|
On December 22 2013 22:16 Nebuchad wrote:
Why are you all so hellbent on changing protoss? Apart from the oracle, nothing in protoss is complained about by protoss players. If it doesn't feel nice to play against it as terran, why should we change protoss instead of terran? You have a race where it's admittedly impossible to make transitions, resulting in a lot of units hardly ever being produced, and you want to change the other? Things would be so much easier if terran wasn't the hero and protoss wasn't the villain.
There's a fuckton wrong with protoss is why people have been so hellbent on changing them since inception basically.
Warpgate, forcefield and msc enable someone to go from absolute defence to offence and vice versa at the drop of a hat, and even if protoss was hideously under powered, the satisfaction of playing against them is incredibly low.
Something people always bring up is the disparity in mechanical skill required between a protoss player and his z/t opponent. Something that's not brought up is the disparity in how much the protoss player has to pay attention to and his opponent. The next zvp/tvp series that features a protoss scout fiendishly around the map for a hidden building and then having the game decided almost on luck (whether he finds it, and then if he can react properly) every single game will be the first.
Oh well, that can be hidden behind "race design" or some other buzz word I suppose. It sure is fun scouting a pylon hidden behind some rocks, flying an overlord in and seeing 4 gasses taken then flipping a coin as to what the protoss is going to do.
|
The bottom line is that blizzard will not change forcefields and warpgates. Just throwing it out there.
|
Lol we're back to warpgate. Now I remember why I didn't want to check this thread anymore.
|
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it.
|
On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it.
Try playing Protoss and you will notice it is not just a-move no skill race. 
|
On December 22 2013 22:56 Nebuchad wrote:
Lol we're back to warpgate. Now I remember why I didn't want to check this thread anymore.
Yea, cuz some ppl still think they're right if they complain about things which are just necessary for a race... ^^
|
Please highlight were I said that.
For w/e its worth I played protoss for a good 7 months when I first got the game before changing.
|
I hope we will see some more balance changes before the new season starts. If the Oracle and placebo Tank change is all they are willing to do then the future doesn't look to good.
|
On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it.
People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works.
Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post.
|
David Kim and Blizzard should really TALK to Progamers like DeMu more often.
I really hope one day Terran will have a choice to use multiple builds instead of going MMM every game in TvP.
Like DeMu said, you CANNOT surprise a top level Protoss with a build.
|
On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post.
That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really?
It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works.
Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all.
The broodlord infestor era is a perfect thing to bring up actually. Immortal all in looked almost unbeatable, and so did late game zerg. Both strategies needed fixing, not so much as to achieve a perfect 50/50 balance ratio, but because both strategies were incredibly powerful compared to the amount of effort required. The balance ended up being ~46% for pvz, which is actually more balanced statistically then current tvp. Yet it's pretty clear the balance back then was horrendous.
|
On December 21 2013 18:22 VArsovskiSC wrote:IMO Terran is the problem.. Though it might feel - ahhh I like Terran, they are a fine race - yet - fail to perform with them  Well - that's because Terran IS NOT a well designed race.. It's a race in which transitions are nearly impossible to make.. Though there was the Broodwar case as well - dislike that TBH.. Though mech was a viable option as well - it was either one of the two.. NOW - perhaps Blizz could make Mech stronger and make things like making the Siege-Tank dps being "magic" instead of physical and therefore not activate the shield of the Immortal, or they could make that and make the immortal shield being 50% resistant to spells (would hardly affect the other matchups TBH, storm is rarely used in PvP), and make it like the Brood-war-esque scenario where EITHER bio or EITHER mech is strong again.. OR - they could make some of the mech units (for example the Widow-Mine) more versatile and not a specialized unit.. They could buff the thing in every which different way other than being a vs Zerg board-domination unit.. They could rather make it just as it is in total against the Zerg as well as the Protoss.. Could increase damage vs mech, i.e. - non-bio, or could even make the WM CD being shorter.. Like - options are VIABLE TO TEST/EXPERIMENT, but they did nothing.. Blizzard released the WM in it's primary retarded anti-Zerg form which is totally useless vs Protoss IMO.. Out of all the mech units TBH I feel like the only unit that doesn't do it's own job vs Protoss is the WM, hence noone produces them anymore.. If they could do at least a decent board-control vs the Aiur race - then mech, as well as BioMech, would be viable.. The reason I say this is that the problem with Terran is that except the Marines (Marauders, Medivacs, w/e/ - that's just a suplement to the Marines TBH) they have not a single versatile unit anymore.. All the other units (except the Banshee which becomes useless once the opponent has air units or air unit production capability) are designed to "help" marines instead of work on their own.. And THAT's a problem TBH As long as the other two production structures don't have "the marine" - i.e. - a versatile/easy to produce unit - Terran will be a race stuck on Marine tech all game long and things we observe will occur.. Terran will win very easily vs what Marines are strong, Terran will die to what Marines die to.. Simple as that - the whole race ATM is defined by the Marine as a unit, and that's really a bad design y know
There are tons of things that are viable in TvT (even too many actually), so you have to wonder why the options are so limited in TvZ and TvP. Why does mech struggle so much in TvZ and TvP? Is it because mech is weak per se, or because Zerg and Protoss have things that vastly overperform against it?
