a lot of pro Protosses who I think are amazing and fun as hell to watch. I'm nowhere near as good as they are, but I enjoy playing it as well.
|
what other race can you play where there's like 2-3 units and multiple openings you can do that makes the other play start wishing death upon your family and hoping that you come down with cancer?
DT rushing isn't even good in HOTS yet I do it still just for the lulz
|
United States15275 Posts
On August 20 2013 05:09 Big J wrote:
No, I don't think you try to make him sound inferior. But I don't get what part of that stuff is abusive. I mean, we can argue that mass Infestor play towards the end of WoL was abusive because everybody knew it was too strong.
But he was in no way "more abusive" than any of the other zergs in that regard. You say he was worse than Curious or Symbol when he put his mind to it which simply isn't true. Symbol and especially Curious did play those pure BL/Infestor + 50spine/spore games. Though I think neither of those 3 really did it vs Terran, those were basically always ZvP games. ZvTs would usually get more even the longer you waited with "the engagement".
Was he more abusive? No. Plenty of zergs only used BL/infestor at the end of WoL. But Leenock was smart enough to defy expectations and use strategies that punish terran opponents at the very weakest. And it was abusive precisely because without going for those extremely greedy openings, his opponents would fall drastically behind in the late game. They were stuck in a very bad guessing game.
On August 20 2013 05:09 Big J wrote:And well, basetrading with an army that is better at basetrading yet might lose the combat isn't "abuse", it's a completely normal strategy. Just like it is not an "abuse" if you don't attack into swarmhost/spine/spore/corruptor, but drop against it or engage it from an unprotected angle.
An "army". Made up of pure spellcasters. Yes, it is abusive to trade economies, mindlessly make one unit, and have that composition be better than almost every other terran composition in exchange. He used that strategy to beat bio armies, mech armies, armies with ghosts in them, air armies, and everything possibly in-between. He was defeating sky terran armies with mass infested terrans and fungals while killing off OCs with more ITs.
Leenock would do it against Terran, particularly on Cloud Kingdom where he would overproduce drones and spine up his fourth base while rushing to hive.
On August 20 2013 05:09 Big J wrote:It's funny that you think Mvp and MC were creative and TLO/Nestea were not and justify it with: Show nested quote +They were great at using very specific builds at a certain point within a series, but overall they weren't particularly wizards at adaptation or mindgames. Because that is exactly what Mvp and MC are known for.
Mvp and MC were innovative (not necessarily creative because many of their innovations were clearly inspired from their BW roots) because they single-handedly dictated the metagame of multiple matchups for the respective races. For almost a year and a half all Protoss builds and strategies were either variations or improvements of builds MC created and popularized. Mvp popularized hellion openings into fast third CC, bio-tank timings in TvP, and various other strategies; the only arguable comparison was the entire creative output of the SlayerS team and coach Ryu Won during their glory period. In contrast Nestea and TLO used creative builds in certain well-known games. Neither of them had the effect of changing entire matchups based on their individual gameplay. The closest Nestea got was introducing mutalisk openers in ZvZ, a strategy that he himself did not perfect.
On August 20 2013 05:09 Big J wrote:Partly true, partly not. There are players like Goody that are strategical geniusses, but then there are also players that just talk a lot of bullshit why you should do X or Y and it is so obvious that they are just doing a very situational thing and building on the fact that their opponent does not find out or reacts wrong.
I wouldn't claim Goody is a strategic genius. I was talking about players like MMA who were amazing at both choosing proper strategies in-game and planning them over a BoX series. There are several of them out there who go unnoticed because they're not winning tournaments.
On August 20 2013 07:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 07:53 Big J wrote:On August 20 2013 07:43 Plansix wrote:On August 20 2013 07:16 Grumbels wrote:
About that thread, I don't know why this 'redesign protoss' thing suddenly came up, I've seen lots of it the last few months on reddit. Is protoss in a particularly awful state at the moment that I don't know of? What has changed?
Reddit being reddit upvotes eye catching if bad suggestions that were taken from previous threads about the same topic, as if we need more evidence that one shouldn't do game design by community vote, so it's not really productive but still worth checking out for LaLush's contributions.
