|
On April 23 2014 08:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 07:54 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 23 2014 07:22 Hider wrote:Are you saying marines standing in place in the back of a mineral line takes more clicks than positioning zealots and pressing hold position? Eh, no you don't press hold position on Marines quite often (and then look away), because then your your opponent can just move his drone away. Yes, when there are no banelings, you can hold postioin behind mineral lines and be very cost effective vs speedlings, but at standard medivac timing, the zerg has banelings and you already need to micro against that unit away. The simple truth is that there is so much more stuff you can do with Marines. Like the opponents comes in with his blings. Then you focus fire as many banelings as possible as you can before they come close enough and you need to load them in. Or when he comes in with Mutas, you put the Marines into the dropship, then speed boost away to a new "ground-level" while clicking "d" on the dropship so your marines drops out while the dropships is flying away (so it doens't get killed by mutas). Meanwhile you take your dropped marines and fucs fire the Mutalisks that is trying to kill off your dropships. Basically, each time you do a Marine drop, it feels like the potential basicailly is unlimited. The same thing goes for early game Hellion/Reaper harass, or just army battles in general. The same concept doens't really apply for protoss (not too the same extent at least), which IMO makes it a less fun race. This. At its least skill intensive, a Marine drop will end with marines standing still, attacking one structure or a couple of workers, then lifting back up and hightailing out of there. And those drops do happen. But a hundred different scenarios could arise forcing the Terran to pay total attention to the drop and micro his heart out, whether it's looking for the best positioning against a ling surround, target firing a stream of incoming banelings, following Drones around the base, picking the marines back up because of incoming Mutas and then dropping them one by one to try to save the Medivac/kill some Mutas, controlling two drops at the exact same time... each situation calls for a completely different response which takes advantage of very different mechanical skills. And the decision how much attention to devote to this particular drop based on how the Zerg is responding is a crucial one. At its least skill intensive, a Zealot warp in is... the same as at its most skill intensive. You warp in a bunch of Zealots and 1a them into the Terran mineral line. You might right click on a bunch of workers. Not exactly the same level of involvement, is it? But the damage is often comparable. Not only that, the risk is much lower for the Protoss - he can only lose the Warp Prism on the way there, not the Zealots themselves unlike the Medivac which has to travel with its cargo, and he can have two drops' worth of units come from a single WP meaning he again loses one Prism instead of two. And while the drop is in progress, the Medivac is always in danger of getting sniped, unlike the WP which is free to go the moment the units are warped in. I watch a Terran drop and I think, 'the Terran player is in a position to impress me, what can he do here that will make this game memorable?' I watch a Protoss drop and I think 'OK. That happened.' The difference is if the Terran player isn't making the game memorable, that actually means he's losing. But that's the thing when I say potaytoes potahtoes. With a marine drop, a lot of the energy is used up in the final moments of the execution. Terran builds marines and medivacs as much as possible, the tech to get them is the tech they need to go after no matter the strategy. Tech wise, protoss has to commit to harassment. Without speed upgrade, scvs just walk away from zealots and you get 0-1 kills tops. Without dual tech of twilight+robo then you don't get prism. Without prism you have to make certain you have places to hide pylons which get sniped regularly. You need a constant probe out in the field not dying to place pylons throughout the game etc... There is a LOT that goes on in zealot harass. The zealots arriving in the base is just the last part of it. But no one is ever impressed by how tightly a protoss player can cut corners surviving with little to no units out. Unless your name is Rain or Parting no one cares about your observer placements, your constant map awareness. All they point to is "look at that marine kite" and they never find it impressive to see a Stalker kiting marines/slowlings. It just seems rather biased and dishonest for the most part.
Yes when you initially replied to me, my post was entirely based on whether mechanics/micro was involved in the protoss harass. You said all my points was wrong, but based on what you have just written your actually not disagreeing with me as the "diffuclt" stuff related to playing protoss is getting the build order correct = Not mechanics.
I would also be very careful about claiming other people are biased when you say a Marine drop is all about hold position behind mineral lines. To me, that's indicates more than anything that you lack experience playing terran at a decent level.
