|
On November 18 2012 23:29 ReignSupreme. wrote:
Forcefield's are the only ability I like in this entire game.
Can be used to juke, can be used offensively (splitting), and defensively (FF'ing Ramps).
I can't count the number of time's FF has saved me from an early offensive move (4Gate, Early Pool, SCV Marine All in).
I will admit I can't bring my point to words, but I don't feel it needs to be changed at all...
The thing is that you are not the only person who plays this game. When you're one of the best in the world, and you lose out on a $100,000 prize because your opponents race was poorly designed, I think there might be a legitimate reason for some criticism of the cornfield.
|
My solution is to change forcefield to an arbiter ability, namely statis field but it would act as single target abilty. It would still be possible to block ramps as the statis field would so big that it would hinder the movement up the ramp for any other unit. The difference would be that it's easier to navigate around the statis field compared to the usual semi-cricle of forcefields.
|
On November 19 2012 00:15 IMPrime wrote:
The forcefield needs to be replaced or modified such that it still addresses the roles it was intended for (early crowd control). Let me try a few examples...
- Forcefield is replaced with an ability that increases the amount of damage enemies within the AoE take, with light units taking a higher amount increase. Units take X extra damage per attack, with light units taking X+Y extra per attack instead. I say a bonus to light units because marines are a thing, and tosses need a way to survive against mass marines until colossi/storm are out (being more useful against lings wouldn't hurt either).
- Forcefields is replaced with an ability that simply slows enemies down within the AoE. Again you could try to make certain units take a higher movement penalty.
- The sentry could maybe have two modes, like siege tanks. They have their normal mobile mode, but they need to switch to their immobile mode to do their stronger attacks or spells. It sounds like a ripoff of the tank, but tosses have the warp prism meaning they could definitely have the sentry follow a similar route. Thus, similar to tvz where Zergs try to engage when the tanks aren't ready, the Zerg would try to engage while the sentries are not ready.
This sounds pretty silly, honestly.
Your first idea would be helpful against early stim-timings(though these are rare in high-level play) and even medivac pushes. However, I can imagine how quickly a Terran army would melt if you cover a late-game bio army in this ability and have just 1 or 2 colossi. Such an ability would be very difficult to scale into the late-game.
Slowing abilities restrict micro as well. The entire point of OP is to remove this altogether.
Again, this goes against the point Morrow was trying to make. The Zerg has to pick the engagement right, but can't actually micro once the fight has started. Static sentries would not change this in any sense.
|
I'd rather that the game ends with a hundred small moves rather than 3 big once, PvZ does not agree in the current state 
|
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote:
Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro.
Try to fungal like Stephano, then try to FF like Parting. Then slap yourslef for being ignorant.
|
What if they make FF same as Entomb?
Same size and time durability but every FF with HP? So ling roach can still fight killing FFs,but need DPS and time and dont get totally blocked as they can escape and other units can help them killing the FFs.
If Blizzard is going to change infestor and make fungals missile,so you can avoid it with micro,why not try something with FFs?FF doesnt kill you,but blocks you,same as fungal,so they must do something to be able to be avoided.
What if they make burrow roaches to heal quicker? So you can avoid the FF and dont die to fire while burrowed.
|
unlike fungal, forcefields are are a spell that needs alot more skill than most other casting spells.
Sorry, but Sentries Immortal all-ins are going to be always strong, if Zerg insists on fighting with only tier 1 units.
Discussion ends, Pro gamers just seem to have found a timing that exploits the tech disadvantage of a fast 3 hatch and now people call this OP??
How about Zerg players just adapt and maybe try a different style? (instead of again asking for a nerf of a style just because it punishes the greedyness of a zerg)
You should ask your self the other question from another point of view. How would the balance and win rates look with this Timing didn't work? Most Protoss Pros wouldn't even win probably currently even half of their games, again a testament to the state of the matchup.
User was warned for this post
|
Couldn't you argue that the zerg needs to burrow under FF's and snipe the obs? That would be a micro-heavy solution to forcefields.
|
Agreed.