David Kim was on Climbing the Ladder the other day and did he give any indication whatsoever that they were going to replace warpgates, sentries and colossi with different mechanics? (hint: he didn't) At some point we have to give up complaining, it's one thing to do analysis/discussion of game mechanics, but quite another to try and create some sort of movement to get Blizzard to overhaul protoss design. Its been around forever, it will not die. Its is one of those endless discussion points that people bring up when they don't have much really to say. Its like saying "positional play" or "defenders advantage", which are just these vague overly broad comments people make about the game that don't really mean anything. Much like, "fix warpage", they will never go away as long at there are people complaining about SC2 rather than playing it. Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot "elegant solution" and "elegant design". Those come up a lot too in the land of balance buzzwords. dont forget "low skill cap", "antimicro spells", "free units", "macro boosts" I knew I missed some in there. You know what the best part is about the design arguments. When people complain about "anti micro spells" but then rant and rave about how good Dota 2 is. If you want to see a game that is filled with one way stuns, slows and other BS that takes one click, Dota 2 is your game. What a spell that damages people if they mirco their unit, play Dota 2, it has the ultimate anti micro spell.
It's fair to have anti-micro spells when everyone has an anti-micro spell. Also it takes a complete collapse of team communication to lose a DotA 2 game because of one spell. You can lose a SC2 game in one second because of FFs.
|
On August 20 2013 08:19 Foxxan wrote:
so you guys are actually happy with protoss?
On the whole, yes. Sure, it could be better (if there was a Starcraft Santa, I'd wish for a Stalker that scaled better), but it could also be worse - and, more importantly IMO, the game could be worse with excessive meddling.
More to the point, Protoss is my race. I've tried Terran and I've tried Zerg and they don't feel right to me. Marauders piss me off. I dislike the look and feel of Zerg. I think the sounds probes make are cool. Whatever happens, I'll always play Protoss.
|
On August 20 2013 07:59 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 07:53 Big J wrote:On August 20 2013 07:43 Plansix wrote:On August 20 2013 07:16 Grumbels wrote:
About that thread, I don't know why this 'redesign protoss' thing suddenly came up, I've seen lots of it the last few months on reddit. Is protoss in a particularly awful state at the moment that I don't know of? What has changed?
Reddit being reddit upvotes eye catching if bad suggestions that were taken from previous threads about the same topic, as if we need more evidence that one shouldn't do game design by community vote, so it's not really productive but still worth checking out for LaLush's contributions.
David Kim was on Climbing the Ladder the other day and did he give any indication whatsoever that they were going to replace warpgates, sentries and colossi with different mechanics? (hint: he didn't) At some point we have to give up complaining, it's one thing to do analysis/discussion of game mechanics, but quite another to try and create some sort of movement to get Blizzard to overhaul protoss design. Its been around forever, it will not die. Its is one of those endless discussion points that people bring up when they don't have much really to say. Its like saying "positional play" or "defenders advantage", which are just these vague overly broad comments people make about the game that don't really mean anything. Much like, "fix warpage", they will never go away as long at there are people complaining about SC2 rather than playing it. Edit: Oh yeah, I forgot "elegant solution" and "elegant design". Those come up a lot too in the land of balance buzzwords. dont forget "low skill cap", "antimicro spells", "free units", "macro boosts" I knew I missed some in there. You know what the best part is about the design arguments. When people complain about "anti micro spells" but then rant and rave about how good Dota 2 is. If you want to see a game that is filled with one way stuns, slows and other BS that takes one click, Dota 2 is your game. What a spell that damages people if they mirco their unit, play Dota 2, it has the ultimate anti micro spell.
It's fair to have anti-micro spells when everyone has an anti-micro spell. Also it takes a complete collapse of team communication to lose a DotA 2 game because of one spell. You can lose a SC2 game in one second because of FFs. [/QUOTE]
Yeah, but remember with forcefields, it goes both ways. I've lost far more games because I missed that one forcefield by a tiny bit (and the 24 lings that stream into my base are usually game ending) than I hit that one forcefield that won me the game. Since we are also discussing the WoL days. Fungal growth (in WoL) never went both ways. You had 20+ infestors, if you missed that one fungal, you cast another. If you missed that, you cast another, and eventually you do cast that game winning fungal that hit the 20 vikings or the 20 marines.
