this is a post i originally posted on the hots public discussion thread (as well as the internal hots forum). this is not really a discussion that applies only to hots, of course its very relevant in WoL too i felt like posting it here too.
im sure we all just saw the amazing tournament that just happened (wcs world). i suggest for all who didnt watch it should go check up the vods (not sure where or if they exist sorry).
after i saw parting win against sen with immortal sentry allin 3 games in a row and afterwards seeing sen get destroyed by rain 3 games in a row with timing attacks before broodlord tipped me over the edge to finally go ahead and get this off my chest. mind you i think parting rain and sen are all great players and i do realize they were not perfectly played games too from both zerg and protoss perspectives - i still feel they demonstrated what im talking about here.
so please go ahead and discuss what you think about this, everyone has their own opinions wether or not this is an issue, if its even possible at this point to fix and even more specifically what is actually needed to be done to address the issues presented
This is nothing new and this has been the case all along this has been an ongoing thought of many progamers for quite a long time but i thought like posting about it now because of some games were seeing in the wcs tournament in china
the issue is regarding ZvP at given point of the game, but more heavily before infestors or broodlords are out. in other words normally prior the 12 minute mark for infestors and 16 minute mark of broodlords.
Protoss player needs great micro, zerg needs protoss not to have the issue is really not that complicated, its very hard for a zerg player to win a fight by having superior micro than his opponent. in a classic zvp fight, it only comes down to the skill and micro of the protoss player. (ofcourse there is a lot of skill involved where zerg chooses to pick his battles and so forth, but what im talking about is the actual battle and not where or how its initiated).
if both players micro badly, lets say the forcefields are late and/or missing and zerg is just amoving without any target fireing etc - the zerg almost always totally destroys the battle.
if both players micro absolutely beautiful, forcefields cut out the perfect amount of zerg units outside range of the protoss army and lets perfect amount of zerg units inside the forcefields doomed to die. the actual zerg micro is not really relevant during a fight, he move commands into the protoss and crosses his fingers his opponents micro wont be godly. once the forcefields are declared the room zerg has to micro is to target fire down the most potent units as much as possible while hes rapidly losing his units inside the forcefields.
so if you compare both of the races in such a situation, the zerg doesnt really have a lot of room to preform great micro, at same time zerg has little to no room to !@#$ up during the engement. where as a protoss players micro control can be everything from god awful and lose his entire army in a snap second to executing perfectly and absolutely destroys the zerg army losing close to nothing.
"I have to learn actually micro while you a-move" "well at least you can micro" this is very frustrating for both sides of the table. the protoss is unhappy because his micro control has to be spot on to be able to keep up with a zerg that doesnt really need great micro. and a high level zerg player feels helpless to outplay his opponent because he feels he has not enough opportunities to stand out from a lesser zerg player.
Closing the distance there has been many ways zerg players has tried to close the distance and put their faiths into their own hands trying to win engements by their own micro control and not relying on protoss microing poorly with burrow movement roaches and overlord drops. both of these tools were absolutely amazing for a period of time - but eventually protosses found micro techniques and ways to about it to counter these tools. against drops they would normally put down forcefields and snipe an overlord at a time while kiting backwards. the overlords were simply too fragile and slow to ever catch up with the kiting protoss army. against burrow movement the protoss would do a similar technique. they would wait for the roaches to come out or close to passing the initial forcefields, then proceed to back off with their units slightly and put down a new layer of forcefields. the roaches end up being prisoned from surface by the forcefields, stuck under the ice in other words
from this we see alot of protosses on the absolute top level of play "abuse" the fact that their micro control is so good, so strong that they feel immortal from dying as long as they are attacking in the right timing windows. the build everyone is thinking of already, im sure - is the famous 3immortal allin warp prism (10:30~) but also the classic "timing before broodlord" which is more of a playstyle than a build. both of these timings share a very similar key to success, the lack of zergs ability to close the distance between the zerg and protoss army because of forcefield. 3base infestor can come out at different timings - sure its possible to get infestors out by the time such an immortal allin would strike, but that doesnt change the fact that if zerg doesnt have infestors, prior statements written in this post remain true - zerg feels helpless against perfectly controlled protoss army. the meta game were in right now, zergs dont simply go this quick infestors because of their fear to get killed by different builds than the 3immortal allin (there are alot of strong timing attacks from protoss prior 10:30 that would destroy a zerg cutting corners to try to get to infestors out earlier).