Would be all for a slight buff to tunneling claws or drop tech. Maybe even a slight change to ff? Who knows.
Very happy to see a pro standing up for us zergs losing to those damn immortal sentry all-ins.
|
On November 18 2012 23:05 Liquid`Nazgul wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2012 23:02 divito wrote:
Only difference being that a forcefield doesn't always trap units, usually only blocks. A fungal is even worse in this regard because you can't move at all, and it does damage to boot.
Zerg and Terran can escape, either through burrow, as well as movement, and being picked up in medivacs. Both of these points alleviate the "no micro" argument. Protoss has no such way out though. Although of course you are right that both burrow as well as medivacs are the leftover micro actions that can help, I feel like you are missing a realistic game approach when using them as counter arguments. Take burrow for example you can't have it very early in the game, and late in the game with large armies you lose more from burrowing than you do from fighting. Because of this the timeframe where forcefields increase micro from a Zerg is rare and limited.
Yes but how the hell do you fix FF without screwing up P? If you nerf FF in any way shape or form, Z can just 3 base 200/200 Roach/Ling bust them all day, since perfect FF's, good building placement, and having out a few Immortals in time is the only way to hold that type of timing. FFs in general are crucial to P's survival up to around 8-10 minutes, and without them P is in a huge amount of trouble since their tier 1 is so weak when comparing them to T or Z. It isn't until Blink/Charge is on the field that their tier 1 is any decent, and even then if it's tier 1 P with upgrades vs tier 1 units of Z or T that are fully upgraded, P's Zealot/Stalkers still get obliterated.
|
On November 19 2012 00:41 Meatt wrote:
Couldn't you argue that the zerg needs to burrow under FF's and snipe the obs? That would be a micro-heavy solution to forcefields.
At 13 min mark,which unit in ZvP can snipe the Observer? Antiair is the Queen only and she wouldnt do it because of FFs and being too slow
|
On November 19 2012 00:30 Asmodeusx wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote:
Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Try to fungal like Stephano, then try to FF like Parting. Then slap yourslef for being ignorant.
Limits the opponent's ability to micro.
|
On November 19 2012 00:36 freetgy wrote:
unlike fungal, forcefields are are a spell that needs alot more skill than most other casting spells.
Sorry, but Sentries Immortal all-ins are going to be always strong, if Zerg insists on fighting with only tier 1 units.
Discussion ends, Pro gamers just seem to have found a timing that exploits the tech disadvantage of a fast 3 hatch and now people call this OP??
How about Zerg players just adapt and maybe try a different style? (instead of again asking for a nerf of a style just because it punishes the greedyness of a zerg)
You should ask your self the other question from another point of view. How would the balance and win rates look with this Timing didn't work? Most Protoss Pros wouldn't even win probably currently even half of their games, again a testament to the state of the matchup.
You know the win rates would look realy bad if zerg didin't 3 hatch every game. Toss going straight to higher tiers from 2 base is alweys stronger than zerg doing the same.
|
On November 19 2012 00:50 SacredCoconut wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2012 00:36 freetgy wrote:
unlike fungal, forcefields are are a spell that needs alot more skill than most other casting spells.
Sorry, but Sentries Immortal all-ins are going to be always strong, if Zerg insists on fighting with only tier 1 units.
Discussion ends, Pro gamers just seem to have found a timing that exploits the tech disadvantage of a fast 3 hatch and now people call this OP??
How about Zerg players just adapt and maybe try a different style? (instead of again asking for a nerf of a style just because it punishes the greedyness of a zerg)
You should ask your self the other question from another point of view. How would the balance and win rates look with this Timing didn't work? Most Protoss Pros wouldn't even win probably currently even half of their games, again a testament to the state of the matchup. You know the win rates would look realy bad if zerg didin't 3 hatch every game. Toss going straight to higher tiers from 2 base is alweys stronger than zerg doing the same.
