EPTA fundamental issue about forcefield - Page 28
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
YellowPandaz
United States7 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12355 Posts
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. tell me how do you micro against an immortal sentries warp prism all in. As zerg, you can only hope you build enough units and stopped drone production at the right amount and then hope his forcefields are not good enough and best case scenario is killing off the warp prism. But what can take down the warp prism? Queens. It certainly doesn't give zerg a lot of room to micro their queen to snipe the warp prism. It's up to the toss forcefields and if he can protect the warp prism. | ||
|
kmillz
United States1548 Posts
| ||
|
sekritzzz
1515 Posts
This is coming from someone who has never played brood war but can clearly see where the flaws of sc2 are coming from. | ||
|
sh02hp0869
Sweden460 Posts
But I really want fungel and forcefilds replaced or at least change in way that permits more micro oriented games. I do understand that P live and die with forcefilds early game so it would need a big overhaul of the other P race. I do not know if hots will change anything but zvp isent a enjoyable matchup to watch right now IMO. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On November 25 2012 12:33 sekritzzz wrote: The issue here isn't forcefield. It is almost everything which was introduced to Sc2 from Sc1 with a few exceptions like banelings. There is seriously so many flaws in the way things work rather than them being imbalanced such as collusus, carriers, forcefield, warpgate(to some at least), infestors, etc. Blizzard should just do itself a favor and copy what dota 2 did. You know, copy an awesome game and improve UI and graphics to make it more mainstream/user friendly and then work on the game from there. Though it is a bit late for this idea. This is coming from someone who has never played brood war but can clearly see where the flaws of sc2 are coming from. I find your post incredibly puzzling. Yes there are design flaws but everything which was introduced to SC2 from SC:BW except banelings? Banelings weren't in the original SC; FF wasn't in the original SC. Then you go on to say Blizzard should have done what DotA2 did. By copying the original and improving the AI and graphics... Blizzard still want to innovate at the same time. The clear thing here is they missed the mark on B.Net and they really tried to push for certain units to stay in the game. | ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On November 25 2012 12:24 ETisME wrote: tell me how do you micro against an immortal sentries warp prism all in. As zerg, you can only hope you build enough units and stopped drone production at the right amount and then hope his forcefields are not good enough and best case scenario is killing off the warp prism. But what can take down the warp prism? Queens. It certainly doesn't give zerg a lot of room to micro their queen to snipe the warp prism. It's up to the toss forcefields and if he can protect the warp prism. How do you beat an immortal sentry all in? Don't take a sub 4:30 third and tech a bit before expanding. No you won't put yourself so economically behind that you'll instantly lose, you'll just be on par with the Protoss. If the all in comes because you denied the Protoss a scout on your third, or the Protoss was retarded enough to attack anyways after scouting no third at 5:00, then you crush the living fuck out of his push and win. If the all in transitions into a immortal sentry expand, then you continue the game with your faster tech and slower econ. Zergs act like they don't know the reason why immortal sentry works... it works because it's a timing before blink all ins and stonger than the earlier menial gateway all ins. Zergs have optimized builds to counter post 11:30 timings as well as weaker timings before 10:00. Protoss have adapted to this optimization and learned to hit the medium timing with theoretically weaker armies than the post 11:30 all ins, but with more salience than sub 10:00 minute all-ins... Know what/when to ovie sac, tech faster, expand 1-2 minutes later and adapt to the new metagame instead of using builds optimized to get smashed by the immortal sentry all in. | ||
|
sekritzzz
1515 Posts
