|
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it.
|
On November 23 2012 04:47 MrTortoise wrote:
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it.
The problem with this point is that the Zerg doesn't really have a choice when it comes to all-ins at their third base. Pretty much they have to engage at some point, just letting the base die isn't really an option because at this point they have to kill the Protoss army or it's game over for them.
|
On November 23 2012 04:47 MrTortoise wrote:
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it.
I agree, you would need to redesign the whole of SC2 from scratch. Essentially OP wants a different RTS.
|
Russian Federation221 Posts
On November 23 2012 12:10 Parcelleus wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 04:47 MrTortoise wrote:
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it. I agree, you would need to redesign the whole of SC2 from scratch. Essentially OP wants a different RTS.
Well it’s easier to make WC4 or SC3 than make a decent game from SC2.
There is no realistic way to make SC2 great game.
Burn in HELL DB! 
User was warned for this post
|
On November 23 2012 12:10 Parcelleus wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 04:47 MrTortoise wrote:
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it. I agree, you would need to redesign the whole of SC2 from scratch. Essentially OP wants a different RTS.
Want 1 thing changed about a race - means person wants a completely different RTS. lol.
No his points are valid, most people find forcefield boring, it just is. It's boring to play vs especially and as a toss I imagine it's frusterating when you miss a forcefield and your army gets rolled because your race is balanced around a stupid spell like that.
^_^, if he gave a huge list of changes then I could see you having a point, but having 1 spell changed for the better of the whole game doesn't mean he wants a completely different rts.
|
I've thought long and hard about fixing Protoss's reliance on forcefield, which coincidentally also balances the Warp gate upgrade. The problem with Protoss emanates from the Warp Gate upgrade, which means units can't be "strong" or else all ins become too powerful, to counteract the "weaknesses" of the Protoss gateway units, Blizzard implemented the Sentry that can stop all ins.
Nearly every player should know the Forcefield has horrible design. The rationale behind the forcefield and its implementation is completely fine, but the issue of its inherently bad design has become more visible as the meta game develops.
My proposed idea is this:
- Put a fixed added time on all units spawned in by the warp gate.
- Remove the sentry's ability forcefield
- Add a new sentry ability
- Add in new gateway units or buff current ones accordingly
Ok, from the beginning.
The idea behind adding a fixed time on the warpgate is that it becomes productively inefficient to leave your gateways in Warpgate. This means that warpgate now becomes a "oh shit, I need units here NOW!" or a "I'm going to all in you" type thing. Warpgate won't lose its usage, it just means that for defensive reasons that Gateways are more productively efficient as you produce more units in a fixed timeframe. This creates a need for "gateway/warpgate micro" as you will likely want to be switching between both depending on your strategy/needs. This change doesn't mean Mass warpgate is essentially really bad, it just means you need to create a lot more gateways if you intend on doing so. For people that might misconstrue what this change is, I will make it simple.
Lets say Zealots have a build time of 60 seconds and the added time is 10 seconds. This means that if you build a zealot, the Warpgate is on a 70 second cool down. So there's 10 seconds of productive inefficiency, as a normal Gateway would be 10 seconds into producing a second Zealot. So in 6 minutes, the person with the Gateway has 1 more zealot than the person that has a Warpgate.
Alright, the second and third steps are easy. We remove the badly designed Forcefield and replace it with something else.
Now is the most important part, we need to add in another or several new Gateway units to counterbalance the loss of the Forcefield. This means we need units that are effective to counter 6-10 pools and other stuff like 11/11 rax. Likely this is going to be a ranged unit effective against Light type armor. It needs to complement standard unit compositions, but not strong enough where you can all in easily and we go back to the classic 4 gate beta days.
|
I'm only diamonds player from EU but I have heard alot of complaints from other zerg (I play zerg aswell) about ZvP, both about forcefields and more particularly immortal + sentry all in. Perhaps the problem zerg is having in this matchup is playing in a very specific way that forcefields is incredibly good against. This is a heavy ground army of primarly zerglings+roaches versus an army that I would have to call more advanced with the inclusion of sentrys. Perhaps zerg has to not fast expand to three bases in order to be able to get infestors or mutalisks out. You could argue that a sentry push could happen before infestors are out, but then you should still be able to defend 2 bases with spines.