Mech does have flaws in the way it is built in SC2 (the developers didn't understand the Tank had to be the core unit; the piece of trash that is the Thor instead of some kind of Goliath, i. e. a more versatile unit indeed), but by softening two of the current hardcounters with two simple changes, you would already see much more mech in TvZ and TvP:
- Blinding Cloud reduces the range of units under its effect by 5.
- Rework Hardened Shields in the following way: it still reduces damage from 10 to 20 to 10 (unchanged), but attacks that deal more than 20 damage are halved instead (e. g. a Siege Tank would deal 25 damage to the shields instead of 10).
Regarding options, you have to consider how some Zerg/Protoss things restrict the Terran side. There were tons of agressive openings in WoL TvP, for instance; they still exist, but they now all lose to F-click. Thus the responsibility of Terran's lack of diversity lies at Protoss' door. There is a similar phenomenon with mech: some Zerg and Protoss things are simply way stronger than necessary against mech and thus force or strongly encourage bio play.
|
On December 22 2013 23:14 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post. That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really? It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works. Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all.
I wish you could see how hard I'm facepalming at your reaction right now.
Anyway if you don't want me to consider you dumb, don't tell me to try other races to see how hard mine is, especially not when I come in advocating terran buffs.
|
On December 22 2013 23:14 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post. That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really? It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works. Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all. The broodlord infestor era is a perfect thing to bring up actually. Immortal all in looked almost unbeatable, and so did late game zerg. Both strategies needed fixing, not so much as to achieve a perfect 50/50 balance ratio, but because both strategies were incredibly powerful compared to the amount of effort required. The balance ended up being ~46% for pvz, which is actually more balanced statistically then current tvp. Yet it's pretty clear the balance back then was horrendous.
The circle of TvP: Forum edition continues again
Everytime Terrans want to make some type of argument, we get called out for being stupid, biased, not a Korean Terran, not innovative, "it's actually 50% balanced", "terrans just want to stim a move and win everything" Where's the real argument? Can't even back up what they're saying with actual data.
|
On December 22 2013 21:35 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 11:54 Chaggi wrote:On December 22 2013 11:50 Sabu113 wrote:On December 22 2013 11:11 Chaggi wrote:On December 22 2013 11:00 Wombat_NI wrote:On December 22 2013 10:50 Chaggi wrote:On December 22 2013 07:48 TeeTS wrote:
Warpgate is a fundamental race feature of Protoss in SC2. If you remove that, you have to bring another unique feature to the race.
The problem in SC2 is, that in comparison to BW, only 2 of the 3races were given very powerful race features. Zerg got Larva injects, which make the production incredible efficiant and creep mechanic, which makes the army very efficiant if it fights onto it. Protoss got Chrono boost, which make them very strong in aquiring upgrades and producing special tech units and warpgate, which offers just an incredible tactical and strategical advantage.