On November 25 2012 13:24 StarStruck wrote: I find your post incredibly puzzling. Yes there are design flaws but everything which was introduced to SC2 from SC:BW except banelings? Banelings weren't in the original SC; FF wasn't in the original SC. Then you go on to say Blizzard should have done what DotA2 did. By copying the original and improving the AI and graphics... Blizzard still want to innovate at the same time. The clear thing here is they missed the mark on B.Net and they really tried to push for certain units to stay in the game. I meant everything new which was introduced into Sc2 has a lot of design flaws except a few exceptions like the banelings(as in banelings are a good unit/concept). BW units which were brought over are all awesome. I would really love if blizzard did something drastic to some units but they just do these tiny tweaks to balance rather than design tweaks which are a bigger problem in sc2 than balance. | ||
|
StarStruck
25339 Posts
On November 25 2012 14:25 sekritzzz wrote: I meant everything new which was introduced into Sc2 has a lot of design flaws except a few exceptions like the banelings(as in banelings are a good unit/concept). BW units which were brought over are all awesome. I would really love if blizzard did something drastic to some units but they just do these tiny tweaks to balance rather than design tweaks which are a bigger problem in sc2 than balance. That's what I thought you were trying to get at, but your other post was a little unclear at the beginning. With that said, Blizzard always try to push the limits of innovation with every title and yes they certainly did try to push a few units that have created all sorts of problems. | ||
|
BabyCrusher
United States25 Posts
[QUOTE]On November 25 2012 12:24 ETisME wrote: [QUOTE][QUOTE] How do you beat an immortal sentry all in? Don't take a sub 4:30 third and tech a bit before expanding. No you won't put yourself so economically behind that you'll instantly lose, you'll just be on par with the Protoss. If the all in comes because you denied the Protoss a scout on your third, or the Protoss was retarded enough to attack anyways after scouting no third at 5:00, then you crush the living fuck out of his push and win. If the all in transitions into a immortal sentry expand, then you continue the game with your faster tech and slower econ. Zergs act like they don't know the reason why immortal sentry works... it works because it's a timing before blink all ins and stonger than the earlier menial gateway all ins. Zergs have optimized builds to counter post 11:30 timings as well as weaker timings before 10:00. Protoss have adapted to this optimization and learned to hit the medium timing with theoretically weaker armies than the post 11:30 all ins, but with more salience than sub 10:00 minute all-ins... Know what/when to ovie sac, tech faster, expand 1-2 minutes later and adapt to the new metagame instead of using builds optimized to get smashed by the immortal sentry all in. [/QUOTE] Perfect. When I watched the games with Sen, I saw a player that 100% knew what was coming and chose to ignore it every time. | ||
|
admi_n
28 Posts
I've seen four types of posts in this thread: + Show Spoiler + 1- Totally agreeing with OP, perhaps offering evidence to support its claim, but few constructive suggestions 2- lol zerg babies need to lrn3play, game is balanced 3- toss OP, need crazy nerfs, remove ff, remove collossi, remove probe 4- the very rare constructive post that suggests things that might work, whether they change the game itself or are just different playstyles The OP focused on ZvP, so I will as well. I play zerg, so obviously I am biased. I am only platinum league, so my suggestions possibly will not work at higher levels of play. I will not comment on the late game, because force fields are not much of a late game issue. Therefore, I will focus on the midgame, particularly all-in pushes with sentries. When I play against a protoss who does a sentry all-in, I feel very weak, even if I scout it. Once the protoss has reached my ramps, if he can forcefield well, he will always win against me, even if I have infestors. I'm only in plat, but my opponents still tend to have relatively good force field micro. The net result is that if protoss has the correct composition and proper micro before I have brood lords or an overwhelming advantage, he will always win once he gets to my base. Suggestions on how the zerg can play: + Show Spoiler + -baiting force fields with a large squadron of lings before they arrive at your base can greatly help by preventing the protoss from ffing ramps once they do reach your base. this, however is difficult to execute without getting trapped. In addition, it might be difficult to maintain a good roach count when you need enough lings to bait ff. -The zerg could stay on two bases. This would allow him to produce more units, possibly tech to spire or hydralisks, and have a higher infestor count. However, it seems that he would be at a severe disadvantage if the protoss instead decided to rush tier 3 or take his own third. -Burrowing underneath might work, but with a single obs, immortals can devastate roaches as they burrow. Also, the upgrades necessary are expensive and might not be