Basically, changing strategy and metagame is easier than changing forcefields.
|
I'm fine with FF. The game needs things like that to give birth to any new strategy.
|
On November 22 2012 16:26 ZergChief wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2012 10:37 The Final Boss wrote:On November 18 2012 21:45 randoomguy wrote:
welcome to tvz for a terran player
User was warned for this post This is obviously a poorly written post, but I feel like this guy has a point. Even back when Terran was "OP," TvZ often came down to "Does the Terran micro well" and not "Does the Zerg micro well," because if the Terran doesn't micro well, the a-moving banelings will crush most of them followed up by the clean-up crew Muta/Zerglings. Of course, both sides need macro well and hit proper timings, but when you get into the actual battle, the Zerg doesn't have to do anything compared to the Terran. I was playing StarCraft since the release and I eventually quit because Blizzard kept burying non-pro-Korean-Terrans in layers of nerfs, making TvZ and TvP almost impossible if you aren't Mvp. I haven't played StarCraft 2 in a while but yeah, Zerg is designed so that if your opponent messes up his micro, you win, and if he doesn't go write on forums until Blizzard makes it impossible to lose. That's StarCraft 2 WoL for you. You obviously played the game at a very very low level. Do you realize what happens when you A move ling bane into marine tank? A good Zerg had to split the bane lings as they move in and make sure the lings didn't clump onto single targets. Maybe not as quite as intensive as the marine split, but it was definitely not A moving. Not to mention setting flanks if possible, ect. Also, the marine tank timing worked in such a way that Zerg was cornered into their base during that meta game, so Zerg had to constantly fly Mutas around while cutting reinforcements and attempting to pick up tanks while macroing and building up enough counter attacking units for a very clutch engagement. Clutch because if Zerg messed up the battle, a small group of marines left with the medivacs can cause irreversible damage. You had to sweep the Terran nearly completely clean or risk end up losing to a tiny group of medi-op heal. Infestor really changed the matchup for sure, but for you to argue that Terran was harder to play back then is ridiculous. Zerg scouting was nearly impossible back then. Overlords never made it into their base if they had a 1-2 marines on the parameter and any kind of early game all in or mid game all in was very difficult to stop as scouting was so limited and queens weren't half as good without their range. With the faster bunkers and smaller maps, it was damn hard to stop any kind of proxy cheese as well, 2 raxes almost always guaranteed a good chance to win the game outright. You were just bad back then.
I was Masters level Terran for a long time, which is pretty good, especially considering how few games of 1v1 I played in comparison to a lot of other people, but that was a cute post that was fun to read. Here's my account, I'd love to take a look at yours. But regardless, if all of that is true, why were Terrans doing so badly outside of Code S back then. The same people who today, despite all the nerfs and changes are still successful were the people doing great back then, but outside of Code S Terrans were far from being the "OP" race.
|
Last time i heard marrow talk about his micro he said something along the lines of " My micro is shit ". So I don't see room for complaining. You know the sentry immortal push is often described as the 1/1/1 of protoss with the 1 different thing that it is always the same 3 immortals 5-6-7-8 sentries and a few zealots when it moves out. So basicly it has no 0 to no variety and can be easily countered if scouted unlike the terran 1/1/1 pushesh which are probably one of the few if not the only 1 base allins that are actually good and are full of variety in timings and composition. Since you play terran along side zerg and will probably play terran in hots i suggest less whineing about pvz builds and more playing what u're gonna play anyway.
Final summation
1/1/1 in TvP > Sentry immortal push in ZvP
|
Well I wouldn't mind forcefield being only 12 seconds or something, I mean I am a Protoss player and even I feel 15 seconds is just...excessive.
|
Poland117 Posts
On November 24 2012 02:04 Consummate wrote:
I've thought long and hard about fixing Protoss's reliance on forcefield, which coincidentally also balances the Warp gate upgrade. The problem with Protoss emanates from the Warp Gate upgrade, which means units can't be "strong" or else all ins become too powerful, to counteract the "weaknesses" of the Protoss gateway units
It became extremely popular to say that gateway units are weak, and I disagree with that. They are absolutely ok, we're looking at the wrong issue. It's the Roach that is imbalanced and too strong.
Vs T, force fields are not an issue. They are useful early on to trap bio and allow zealots to deal damage, sometimes to prevent bunkers from being repaired. Nothing imba. Also, pure gateway vs pure bio is quite on par and depends on micro and positioning.