Despite how hip it is to hate forcefields, they do add to the skill in the game. You can bait them out, they are hard to land, and a lot of times it forces you to make smart decisions. Yes the game would be balanced differently, so this situation wouldn't be entirely the same, but what requires more skill in the game when you see the ramp into a protoss base, with no high ground vision. Without FF, you stim and run up and try to kill everything. If it looks bad, you retreat. But with FF, you stim a single marine up, you see if they have sentries and how many forcefields they have, you see if they have stalkers that can shoot down your medivacs (no stalkers, you go up and can hotpickup your army), or if you have enough supply that you can beat their army even if you are unable to kite back.
|
On August 20 2013 08:19 Foxxan wrote:
so you guys are actually happy with protoss?
Yes, I am fine. They could harass more, but beyond that I am good. The only part of design discussions I really enjoy is mocking design discussions and how they are just rehashes of the same discussion we had 2 years ago.
|
Maybe if protoss is slightly too strong, we can finally stop restricting mapmakers into making easily defensible thirds?
|
On August 20 2013 09:23 RifleCow wrote:
Maybe if protoss is slightly too strong, we can finally stop restricting mapmakers into making easily defensible thirds?
you mean thirds like on Star Station or Whirlwind or Neo Planet S?
|
On August 20 2013 09:23 RifleCow wrote:
Maybe if protoss is slightly too strong, we can finally stop restricting mapmakers into making easily defensible thirds?
That'll just encourage more 2-base all-ins...
|
For me personally, having to witness what Protoss was like back in BW and now in WoL/HOTS.. I dont quite like the design at this current present time from race/game design to art direction although I see there is alot of potential to make it back to its former glory.
Let me do a quick summary:
Race design:
Protoss in BW felt "powerful" as in they actually felt like an "old/ancient yet fading away" race with higher tech (Compared to Terran their technology felt it had more finesse) with devastating psychic alien abilities where a small group of units could really take on alot vs the enemy. PvZ in BW really highlighted this "theme". All their high tech units were fragile but devestating (reaver/HT-storms) and the backbone of their army ala gateway units (zealots/dragoons) were quite strong even if they were few in number.
SC2 on the other hand is completely the opposite. The back bone of a protoss army IS NOT the gateway units. Its the high tech units that form the core of their composition (the units that do the real damage). The warpgate mechanic makes protoss a race where you need to "overwhelm" the opponent with superior numbers in a given time, killing off the idea of an "old/ancient yet fading away" race and instead turning them into somewhat a zerg theme of "swarming" their opponents. Protoss units when in small groups are so weak that they need to stay in a deathball formation to really flex their muscle, again killing off the theme of the race set by its predecessor.
Game Design:
Warpgates vs gateways, warp mechanic, photon overcharge, over-reliance of FFs and far too many gimmicky units that cannot ever be your core composition or be actually useful in real engagements. These are just a few design issues I can see that could be fixed to make the race more appealing and fun.
Imagine if:
-Warp gates were nerfed in a sense that they had a much longer cool down or units from warp gates are more expensive or the warp in time is actually the unit build time (but the is exposed) in return for gateway units that dont get eaten alive by roaches.
-If gateway units become the backbone, FFs could be toned down somewhat to be a smaller radius and perhaps destroyable (high hitpoints of course) meaning that it gives players to actually answer back instead of dying because the ramp was blocked for 1 mins in game..
-Photon overcharge could very well be toned down instead of being range 13 so that early game options for other races can become viable again thanks to the improved gateway units.
-A re-worked colossus so that its not some high hitpoint A-move AOE unit (perfect for deathball compositions as it has no collison size!!!) but something thats high impact but fragile opens up lots of possibilities. Perhaps making it a ground unit so you dont literally force the enemy to get air AA units i.e. shutting down the protoss air tech transition completely even before it started could be a starting point..
These are just a few things they could very well have tried in HOTS. Yet they didn't and instead came up with a protoss queen, a protoss guardian that takes 4 supply while shooting unit both air/ground, a flying WoL reaper (say hello to two shot workers) and improving the A-moveness of units such as the voidray..