Terran got..... the Mule. A race feature, that´s main purpose is evening out the economical advantages the race features of protoss and zerg offer. Mules are basically just making up for the enormous worker production, that you get out of chrono boost and larva inject. And that´s all we have.
So from a basical view at the core designs of each race, terran is at a big disadvantage from the start. So you have to make up for that somehow and that is the difficulty, that´s showing in the messy balance we had for most of the time in SC2. BW was much easier to design, because the races were much closer together in the strength of their core design features. Zerg hat no super cheap production, Protoss had no turbo upgrades and warpgates etc.. So the task there was just to make sure, that the unit mix of each race evens out in the end. In SC2, you have to correct the core mechanic imbalance between the 3 races through the stats of the units.
Zerg and Protoss are just too flexible in comparison to terran. Terran needs to react to the strategy of the opponent right the moment he decides to do it. You didn´t start marauder production early against a blink allin? you are dead. You didn´t start viking production, when the first colossus was out? You are dead. and so on. In WoL this was the same in TvZ, but in HotS we had with bio mine a very robust unit composition, that was able to fight on even footing against everything zerg could field. I don´t know yet, if this is still true after the nerf.
But they either need to nerf the flexibility of protoss and zerg or need to buff it on the terran side. And then nerfing overpowered terran features like stim or medivac boost becomes also possible. I think it's much less about nerfing Warp Gate but making Gateway more attractive to use. If you look at macro mechanics like Terran and Zerg have... Terran has to make the choice between reactor and tech lab. It might be mindless now, but a lot of early innovations and timings were due to this. The one that comes to mind is a TvP one where MKP (I think), used double reactors against a Protoss and hit with a ton of marines and it gave him a lot of wins cause Protoss would think a smaller, marauder heavy army, while he came at them with tons of marines. Zerg has to make the choice between larva and creep spread (though I think if it was a decision that made more of an impact, it'd be good - then again, I don't play Zerg so I'm not sure how big of a decision it really is) A lot of what I think is wrong with Protoss is how single minded it is. I can't think of really too many cases in terms of choices in the game that Protoss makes that's different from other Protoss. I'm not really too sure how to phrase this better, but I don't mean choices in defending, but more like what they do with their production structure/macro(?) If we had a Protoss race that had both Warp Gates and Gate Ways, it would mean that if they were near the Terran base, and wanted to attack, they could open the Gateways into Warp Gates and do a big doom warp after. But you'd have to time it correctly. That takes a lot of skill to do, especially in a big fight. If Gateways were viable and not just something to proxy 2 gate with, it could have faster production and would promote constant production among Protoss players. Having to choose between warp gate and gate way means different games, means Protoss can add their own flair to how MU's work. Yeah pretty much on the money, to me at least. I like the WG mechanic, just not as a core mechanic. It's cool and fits the high-tech alien aesthetic well. Ah well I don't believe it will ever be touched alas I really believe that even if it was overpowered, or underpowered for a bit, as long as there was some light at the end of the tunnel that made the game more fun/deep/whatever - I'd take it. Like to give an example: HoTS Beta when Warhounds came out, there were some really damn vocal Terrans that wanted the Warhound to be removed cause it was nothing even close to what made Terran an awesome race. Anyone with eyes wanted the warhound removed. but it was such an easy unit to a move and win with! isn't that how we always argue against the other race?! only wins matter! You make it sound dumb, but it's actually how most people work.
the point is to ignore those people, and focus on making the game fun, and fair. If that means messing up the balance in one way or another for a bit, I'd be all for it. Hell, LotV would be a great time for it cause balance shouldn't really be a concern at the start of a new expansion.
|
On December 22 2013 23:26 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 23:14 bo1b wrote:On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post. That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really? It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works. Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all. I wish you could see how hard I'm facepalming at your reaction right now. Anyway if you don't want me to consider you dumb, don't tell me to try other races to see how hard mine is, especially not when I come in advocating terran buffs.
Err... You are to one calling people dumb. It's clearly an evidence of your lack of argumentation skills.
|
On December 22 2013 23:26 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 23:14 bo1b wrote:On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post. That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really? It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works. Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all. I wish you could see how hard I'm facepalming at your reaction right now. Anyway if you don't want me to consider you dumb, don't tell me to try other races to see how hard mine is, especially not when I come in advocating terran buffs.