available for the earliest pushes, around 10:30. -Attacking the protoss from multiple angles puts pressure on them, causing them to mess up force fields, and what ones they make to be even less effective. Stephano can be seen doing this successfully. Current maps, however, can make this difficult because they have few open areas, and once the protoss reaches your base, it is nearly impossible. -Dropping on top of the protoss might be viable, but not until late midgame, because of the cost of both overlord upgrades. It would, however, allow many opportunities for micro on both players' sides. -TLO circumvents force fields with nydus, by literally just abandoning his third and nat to die, while using nydus to counterattack. For more details, please see http://day9.tv/d/Day9/tlo-innovates-zerg-again/ parts 2 and 3. It is very effective against all-ins, more so than it is against force fields themselves. it seems the most promising approach at this point, at least to me. Suggestions on balancing of the game: + Show Spoiler + -Force fields are made destructible. I like the idea of giving them 10 health and 100 shields, with an upgrade to give them more shields or a longer duration. they would not be a priority target, meaning that they would require micro to be targeted. Also, shield upgrades and the aforementioned shield boost upgrade would allow them to scale well into the late game. This would allow the zerg to defend them in the midgame, but only if he can focus them down effectively and move through. I am not sure about how this would effect TvP, because ghosts could destroy them quickly with EMP, but for ZvP, this seems the best option to me at the moment. -Force fields require cooldown equal to or more than the duration of the force field. This would require much better decision making about when to use force fields, and it would also make them less spammable. However, it seems to put even more weight on the protoss' micro, which is already quite demanding. It might work well in conjunction with the previously noted fix, but it also might be too much combined with the above, causing sentires to be underused. -Tunelling claws comes with glial reconstitution. This would make burrowing under the force fields viable. The cost of the upgrade would have to be balanced, and perhaps roach life regeneration would have to be rebalanced as well, but it seems like it would give zergs a solid opportunity to circumvent force fields with a decent amount of micro. -Force fields cause units in them to take extra damage. I really don't like this one for the obvious reason that it would allow collossi to decimate ground armies even more easily. While you could move out of it, it would still be too effective imo. -Force fields slow units instead of preventing movement. Like the previous one, only possibly worse, because imagine it combined with storm. Conclusion (My personal recommendations): + Show Spoiler + I would conclude that a combination of the above would be optimal. I do believe that as the metagame shifts, zerg will be able to defend these pushes much more easily. I believe that TLO and Stephano-esque treatments of these playstyles will make them much less effective. That said, force fields do deny micro, and are potentially broken in many scenarios. The final changes that I would personally implement in the game would be the following: -Force fields are destructible and have shields, possibly given extra upgrades to increase duration/life, -Glial reconstitution and tunnelling claws are combined into one more costly upgrade. In this scenario, I would make it so that this upgrade does not increase burrowed roach life regeneration, and add back a nerfed organic carapace to do just that. This is more of a personal want, because I would really like to see burrowed roaches used more. I'm currently working on a custom version of cloud kingdom with these changes, however I still need to learn how to use the map editor. I'll start a thread once that's done. TL;DR I put a lot of effort into this post, so please read the whole thing if you can :D | ||
|
deadmau
960 Posts
On November 25 2012 12:33 sekritzzz wrote: The issue here isn't forcefield. It is almost everything which was introduced to Sc2 from Sc1 with a few exceptions like banelings. There is seriously so many flaws in the way things work rather than them being imbalanced such as collusus, carriers, forcefield, warpgate(to some at least), infestors, etc. Blizzard should just do itself a favor and copy what dota 2 did. You know, copy an awesome game and improve UI and graphics to make it more mainstream/user friendly and then work on the game from there. Though it is a bit late for this idea. This is coming from someone who has never played brood war but can clearly see where the flaws of sc2 are coming from. I'm very impressed by that fact, since you haven't played Broodwar, it's hard to notice these subtle differences. | ||