The race itself feels so damn fragile and gimmicky compared to its predecessor in early/mid game, while lategame they feel like some newly identified alien race that could instantly replenish its expendable ground troops resulting in a slow painful death to most T/Z players.
Art/3D Design:
I dont know if its just me, but why do protoss now all have pointy chins with the voice of a Tauren chieftain..??? Zealots with braided hair.. what? It wasn't a good decision to incorporate "American Indian" culture into the Protoss race because the protoss race is not a race with "nomadic" characteristics. I always find it hilarious to see Zeratul with hair and find it laugable how he suddenly becomes the Gandalf of the SC universe compared to the zeratul in BW.
Not only that but the attack animations are just appalling. Just go to youtube and compare the BW archons vs the SC2 ones and tell me which looks more pleasing to the eye? Imagine a scenario where the BW archon hits a clumped up muta ball and you know it will hurt. Immortals also could do away with firing dual photon projectiles instead of some invisible thing that you can barely make out..
They should have taken the theme of a protoss race merged with the dark templar theme because thats how the damn game ended in SC:BW. A shadowy race now with a new homeworld on shakuras instead of a proud supreme overlords of the stars that they once were..
Its quite sad actually that most people who put time and effort into design discussion really care for this game because there is potential to be better yet their voice isn't heard by the devs. Its rehashed all the time because the same issues/flaws are time and time again creeping up. HOTS was a chance to fix this and make the game much more enjoyable/dynamic and best of all be more than one dimensional.. for not just us but progamers.
The game simply is not that good or fun but the biggest problem is that there is no better alternative RTS for people like me (and i know theres ALOT of them out there) to jump to. It'd actually be nice if there was a game like that to really show how mess of a game SC2 is. A game developed by the same people saying "what chat channels?" back in 2010..
|
On August 20 2013 09:41 jkim91 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 09:23 RifleCow wrote:
Maybe if protoss is slightly too strong, we can finally stop restricting mapmakers into making easily defensible thirds? That'll just encourage more 2-base all-ins...
And then people will learn to defend them and take that 3rd. You can't learn to stop something if you build maps so you never have to play against it.
|
On August 20 2013 08:18 awesomoecalypse wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 08:02 aZealot wrote:
I'm ashamed to say this, but I like Starcraft 2. I know, I know, stone me now... I'm with you on that. I like playing it, I really like watching it. Since HotS fixed PvP, there actually aren't any matchups I hate. There are lot of players of all 3 races who I enjoy watching. The number of people who devote tons of timing to watching, playing and analyzing a game they apparently despise sort of baffles me.
That would be a case of the vocal minority and the silent majority. You would think that with tournaments like WCS EU (which pulled over 100k viewers in season 1), the vast majority of those 100k are actually watching because they enjoy the game. There are always people who make you feel like the scene is dying, the game is fundamentally flawed, and there is no enjoyment to be had.
|
@YyapSsap: I'm not exactly an expert on BW, but my understanding is Terran was the more "powerful" race than Protoss in BW. As in, Terran had a really strong deathball, and the Protoss had to be more mobile, take more bases, and "overwhelm" the Terran opponent. Protoss could also fall back on the superior late-game tech, but a lot of people think Protoss has a stronger late-game anyway (Terran has to stick on mass T1 w/ support while Protoss moves to higher tech). If anything, that's the relationship that's switched – in BW Terran had to defend and make a big mass of mech and then do a big push, while Protoss tried to move around the edges and flank and expand. In SC2, Terran has to be mobile and drop and expand, while Protoss makes a big ball and defends and then moves out in a death push.
As for the "backbone" stuff, zealot stalker is still the "backbone." Gateway units are beefy but don't trade that efficiently (just like BW TvP); higher tech is expensive and does good damage, but it's fragile (just like BW TvP). And Plansix should add "gimmicky units/spells" to his list of obnoxious and vague comments people always make about the game that are clearly not constructive or useful or even especially meaningful, but people still never stop talking about them.
|
On August 20 2013 10:01 YyapSsap wrote:
Its quite sad actually that most people who put time and effort into design discussion really care for this game because there is potential to be better yet their voice isn't heard by the devs.