Vs Z though, they function differently. Apart from occasional ramp block and bane bust block, they are used to split roach ball so not all of them can fire at once. They always outnumber toss forces, yet they are as strong as a stalker. If we tweaked hydralisk stats a bit, roach stats a bit and exchanged their tiers, it would be fixed. Since hydra range is larger than roach's, force fields again would be used to allow zeals to kill hydras. And, I bet their importance would fall.
Besides, zealots are supposed to be freaking tearing through anything T1, just not being able to catch without speed upgrade.
|
On November 18 2012 21:45 randoomguy wrote:
welcome to tvz for a terran player
User was warned for this post
Morrow actually plays terran against zergs very often in tournaments...
|
meh... the game won't be "great" unless Blizzard loses their ridiculous pride and stops doing literally anything but take specific feedback from the community or do something that was in another game (including broodwar.)
Other games have LAN? No lan for sc2 then
Broodwar has spider mine that balances well while not costing supply because its dropped from a unit? Well, cant do that so we'll have to find the least awful alternative.. um...
Can't use lurker for zerg area control because it was in broodwar... cant use melee range for locusts because it's like broodlings....okay we'll need to make a broken zero micro swarmhost.
Community wants fungal changed to a slow/become a projectile? umm... what haven't they suggested?... uh... CANT TARGET PSIONIC UNITS! Nobody's said that! (for good reason.... its retarded.)
Jesus christ, LEARN FROM THINGS THAT ARE GOOD IN THE PAST YOU BASTARDS! If Bnet 1.0 lobbies were good, USE THEM. If Lan is good, USE IT. If lurker and spider mine were great unit concepts, USE THEM. Stop trying to do anything desperately to avoid making progress by taking the old concepts that worked and improving them.
|
A very simple change would be to make Force Field only castable within X range of a Nexus from that player.
Make it so that a Sensor-Tower like ring from the center point of a Nexus indicates the range in which Force Field can be cast. Either make it visible to the P player's minimap/map only, or change the hue of the terrain when a Protoss prepares to cast the spell.
This would keep the defensive properties of FF, while making it difficult, but not impossible, to use it offensively.
|
On November 25 2012 11:12 s0ma wrote:
A very simple change would be to make Force Field only castable within X range of a Nexus from that player.
Make it so that a Sensor-Tower like ring from the center point of a Nexus indicates the range in which Force Field can be cast. Either make it visible to the P player's minimap/map only, or change the hue of the terrain when a Protoss prepares to cast the spell.
This would keep the defensive properties of FF, while making it difficult, but not impossible, to use it offensively.
Seems like a contradiction. How would you ever be able to use it offensively then?
|
On November 23 2012 11:57 Myrddraal wrote:Show nested quote +On November 23 2012 04:47 MrTortoise wrote:
THe thing is i see threads liek this
Then i think of all the fucking awesome games of high level players microing against this stuff
then i think of the high level players that just smash themselves into it ... lose and scream imba.
All you are saying is that you dont like THIS rts. That is ok, go and convince someone to make a different RTS
I mean I have to put up with shit RNG based fps games, now you guy shave to put up with a severely movement restricted rts game.
Hopefully someone will come along with a different approach to rts that is more about micro without a crap ton of aoe stuns.
But you have to bear in mind that you DO NOT have to get close enough to get fungaled, you do not have to get close enough so that your army get split in half by forcefields.
If you do YOU chose to do it. If that was a bad decision then you suck at the game - go find another.
The real problem with SC2 is that it has been patched in such a way that balance has been forced and as a result the number of viable build orders is kinda small.
IMO it all started with the marine being too strong in groups. The thing is that you cant just change one thing as everytign else is balanced on top of it. The problem with this point is that the Zerg doesn't really have a choice when it comes to all-ins at their third base. Pretty much they have to engage at some point, just letting the base die isn't really an option because at this point they have to kill the Protoss army or it's game over for them.
you know, you dont have to play the same fucking way with zerg every game. if you keep doing the same thing and dying to that push then maybe idk try something different until people figure it out instead of bitching to blizzard to have it patched. this fad has been going on for what 3 months now? big fucking deal, remember 1/1/1? if maps cant fix it and no one can find an answer in like 6 months then we might need to reconsider.
|
On November 25 2012 11:19 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 11:12 s0ma wrote:
A very simple change would be to make Force Field only castable within X range of a Nexus from that player.