|
Scholera
United States166 Posts
On November 25 2012 12:11 Cereb wrote: 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. Sorry ,but that post is really really stupid. "if you want things from broodwar, play broodwar." That's one of the dumbest things I've ever had the displeasure to read on these forums. You realize marines were in BW and are in sc2... you realize hydras were in BW and are in sc2.... BW had multiplayer and MP is in sc2 as well as BW being played on PC and sc2 being played on PC.... Actually most things are carried from BW to sc2. The only question is which bits do you keep and which do you change.... the answer is you keep the bits you need to, in order to stop from going backwards and creating a worse game. If blizzard is doing literally anything to avoid making the game any more like broodwar, that's why this game is being shit. And, you don't get it, I'm not saying they should do what 51% of the community wants. But we have a situation where say 50% wanted fungal to be slow, 30% wanted it to be projectile and 10% wanted infestor to be 3 supply (lets say 10% didnt want infestor change at all), so blizzard rummaged around in their ass for something nobody wanted and pulled out cannot target psionic units. Why? Simply because they're so arrogant, they think anything that's been suggested by someone else is inherently worse than something they pull out their own ass. And, notice I said "great"... in quotation marks.... I already think the game is great, but the reason for that is the basics they kept from broodwar like RTS format, three carefully balanced races, etc, not because of the units overall. If broodwar had sc2 units, nobody would play that version of broodwar. You can subtitute the word in quotaton marks for "really great" or "awesome" or "decent" depending on your current view of sc2, obviously. | ||
|
Cereb
Denmark3388 Posts
On November 25 2012 20:41 Scholera wrote: Sorry ,but that post is really really stupid. "if you want things from broodwar, play broodwar." That's one of the dumbest things I've ever had the displeasure to read on these forums. You realize marines were in BW and are in sc2... you realize hydras were in BW and are in sc2.... BW had multiplayer and MP is in sc2 as well as BW being played on PC and sc2 being played on PC.... Actually most things are carried from BW to sc2. The only question is which bits do you keep and which do you change.... the answer is you keep the bits you need to, in order to stop from going backwards and creating a worse game. If blizzard is doing literally anything to avoid making the game any more like broodwar, that's why this game is being shit. And, you don't get it, I'm not saying they should do what 51% of the community wants. But we have a situation where say 50% wanted fungal to be slow, 30% wanted it to be projectile and 10% wanted infestor to be 3 supply (lets say 10% didnt want infestor change at all), so blizzard rummaged around in their ass for something nobody wanted and pulled out cannot target psionic units. Why? Simply because they're so arrogant, they think anything that's been suggested by someone else is inherently worse than something they pull out their own ass. And, notice I said "great"... in quotation marks.... I already think the game is great, but the reason for that is the basics they kept from broodwar like RTS format, three carefully balanced races, etc, not because of the units overall. If broodwar had sc2 units, nobody would play that version of broodwar. You can subtitute the word in quotaton marks for "really great" or "awesome" or "decent" depending on your current view of sc2, obviously. Well that was just rude. Glad to see you got rid off the Caps Lock, but if you want someone to listen to your points you shouldn't open up with insults. I think your attitude towards Blizzard is wrong. In your example you mention fungal as a slow, fungal as a projectile, and the 3 supply suggestion. Good examples as these are things people have talked about, but it doesn't really help your own point. Blizzard has tested fungal as a slow in response to community feedback and have played around with it, and as for now, they didn't feel it made a reasonable difference. The next thing you say is fungal as a projective...Which is what they are testing currently with the community. The only thing on your list that I have not heard being tested is the 3 supply. This really goes against your point of them being arrogant. Also, I still think alot of the time Blizzard comes up with better changes then what people have suggested. You speak as if there is a correct way of doing things. A specific list of units to take from BW, units that needs to be changed in a very certain way. You say that you keep the pieces you need from bw. If it's that simple to you, then I can understand your discontent with Blizzard. I just think it's way more complex than that and that it's not just a matter of refusing to do the right thing. Also, why are you contradicting yourself within your own post?`In the first paragraph you say that "the game is being shit" and in your last you say that you think "the game is great". It almost feels like you are so busy trying to show me how wrong I am that it doesn't matter if what you write makes sense together, as long as it goes against what I am saying... | ||