The thing you don't realize is that "their voice" can't be heard. People complain about SC2 for reason x, y and z. If the devs were to pay attention to every single complaint by the community, their game would be reduced to next to nothing.
Quick example. You probably think your post summarizes quite well the problems that people have with the design of SC2. Well, it does, but it also doesn't. You're the first one I've seen complaining about protoss overwhelming his opponent, mainly because that claim is just wrong: you almost always have a supply deficit as protoss because you're teching for the more powerful, more alien-y technology. Moreso, it's been a while since I watched the Day9 BW casts, but I remember seeing a lot of games where the protoss had large supply advantage (especially in PvT I think), and it was just standard gameplay? I'm sorry if I'm wrong about this but I'm pretty sure I'm not.
I could do the same thing about the archon "engagement" issue that you mention. First time I see this mentioned, and first time I see anyone mention that something as marginal as this could ever matter.
That's why you have a problem. You're being outraged that devs don't "fix" things, but there is no actual consensus on what to fix. A ton of people tell you they enjoy protoss in SC2 right there on this thread, and I do too myself. Why shouldn't the devs hear us as well?
|
@YyapSsap, + Show Spoiler +On August 20 2013 10:01 YyapSsap wrote:
For me personally, having to witness what Protoss was like back in BW and now in WoL/HOTS.. I dont quite like the design at this current present time from race/game design to art direction although I see there is alot of potential to make it back to its former glory.
Let me do a quick summary:
Race design:
Protoss in BW felt "powerful" as in they actually felt like an "old/ancient yet fading away" race with higher tech (Compared to Terran their technology felt it had more finesse) with devastating psychic alien abilities where a small group of units could really take on alot vs the enemy. PvZ in BW really highlighted this "theme". All their high tech units were fragile but devestating (reaver/HT-storms) and the backbone of their army ala gateway units (zealots/dragoons) were quite strong even if they were few in number.
SC2 on the other hand is completely the opposite. The back bone of a protoss army IS NOT the gateway units. Its the high tech units that form the core of their composition (the units that do the real damage). The warpgate mechanic makes protoss a race where you need to "overwhelm" the opponent with superior numbers in a given time, killing off the idea of an "old/ancient yet fading away" race and instead turning them into somewhat a zerg theme of "swarming" their opponents. Protoss units when in small groups are so weak that they need to stay in a deathball formation to really flex their muscle, again killing off the theme of the race set by its predecessor.
Game Design:
Warpgates vs gateways, warp mechanic, photon overcharge, over-reliance of FFs and far too many gimmicky units that cannot ever be your core composition or be actually useful in real engagements. These are just a few design issues I can see that could be fixed to make the race more appealing and fun.
Imagine if:
-Warp gates were nerfed in a sense that they had a much longer cool down or units from warp gates are more expensive or the warp in time is actually the unit build time (but the is exposed) in return for gateway units that dont get eaten alive by roaches.
-If gateway units become the backbone, FFs could be toned down somewhat to be a smaller radius and perhaps destroyable (high hitpoints of course) meaning that it gives players to actually answer back instead of dying because the ramp was blocked for 1 mins in game..
-Photon overcharge could very well be toned down instead of being range 13 so that early game options for other races can become viable again thanks to the improved gateway units.
-A re-worked colossus so that its not some high hitpoint A-move AOE unit (perfect for deathball compositions as it has no collison size!!!) but something thats high impact but fragile opens up lots of possibilities. Perhaps making it a ground unit so you dont literally force the enemy to get air AA units i.e. shutting down the protoss air tech transition completely even before it started could be a starting point..
These are just a few things they could very well have tried in HOTS. Yet they didn't and instead came up with a protoss queen, a protoss guardian that takes 4 supply while shooting unit both air/ground, a flying WoL reaper (say hello to two shot workers) and improving the A-moveness of units such as the voidray..
The race itself feels so damn fragile and gimmicky compared to its predecessor in early/mid game, while lategame they feel like some newly identified alien race that could instantly replenish its expendable ground troops resulting in a slow painful death to most T/Z players.