As for the other stuff, you're way overcomplicating it. I could also say that a Terran is committing heavily to drops unless he scans it first (270 minerals) or scouts it with Reapers/Hellions to make sure it's safe for a Medivac to fly in, because there's a good chance the Medivac will die, and unlike Protoss Terran actually need their dropships for engaging, which means he won't be able to push out and will have to play more passively in the future. But I didn't say any of this, because it's neither here nor there for determining whether doing econ damage with Terran takes more mechanical skill than doing econ damage with Protoss.
I would argue that one of the major differences between warp prism harass and Medivac Harass is that Medivac harass have the option of countermicro.
For instance if 10 Mutalisks faces a Warp Prism, there is no type of micro in the world which can save the Warp Prism, it is simply gonna die... always.
Now, however with 8 Marines in a Medivac, a great terran player, will be able to quickly identify the Mutalisks on the minimap, then speedboost a way while dropping Medivacs and then focus fire Mutalisks. Meanwhile, the zerg player can react to that by either sending Zerglings to assist the Mutalisks or manual pull away injured/targetted Mutalisks.
When that happens the Marines will automatically follow the Mutalisks which isn't good. A great terran player will quickly react to the micro of the zerg player and retarget fire (or amove) the Marines so they don't waste their time following the Mutalisks.
So just this simple drop adds a bunch of micro interactions to the game, which IMO makes it very enjoyable to play terran, and I think also enjoyable to play Z vs terran.
|
On April 23 2014 08:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 08:10 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 07:54 pure.Wasted wrote:On April 23 2014 07:22 Hider wrote:Are you saying marines standing in place in the back of a mineral line takes more clicks than positioning zealots and pressing hold position? Eh, no you don't press hold position on Marines quite often (and then look away), because then your your opponent can just move his drone away. Yes, when there are no banelings, you can hold postioin behind mineral lines and be very cost effective vs speedlings, but at standard medivac timing, the zerg has banelings and you already need to micro against that unit away. The simple truth is that there is so much more stuff you can do with Marines. Like the opponents comes in with his blings. Then you focus fire as many banelings as possible as you can before they come close enough and you need to load them in. Or when he comes in with Mutas, you put the Marines into the dropship, then speed boost away to a new "ground-level" while clicking "d" on the dropship so your marines drops out while the dropships is flying away (so it doens't get killed by mutas). Meanwhile you take your dropped marines and fucs fire the Mutalisks that is trying to kill off your dropships. Basically, each time you do a Marine drop, it feels like the potential basicailly is unlimited. The same thing goes for early game Hellion/Reaper harass, or just army battles in general. The same concept doens't really apply for protoss (not too the same extent at least), which IMO makes it a less fun race. This. At its least skill intensive, a Marine drop will end with marines standing still, attacking one structure or a couple of workers, then lifting back up and hightailing out of there. And those drops do happen. But a hundred different scenarios could arise forcing the Terran to pay total attention to the drop and micro his heart out, whether it's looking for the best positioning against a ling surround, target firing a stream of incoming banelings, following Drones around the base, picking the marines back up because of incoming Mutas and then dropping them one by one to try to save the Medivac/kill some Mutas, controlling two drops at the exact same time... each situation calls for a completely different response which takes advantage of very different mechanical skills. And the decision how much attention to devote to this particular drop based on how the Zerg is responding is a crucial one. At its least skill intensive, a Zealot warp in is... the same as at its most skill intensive. You warp in a bunch of Zealots and 1a them into the Terran mineral line. You might right click on a bunch of workers. Not exactly the same level of involvement, is it? But the damage is often comparable. Not only that, the risk is much lower for the Protoss - he can only lose the Warp Prism on the way there, not the Zealots themselves unlike the Medivac which has to travel with its cargo, and he can have two drops' worth of units come from a single WP meaning he again loses one Prism instead of two. And while the drop is in progress, the Medivac is always in danger of getting sniped, unlike the WP which is free to go the moment the units are warped in. I watch a Terran drop and I think, 'the Terran player is in a position to impress me, what can he do here that will make this game memorable?' I watch a Protoss drop and I think 'OK. That happened.' The difference is if the Terran player isn't making the game memorable, that actually means he's losing. But that's the thing when I say potaytoes potahtoes. With a marine drop, a lot of the energy is used up in the final moments of the execution. Terran builds marines and medivacs as much as possible, the tech to get them is the tech they need to go