|
perser84
Germany399 Posts
any vods ? | ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1597 Posts
| ||
|
NoobSkills
United States1597 Posts
On November 25 2012 20:41 Scholera wrote: Sorry ,but that post is really really stupid. "if you want things from broodwar, play broodwar." That's one of the dumbest things I've ever had the displeasure to read on these forums. You realize marines were in BW and are in sc2... you realize hydras were in BW and are in sc2.... BW had multiplayer and MP is in sc2 as well as BW being played on PC and sc2 being played on PC.... Actually most things are carried from BW to sc2. The only question is which bits do you keep and which do you change.... the answer is you keep the bits you need to, in order to stop from going backwards and creating a worse game. If blizzard is doing literally anything to avoid making the game any more like broodwar, that's why this game is being shit. And, you don't get it, I'm not saying they should do what 51% of the community wants. But we have a situation where say 50% wanted fungal to be slow, 30% wanted it to be projectile and 10% wanted infestor to be 3 supply (lets say 10% didnt want infestor change at all), so blizzard rummaged around in their ass for something nobody wanted and pulled out cannot target psionic units. Why? Simply because they're so arrogant, they think anything that's been suggested by someone else is inherently worse than something they pull out their own ass. And, notice I said "great"... in quotation marks.... I already think the game is great, but the reason for that is the basics they kept from broodwar like RTS format, three carefully balanced races, etc, not because of the units overall. If broodwar had sc2 units, nobody would play that version of broodwar. You can subtitute the word in quotaton marks for "really great" or "awesome" or "decent" depending on your current view of sc2, obviously. Just going to speak to the psionic part. With the pro TvZ games that have been out recently, pressure, and better strategy, unit selection makes TvZ seem less imbalanced, and they have no need to nerf the infestor for that matchup. With protoss however they really have shit AA and their Air vs Air is weak when compared to the corrupter. That is why they chose psionic to allow archons (protoss' only real AA) a chance to push through the bullshit (broodlings and IT) and then attack corruptors and broodlords. It actually isn't a bad change. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On November 26 2012 04:43 NoobSkills wrote: I think things that prevent unit movement fungal and FF both lead to boring engagements. They prevent micro which is one of the more impressive parts of the game. But just because a zerg wants 80 drones, 4 queens, tech, upgrades, 3 bases, all before making a single unit doesn't make FF imba, it makes zerg greedy which is what those games were. Sure, if protoss walks into a 2nd base with this timing attack, and zerg has 30 lings 15 roaches 3 spines infestors popping and still wins FF is imba. You base your opinion on thinking X is imba, instead of asking what did Y do wrong? Did you read the OP at all? He never said it was imba, he said it was BORING. Zerg can't really micro they have to rely on tosses forcefields as their "micro" and he thinks it's boring (which it is). He never said "this is broken and FF needs fixed". Read the OP before you go on a huge rant that makes no since. | ||
|
dUTtrOACh
Canada2339 Posts
| ||
|
BerkmanZ
United States56 Posts
sure zerg has infestors, but what does it matter if they have no energy?? There are good points to this post about the micro difference in PvZ. Protoss has to have awesome micro and zerg has to smash there units into the protoss army to be effective. Roaches have to "hug" the army because of their short range roaches without the right number of lings to buffer zealots, just melt to colossus or immortal sentry timings. Zerg needs maps that have more potential for surrounds and less chokes. In general I think maps need to move in a different direction because they have so much to do with the gameplay and the choices armies have. | ||
| ||