Art/3D Design:
I dont know if its just me, but why do protoss now all have pointy chins with the voice of a Tauren chieftain..??? Zealots with braided hair.. what? It wasn't a good decision to incorporate "American Indian" culture into the Protoss race because the protoss race is not a race with "nomadic" characteristics. I always find it hilarious to see Zeratul with hair and find it laugable how he suddenly becomes the Gandalf of the SC universe compared to the zeratul in BW.
Not only that but the attack animations are just appalling. Just go to youtube and compare the BW archons vs the SC2 ones and tell me which looks more pleasing to the eye? Imagine a scenario where the BW archon hits a clumped up muta ball and you know it will hurt. Immortals also could do away with firing dual photon projectiles instead of some invisible thing that you can barely make out..
They should have taken the theme of a protoss race merged with the dark templar theme because thats how the damn game ended in SC:BW. A shadowy race now with a new homeworld on shakuras instead of a proud supreme overlords of the stars that they once were..
Its quite sad actually that most people who put time and effort into design discussion really care for this game because there is potential to be better yet their voice isn't heard by the devs. Its rehashed all the time because the same issues/flaws are time and time again creeping up. HOTS was a chance to fix this and make the game much more enjoyable/dynamic and best of all be more than one dimensional.. for not just us but progamers.
The game simply is not that good or fun but the biggest problem is that there is no better alternative RTS for people like me (and i know theres ALOT of them out there) to jump to. It'd actually be nice if there was a game like that to really show how mess of a game SC2 is. A game developed by the same people saying "what chat channels?" back in 2010..
- Zealots have 10 less shields although they attack every 1.2 game seconds, where the equivalent from BW in SC2 time is 1.25 (assuming the cooldown was 22.22222 frames instead of just 22, which would have made it 1.2375). DIfferences, but not great(large) ones
- Stalkers deal less than Dragoons vs "medium" and large/armoured units but fire 17.1875% faster than dragoons for -17.1875% more damage to small units
-21.875% LESS damage vs 'medium' (Banelings, Queens, Ghosts*) and
-17.96875% less damage vs armoured
-Ghosts used to be small and Hydras used to be medium so actually Ghosts take 171875% more damage per second and Hydralisks take 21.875% LESS damage per second
Alone, those two facts are not that strong, but then Roaches and Marauders with Concussive shells and stim get added into the equation and really make gateway units seem weaker.
It's not that gateway units are weak in SC2, it's that Roaches, Marauders and the decreased reliability of AoE things like storm and reavers/colossi against bio (durable 6 range marauders instead of having only marines) make them feel that way.
You want a better example of a nerf? Zerglings. Sure, we can make many of them more quickly but they were statisticaly neutered.
BW attack rate were cooldowns of 8 and 6 (with BW's +33% Adrenal Glands) frames, equivalent to 0.45 and 0.3375 game seconds in SC2.
SC2 attack rates for zerglings are 0.696 and 0.587 (only 18.569% faster with Adrenal Glands in SC2).
0.45÷0.696 = Unupgraded zerglings became only 64.655% as strong as they were, a ~35.345% drop, meaning you need 1.5466 as many for the same damage output.
0.3375÷0.587 = Upgraded zerglings became only 57.496% as strong as they were, a ~42.504% drop, meaning you need 1.7393% as many for the same damage output.
Meanwhile, for the same cost as BW Hydras, Roaches' hit points×damage output is 1.2234375-2.446875 times greater than that of the BW Hydralisks (depending on whether the hydralisks hit small, medium or large targets and whether there were any shields, which always took the vs large damage). They also got a +1 to armour!
They don't hit up and they have no range upgrade, but that is a big jump in efficiency in one unit (or the role) and a huge nerf to the other.
|
On August 20 2013 10:22 Entirety wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 08:18 awesomoecalypse wrote:On August 20 2013 08:02 aZealot wrote:
I'm ashamed to say this, but I like Starcraft 2. I know, I know, stone me now... I'm with you on that. I like playing it, I really like watching it. Since HotS fixed PvP, there actually aren't any matchups I hate. There are lot of players of all 3 races who I enjoy watching. The number of people who devote tons of timing to watching, playing and analyzing a game they apparently despise sort of baffles me. That would be a case of the vocal minority and the silent majority. You would think that with tournaments like WCS EU (which pulled over 100k viewers in season 1), the vast majority of those 100k are actually watching because they enjoy the game. There are always people who make you feel like the scene is dying, the game is fundamentally flawed, and there is no enjoyment to be had.