The entire point of me encouraging warp gate apologists to try another race wasn't to induce epiphanies on how much harder other races are, or why stutter stepping or w/e is impressive. It was to give another perspective on how game ruining the warp gate mechanic is, and to possibly experience losing a game instantly to a forcefield on a ramp and see how that too is (at least in my opinion) a silly game mechanic.
You completely missed the point and went off on a tangent about why people get angry in video games, so please, continue face palming.
What ever, take from it what you will I suppose.
|
On December 22 2013 22:16 Nebuchad wrote:
Why are you all so hellbent on changing protoss? Apart from the oracle, nothing in protoss is complained about by protoss players. If it doesn't feel nice to play against it as terran, why should we change protoss instead of terran? You have a race where it's admittedly impossible to make transitions, resulting in a lot of units hardly ever being produced, and you want to change the other? Things would be so much easier if terran wasn't the hero and protoss wasn't the villain.
Because Zerg players will tell you similar things about the MSC, or the excessive strength of scouted all-ins that can still prevail, or abilities like Time Warp and FF turning their units into crawling snails, etc. The issues that arose in HotS TvP come from the Protoss side (and mostly from the MSC).
Terran not being able to transition from bio to mech or the reverse is not a problem; the race simply does not function like this and that's it. Air transitions exist in TvT and TvZ, but not in TvP—again because it's the Protoss side, with Tempests/Templars, that makes them null. What necessity was there exactly that fully upgraded Tempests deal 95 (!) damage to massive Air from 15 (!) range, for instance? That's pure nonsense.
|
I honestly think if Mech becomes a viable alternative (to the point where its 50/50 with bio, usually depending on the map) it will solve a bunch of problems with terran.
The only thing about Protoss I believe to be too strong is the blink all in with timewarp/mc on certain maps.
|
On December 22 2013 23:37 bo1b wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2013 23:26 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 23:14 bo1b wrote:On December 22 2013 23:08 Nebuchad wrote:On December 22 2013 22:59 bo1b wrote:
Try playing another race for a couple of weeks and you'll probably see why so many people hate it. People hate stuff because people think they deserve to win every game. Just because protoss has the advantage in the current state, doesn't stop people from whining about mutas when Scarlett wins a game vs Naniwa, much like zergs would complain about immortal all-ins when zerg was crazy good in WoL. If you think it proves a point that people would get angry about losing when they switch races, you don't really have a grasp of how anger works. Anyway I'm kind of sad that this is the debate we're having out of my post. That's what you got out of my post? You think I'm writing the stuff I'm writing because I feel people think they should win every game? Really? It's amazing how superior you manage to come across after completely ignoring hundreds of topics, threads and discussions on how things like force field msc and wg ruin games, only to post that incredible speech about my grasp on how anger works. Heres a hint, it has nothing to do with people deserving to win games or not, and everything to do with games being unsatisfying regardless of the result. Playing tvz pre patch from both ends generally felt pretty satisfying, because both players had to put in a ton of micro and multi tasking. Playing zvp and losing to any one of the 2 base all ins almost never feels satisfying. If avillos style of mech was main stream I'd be on here whining about that too, because it has nothing to do with winning or losing and everything to do with how fun it is: not at all. I wish you could see how hard I'm facepalming at your reaction right now. Anyway if you don't want me to consider you dumb, don't tell me to try other races to see how hard mine is, especially not when I come in advocating terran buffs. The entire point of me encouraging warp gate apologists to try another race wasn't to induce epiphanies on how much harder other races are, or why stutter stepping or w/e is impressive. It was to give another perspective on how game ruining the warp gate mechanic is, and to possibly experience losing a game instantly to a forcefield on a ramp and see how that too is (at least in my opinion) a silly game mechanic. You completely missed the point and went off on a tangent about why people get angry in video games, so please, continue face palming. What ever, take from it what you will I suppose.
Complaining about warp-gate is pointless unless you are suggesting a viable alternative, that discussion has been had a billion times before.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