Make it so that a Sensor-Tower like ring from the center point of a Nexus indicates the range in which Force Field can be cast. Either make it visible to the P player's minimap/map only, or change the hue of the terrain when a Protoss prepares to cast the spell.
This would keep the defensive properties of FF, while making it difficult, but not impossible, to use it offensively. Seems like a contradiction. How would you ever be able to use it offensively then?
Proxy Nexus / taking an expansion close to the enemy. But this doesn't necessarily mean we'd see anyone do it (in a standard game.) It just makes it less feasible to use it an offensive scenario (significant investment/commitment to make it work.)
|
On November 25 2012 11:19 chaos021 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 25 2012 11:12 s0ma wrote:
A very simple change would be to make Force Field only castable within X range of a Nexus from that player.
Make it so that a Sensor-Tower like ring from the center point of a Nexus indicates the range in which Force Field can be cast. Either make it visible to the P player's minimap/map only, or change the hue of the terrain when a Protoss prepares to cast the spell.
This would keep the defensive properties of FF, while making it difficult, but not impossible, to use it offensively. Seems like a contradiction. How would you ever be able to use it offensively then?
Well, depending on the range, lategame situations could very easily put a Nexus within FF-range of a Zerg base - I'm assuming here that it's going to be a LONG range, like Sensor Tower+. Multiple screens. One of the potential problems with this idea is that it makes spawns on maps even more important and even more random. For instance, Entombed Valley vertical spawns would put FF range closer to the nearest base than cross. As we're trying to move away from randomness in map spawns - no close positions, cross only and other, similar trends - that would represent a step backwards. It also doesn't make a huge amount of sense.
Really though I think the answer for this particular issue is going to be HotS and the rise of Roach/Hydra/Viper compositions, which allow the Zerg to micro against Force Fields in a way that even Idra thinks is "really fun".
|
On November 25 2012 10:46 Scholera wrote:
meh... the game won't be "great" unless Blizzard loses their ridiculous pride and stops doing literally anything but take specific feedback from the community or do something that was in another game (including broodwar.)
Other games have LAN? No lan for sc2 then
Broodwar has spider mine that balances well while not costing supply because its dropped from a unit? Well, cant do that so we'll have to find the least awful alternative.. um...
Can't use lurker for zerg area control because it was in broodwar... cant use melee range for locusts because it's like broodlings....okay we'll need to make a broken zero micro swarmhost.
Community wants fungal changed to a slow/become a projectile? umm... what haven't they suggested?... uh... CANT TARGET PSIONIC UNITS! Nobody's said that! (for good reason.... its retarded.)
Jesus christ, LEARN FROM THINGS THAT ARE GOOD IN THE PAST YOU BASTARDS! If Bnet 1.0 lobbies were good, USE THEM. If Lan is good, USE IT. If lurker and spider mine were great unit concepts, USE THEM. Stop trying to do anything desperately to avoid making progress by taking the old concepts that worked and improving them.
Lol. You're talking as if "the community" is this one united great thing with great understanding of the game...
1) Most of the time people don't agree at all on what needs to be changed. More often than not, the only thing that people can agree on is that a change that would make things better would be good, which is kinda redundant.
2) Even if alot of people agree on something, sometimes it's just a horrible idea for the game looking back. For instance, the suggestion a while back to have units move more spread out would litterally have ruined the game. If the units were presplit for you, what exactly would you have to micro in the way that SC2 plays out...?
3) If you want things from BW, you should go play that game. Personally I enjoy the fact that it's not the same game. Most things (the ones you mentioned included) are way better now if you ask me.
Your logic about swarm host vs lurker is off too. If anything, the swarm host is actually a harder unit to control cause there is a lot to benefit from if you control and micro it's attacking units. The reason the lurker seemed more complex just boils down to the fact that controlling anything in bw was a pain and therefore it was "harder" to execute.
It's not about "pride". It's about wanting this game to be a different experience from it's predecessor and about not just implementing the flavor of the month complaint from "the community" but taking time to try and make the right call. Alot of the time they come up with something that no one has thought in the entire player base and it turns out to be just the right fix.
And please speak for yourself when you say "This game won't be great", cause to a heck of a lot of people, myself included, this game is very much great.
Cursing and writing with Caps Lock doesn't help your point either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