The scene has is somewhat dying incase you didn't know as LoL/Dota is literally taking over. Its also the case when you look at the real life crowds at the tournaments and see empty seats/barely filling up the stadium compared to what is was before in the days of BW. Its not an exaggeration because Ive witnessed it personally.
The game is fundamentally flawed hence why the term "one-dimensional" gets thrown around alot. Ive never seen KeSPA players complain about the game being boring, or that its just a job, or retiring because theres no fun in it unlike BW. It isn't a coincidence or some act of anti-blizzardism. It's the truth. Diablo 3 is a prime example of this and hence why its being re-vamped as we speak.. yet they won't do it with SC2.
Let me ask you. Do you think this game can be popular for 10+ years? BW was able to do it (still drawing huge numbers even after years) and even after the 1000th TvP/TvT/TvZ/PvZ witnessed on the screen, it NEVER got boring. That is the key difference.
|
On August 20 2013 10:25 ChristianS wrote:
@YyapSsap: I'm not exactly an expert on BW, but my understanding is Terran was the more "powerful" race than Protoss in BW. As in, Terran had a really strong deathball, and the Protoss had to be more mobile, take more bases, and "overwhelm" the Terran opponent. Protoss could also fall back on the superior late-game tech, but a lot of people think Protoss has a stronger late-game anyway (Terran has to stick on mass T1 w/ support while Protoss moves to higher tech). If anything, that's the relationship that's switched – in BW Terran had to defend and make a big mass of mech and then do a big push, while Protoss tried to move around the edges and flank and expand. In SC2, Terran has to be mobile and drop and expand, while Protoss makes a big ball and defends and then moves out in a death push.
As for the "backbone" stuff, zealot stalker is still the "backbone." Gateway units are beefy but don't trade that efficiently (just like BW TvP); higher tech is expensive and does good damage, but it's fragile (just like BW TvP). And Plansix should add "gimmicky units/spells" to his list of obnoxious and vague comments people always make about the game that are clearly not constructive or useful or even especially meaningful, but people still never stop talking about them.
With regards to TvP BW, both races actually have a very strong deathball although I don't like to use that term because good luck trying to clump your units up and see them die to storms/tank splash. On the T side you had T2 units ala all from the factory + T3 science vessels and the occasional cloaked wraiths or ghosts against carriers. Actually lets stop the whole tier talk because starcraft doesn't work like warcraft. Its quite silly. Protoss on the other hand, a good combination of zealot/dragoons along with arbiters/HTs with carriers tech switches. It really came down to how their were used/positioned because arguably both were pretty strong compositions.
Zealot/Stalker is just the MEAT of the composition. They aren't the ones dealing damage are they? Zealots are primarily there to tank damage, stalkers to take out vikings. In BW the zealots/dragoons were the primary damage dealers (Hence why storms come really really late into the game). Reavers are rarely used in the real engagements.
|
On August 20 2013 11:34 YyapSsap wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 10:22 Entirety wrote:On August 20 2013 08:18 awesomoecalypse wrote:On August 20 2013 08:02 aZealot wrote:
I'm ashamed to say this, but I like Starcraft 2. I know, I know, stone me now... I'm with you on that. I like playing it, I really like watching it. Since HotS fixed PvP, there actually aren't any matchups I hate. There are lot of players of all 3 races who I enjoy watching. The number of people who devote tons of timing to watching, playing and analyzing a game they apparently despise sort of baffles me. That would be a case of the vocal minority and the silent majority. You would think that with tournaments like WCS EU (which pulled over 100k viewers in season 1), the vast majority of those 100k are actually watching because they enjoy the game. There are always people who make you feel like the scene is dying, the game is fundamentally flawed, and there is no enjoyment to be had. The scene has is somewhat dying incase you didn't know as LoL/Dota is literally taking over. Its also the case when you look at the real life crowds at the tournaments and see empty seats/barely filling up the stadium compared to what is was before in the days of BW. Its not an exaggeration because Ive witnessed it personally. The game is fundamentally flawed hence why the term "one-dimensional" gets thrown around alot. Ive never seen KeSPA players complain about the game being boring, or that its just a job, or retiring because theres no fun in it unlike BW. It isn't a coincidence or some act of anti-blizzardism. It's the truth. Diablo 3 is a prime example of this and hence why its being re-vamped as we speak.. yet they won't do it with SC2. Let me ask you. Do you think this game can be popular for 10+ years? BW was able to do it (still drawing huge numbers even after years) and even after the 1000th TvP/TvT/TvZ/PvZ witnessed on the screen, it NEVER got boring. That is the key difference.