after no matter the strategy. Tech wise, protoss has to commit to harassment. Without speed upgrade, scvs just walk away from zealots and you get 0-1 kills tops. Without dual tech of twilight+robo then you don't get prism. Without prism you have to make certain you have places to hide pylons which get sniped regularly. You need a constant probe out in the field not dying to place pylons throughout the game etc... There is a LOT that goes on in zealot harass. The zealots arriving in the base is just the last part of it. But no one is ever impressed by how tightly a protoss player can cut corners surviving with little to no units out. Unless your name is Rain or Parting no one cares about your observer placements, your constant map awareness. All they point to is "look at that marine kite" and they never find it impressive to see a Stalker kiting marines/slowlings. It just seems rather biased and dishonest for the most part. Yes when you initially replied to me, my post was entirely based on whether mechanics/micro was involved in the protoss harass. You said all my points was wrong, but based on what you have just written your actually not disagreeing with me as the "diffuclt" stuff related to playing protoss is getting the build order correct = Not mechanics. I would also be very careful about claiming other people are biased when you say a Marine drop is all about hold position behind mineral lines. IMO that's just a raw example of your own lack of experience playing terran at a decent level.
A.) Mechanics encompasses more than just marine splits and kiting.
B.) I never said Marines held position. I said that Zealots are placed in Hold Position both to maximize worker kills (in a fully saturated base) and to micro against defensive Lings (vs Zerg) and defensive zeals (vs Protoss). In my example the marines are literally just dropped through the minimap and can wipe out an entire mineral line without any other help.
That is because how Zealots are controlled matters depending on how the enemy reacts, what he reacts with, and how many workers are in the mineral line. Target fire is used if there is a low worker count of a new base to speed up worker kills. Hold position is used in a saturated base (the same way lings are microed) you can also block off escape routes using hold position if they attempted to fully wall in their mineral line (if in their main).
There is a lot that can happen that requires micro and decision making--you're simply disregarding it.
There is a lot more energy expended in the micro of marines, that can be argued. But then again a lot more energy is used transitioning into harass play for Protoss.
Zealot legs slows down storm/blink, slows down colossus range, slows down robo production. Protoss getting harass tools means they delay storm/lance while delaying armor upgrades as they spend gas twilight+robo tech. Terran spams marines and medivacs whether they harass or turtle.
At mid game protoss either needs complete map control (in order to keep pylons alive) in order to do multiprong attacks otherwise they can only one area at a time, terran by that point can hit 2-3 mineral lines at a time and can quickly transition into doom drops since they will normally have 8-10 medivacs at this point with 2 or more starports still latched onto a reactor.
That means its easier to stop protoss harass because by taking map control you stop their multiprong plan making it so they only hit 1 area of your base at a time which means with good scouting you can easily just keep them off you throughout the game.
Its impressive to see protoss players fight for map control one observer and scouting probe at a time trying to position their army as a distraction point in order to get map vision and army positioning. After literally microing units all across the entirety of the map they finally see an opening to send zealots in. But none of that is respected just because zealot micro does not look sexy (which is absolutely pointless to bring up in a balance thread)
I, as a terran, can literally just move my army around in the middle of the map and when my scan sees you're not in your base I just grab 16 marines and 2 medivacs, travel the 1-2 screens to your nexus and snipe it before you can react.
Terran drop play is already contained within their main compositions. Protoss harass requires the splitting up of many different units all microed many screens apart before finally moving in for the kill. Don't disrespect them just because they play a different race than you.
|
Northern Ireland25984 Posts
'It just seems rather biased and dishonest for the most part.'
'I, as a terran, can literally just move my army around in the middle of the map and when my scan sees you're not in your base I just grab 16 marines and 2 medivacs, travel the 1-2 screens to your nexus and snipe it before you can react.'
Fuck me man.
|
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D
|
On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D
I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate.
|
On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate.
I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it.
|
On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate.
Are you still complaining about queen range when the meta is great with reaper hellion banshee vs queen lings early game?
|
On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it.
It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army.
|
On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army.
Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected.
|
Northern Ireland25984 Posts
It's disregarding a pretty sizeable increase in the size of maps and whatnot when you're talking about Warpgate, a mechanic designed around relatively tiny fields of battle at the time.
|
On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected.
I play Terran and Zerg. I suck at protoss actually.
|
Northern Ireland25984 Posts
It's also not necessarily an arbitrary change, it's introducing a level of risk/reward to instant reinforcement that isn't really there outside of having a pylon/warp prism in positioning.
|
On April 23 2014 09:50 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's also not necessarily an arbitrary change, it's introducing a level of risk/reward to instant reinforcement that isn't really there outside of having a pylon/warp prism in positioning.
Yeah, that's kind of the thought process behind most of the idea.
|
On April 23 2014 09:39 ETisME wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. Are you still complaining about queen range when the meta is great with reaper hellion banshee vs queen lings early game?
To this day it remains the second dumbest change in the history of the game. Only the addition of the swarmhost, in its current state, is worse.
|
On April 23 2014 09:50 Wombat_NI wrote:
It's also not necessarily an arbitrary change, it's introducing a level of risk/reward to instant reinforcement that isn't really there outside of having a pylon/warp prism in positioning.
The reason that it feels arbitrary it that it changes the whole point of the flavor of "warping in"
The idea of warp-in is that a building unit is being teleported from one planet (Auir/Shakuras) to your current planet. It doesn't make sense to have it be more difficult when we're already talking about being able to aim at pinpoint accuracy from solar systems away.
Also, the late game adaptations of building random buildings "closer to the front line" in order to speed up warp ins would be hilarious. Not to mention the fact that it would make prisms automatically the worse drop unit in the game.
Now, I'm not saying I'm against changing it. But at least keep it within the confines of both the lore and design of the game we currently have.
For example--it doesn't make sense why warping in from Auir/Shakuras is 5 game seconds faster than them just walking through a portal/gateway. Like, really? It more difficult for them to just walk through a gateway than be digitized and put back together on another planet? Why is build time longer than warp in cooldowns? Makes no sense lore wise and makes no sense design wise.
Also, if you can warp in gateway units anywhere that there's a pylon, and you a stargate has the animation of warping in a unit, then why can't flying units be warped in anywhere there's an energy field?
Also, if you're just going to warp in units through the robo (what else is that light for) then why not just shove them through the gateway? In Broodwar it made sense since gateways the protoss walked through and the robo built units onsite. Stargates were just bigger gateways that planes flew through. But with this whole "look at the unit building" crap on the Stargate and the whole light shining in the robo seems the opposite of what the BW flavor was and seems opposite of the lore of the buildings.
This is what I mean by arbitrary change. Changing the cooldown based on distance from buildings will lead to weird timings.
|
Northern Ireland25984 Posts
I don't think we'll see any kind of rethink or anything, it just strikes me as curious that it's still in there in its original form given some of the huge maps we have nowadays. I mean Terran especially, reinforcement distance for a big push on Alterzim is insane compared to what warpgate offers you potentially.
|
On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected.
Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt.
Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few - if any), it is simple and easy to use.
Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay.
Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possibly playing Devil's Advocate).
|
I agree with people saying that it's not a great idea. It's pretty hard to implement and even harder for people just started to watch to pick up on it. It's not an intuitive design and that makes watching and playing more awkward than it has to be. However, I do agree on the fact that there needs to be some type of decision made by the Protoss, with either warp gates or gateways, and that depending on the situation, they should be able to change and use it accordingly.
|
Northern Ireland25984 Posts
Chaggi you got it all wrong man, stuff Warping in is like, totally cool and stuff and doesn't restrict the race design at all.
I'm not big on warpgate as a design, but that said I am impressed that the game is as relatively balanced as it is despite things like that it's genuinely a decent job all things considered
|
On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are little), it is currently simple and easy to use and is used in two ways by Protoss (either with low gates and continous production or in bursts). Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay.
Blizzard tends to shy away from concepts that complicate SC2 more than it needs to. This is definitely one of those concepts. This type of thing has been suggested multiple times before and the response has always been basically what aZealot said. It's insanely hard to implement in a reasonable fashion and is even more difficult to explain to people new to the game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