Winrates would also look very bad if you nerfed FF at all. The spell in its current incarnation holds so many different timings and allows P to actually play aggressive against Z. Without FF, a P is stuck on 2 bases forever until Colossus are out. P already has no way to pressure a Z before the 8 minute mark without virtually going all-in, so any kind of nerf to FF would likely shift that aggression mark to a later minute mark, meaning a Z has even more freedom to drone like a whore.
|
As morrow said this is nothing new. FF makes games frustrating to play and boring to watch but currently they have to exist. A protoss army will just get overrun by a zerg army early in the game due to how much more cost efficient the zerg army is at this stage.
I personally think force field needs to be removed and the protoss army needs to some how be made strong enough that it can actually fight the other races army because having to rely on zoning huge portions of units out of a fight creates really uninteresting and lopsided battles. At the same time though you need to make sure pvp doesn't just end up being 4 gate vs 4 gate again.
I have no idea how to do any of this though >.<
I guess some possible solutions could be:
- Buffing guardian shield to give additional stats... maybe just to gateway units?
- Adjusting the cost of either stalkers or roaches to keep unit counts slightly more even?
- Give a new spell entirely which has less zoning potential but is still powerful enough to balance out the fights.
|
So it's basically the same as fungual ?
As long as toss gets some late game option via hard nerf of fungual and infested terran i would agree that ff or even sentries as a whole should be changed to only work on the defensive side of things and not be possible to use efficiently w/o cannons/sim city ( say replace ff with slow/20 sec cannon buff... etc, so toss can still take a 3rd relaying on ff but not do a timing that's based on ff )
|
Give hatcheries an Overgrowth ability that sacs health to nullify a forcefield. And also it can nullify a bunker, then you can decrease bunker build time. It's been a while since we had a bunker patch.
|
On November 19 2012 00:50 SacredCoconut wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2012 00:36 freetgy wrote:
unlike fungal, forcefields are are a spell that needs alot more skill than most other casting spells.
Sorry, but Sentries Immortal all-ins are going to be always strong, if Zerg insists on fighting with only tier 1 units.
Discussion ends, Pro gamers just seem to have found a timing that exploits the tech disadvantage of a fast 3 hatch and now people call this OP??
How about Zerg players just adapt and maybe try a different style? (instead of again asking for a nerf of a style just because it punishes the greedyness of a zerg)
You should ask your self the other question from another point of view. How would the balance and win rates look with this Timing didn't work? Most Protoss Pros wouldn't even win probably currently even half of their games, again a testament to the state of the matchup. You know the win rates would look realy bad if zerg didin't 3 hatch every game. Toss going straight to higher tiers from 2 base is alweys stronger than zerg doing the same.
yes it it, that why you sack alot bit of eco from your 3 hatch build and build more static defense or overhelming amount of units. It is clear, that a good surround is easily able to kill this push. Because this build only works if you can shield the opponents ranged units from your immortals.
Imho extensive creep spead helps alot here. The moment sentries are close to out of energy = P loses
|
You can't modify the forcefields you silly bastards, you would need to start modifying every race if you modify forcefields.
CLEARLY the solution is to just make a freakin' soft/semihard counter to the sentry that zerg can make on the early game, some unit that can help stop protoss's 2/3 bases mass sentrys allins.
|
I kinda agree with the OP. While the FF was a very good idea at first, it becomes very micro unfriendly for the opponent and very unforgiving for the protoss player.
It is hard to change a single unit without screwing up other units or match ups, but hey, here's my try for a sentry rework :
+ Show Spoiler +They could rework the sentry this way :
- Sentry more tanky
- FF removed, added gigantism : for 75 mana : The sentry gains added hp and armor and see his size multiplied by 2. The sentry can push units away in this form. last 5 seconds
The sentry could now do some very brutal flanking, it could be target down with enough dps, makes a dynamic micro for the defenser and attacker. could easily be balanced by tweeking hp, hp boost from gigantism, mana cost or duration of the skill. In the end it would make a very fun unit to play with or against.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