So what if LoL/Dota are taking over? What relevance has that to SC2? They are different genres of game. But, again, this is a discussion I don't want to get into, because I really do not see the point. (Largely, because I think you really don't have one). Some games have their time - maybe the time of RTS was with BW? And even then, these magnificent tournaments were in one country. Where was the international scene for this exciting game? And, even if the scene does die, so what? LoL/Dota will die too in their own time. So what? I've had a damned good run with SC2. Haven't you?
A lot of terms get thrown around a lot. "One dimensional" is one of them. That does not make it true. As to KESPA players which ones? The ones, maybe, who are not succeeding or not succeeding as much as they used to in BW? Has there been a poll that I've missed? Is Flash unhappy? He needs to harden up. Maybe he does not like not being God anymore? Maybe the drive to be at the top is missing from his SC2 play? If so, what is strange in that. Sports (indeed any area of human activity) is full of people who having once achieved something, lack the energy to repeat that same effort again.
Will this game be popular in ten years? I don't know and I don't care. (Neither is BW able to do it - what huge crowds and where?) More to the point, it does not matter. Believe me, lying on my deathbed I won't be thinking, "Fuck you Blizzard design team, you ruined my life!" People need to take a deep breath, step back, and get some perspective.
Enjoy the game for what it is. If it stops giving you any enjoyment, move on. There are more important things than Starcraft.
|
On August 20 2013 10:33 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2013 10:01 YyapSsap wrote:
Its quite sad actually that most people who put time and effort into design discussion really care for this game because there is potential to be better yet their voice isn't heard by the devs. The thing you don't realize is that "their voice" can't be heard. People complain about SC2 for reason x, y and z. If the devs were to pay attention to every single complaint by the community, their game would be reduced to next to nothing. Quick example. You probably think your post summarizes quite well the problems that people have with the design of SC2. Well, it does, but it also doesn't. You're the first one I've seen complaining about protoss overwhelming his opponent, mainly because that claim is just wrong: you almost always have a supply deficit as protoss because you're teching for the more powerful, more alien-y technology. Moreso, it's been a while since I watched the Day9 BW casts, but I remember seeing a lot of games where the protoss had large supply advantage (especially in PvT I think), and it was just standard gameplay? I'm sorry if I'm wrong about this but I'm pretty sure I'm not. I could do the same thing about the archon "engagement" issue that you mention. First time I see this mentioned, and first time I see anyone mention that something as marginal as this could ever matter. That's why you have a problem. You're being outraged that devs don't "fix" things, but there is no actual consensus on what to fix. A ton of people tell you they enjoy protoss in SC2 right there on this thread, and I do too myself. Why shouldn't the devs hear us as well?
4 gate all ins aren't overwhelming your opponent with shear warp ins? Blink stalkers? If you carefully observe those warp in based rushes, its basically getting as many warp-ins possible (building workers have stopped along time ago) and then simply overwhelming your opponents one bunker or a few spine crawlers etc. Its not strange to see 20+ stalkers in your base after failing to hold the blink rush.. since the numbers keep piling up.
Also tell me. Do you think the current archon is aesthetically pleasing compared to the BW archon?
Some of them aren't issues but potentials to make the game more fun and visually pleasing.
Its quite a strange concept to some but if corrupters had BW devourer like goo attack animation, there would be less complaints about that unit. Why? because the visuals compensate for the lack of interesting abilities as a unit hence why people complain less about vikings which essentially has the same role as corrupters.. they fire rockets to blast away their foes!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