the timing attack before broodlord is very loose on when its hitting, because its much later timing. protoss is on 3bases and zerg is on 4, usually all games look slightly different but this timing normally always exists and every top protoss player knows by now - they need to kill zerg before broodlords are out. why that is exactly i wont go into. this topic is about forcefield and not the well-known problematic lack of protoss lategame options against a zerg.
zerg will have infestors out - sure, and corrupters are flying they dont care about forcefields. thats true as well. but the thing that you need to keep in mind is, once you get enugh colossus you just kind of destroy infested terrans without a problem (the magic number for this timing is usually 3). forcefields not only prevents the zerg army from engaging, they help a ton to prevent the perfect fungals from going down, and when fungals can only hit a colossus and 3~ gateway units its not nearly as effective anymore. the corrupters are usually a great tool, if you get fungal on a colossus simultaneously sending in the corrupters to pick that colossus off - youll kill it with ease. but most of the times that is not the case. another thing to keep in mind is most of the times zerg will not even have corrupters out at this time, and if they do they wont really have a sufficient number to survive the stalker fire while trying to kill the colossus. its safe to say by now the timing before the broodlord is a very sticky situation for both where a lot of dancing is done through fungal corrupter colossus stalker. but the ground army is almost not relevant at all because of forcefield.
Nothing dies, then suddenly everything dies when protoss gets enough sentries for forcefield, zergs army becomes kind of useless. the second forcefields run out for protoss, the protoss army gets easily run over and killed without a chance
Its all about the force fields i think forcefield takes too heavy weight in this matchup. and i hope blizzard agrees with me. i want a zerg with great micro control to find ways to deal with the forcefield and i would love if the protoss army wouldnt completely get rolled without relying on forcefield. it is very uninteresting at times in these top level pvz games perfect forcefields keep the protoss army invournable and as soon as they run out - the toss dies.
Where is the first step? Is there one? Maybe its even too late i know its not an easy fix. because force field has been the word in zvp for all this time its hard to imagine the things needed for a protoss player to beat a zerg army without a huge wall of forcefield unabling the zerg to actually attack the protoss army. zerg unit nerfs? protoss buffs? how will any of this work in other matchups? its also hard to find the best ways to able zerg through micro control to close the distance. what should be changes, forcefield, tunneling claws, overlord drops something new entirely? i dont know
keep in mind, i dont want forcefield to be removed from the game, i think its awesome. i just think it has way too big weight in the matchup and there are some huge issues that come from it.
its very clear at this point, not addressing the issue is probably the easiest way to go about it. is this really a fundamental flaw that needs to be adressed? is it really that bad that zerg players cant show off great micro while protoss is required to? its to each his own but i definitely think this is one of the hugest problems in this matchup for a very long time and frankly im quite sick of it. each time i win a zvp engemenent theres a voice in the back of my head that keeps telling me "you won because the protoss %^-*ed up". never am i thinking what i did great, perhaps because i didnt
thanks for reading ! im looking forward to hear your thoughts P.S a community personal in the blizzard office will make sure this topic reaches out to david kim and browder too, so they might be reading your opinions too here
"Its amazing that we have different champions in a game where force fields exist" - Artosis
i m still feeling like burrowed roaches and overlord drops are underused and underrated
but i totally agree with your point about the lack of options zerg can use to micro their heart out to win a battle, while protoss has to do too much in comparision to a zerg
What if forcefields were made so that you cant place them on top of units, just like buildings? That would prevent that splitting army into 10 bits and win, but FF would still be good defensively.
On November 18 2012 21:47 tehcaekftw wrote: What if forcefields were made so that you cant place them on top of units, just like buildings? That would prevent that splitting army into 10 bits and win, but FF would still be good defensively.
totally agree with this. But it would be extremely hard to fix this, I feel. Maybe nerf ff (reduce their size, slow units and not block them, 2 ff max for a sentry, ...) and buff zealot stalker. Bunkers would have to be buffed as well then, I guess.
On November 18 2012 21:45 randoomguy wrote: welcome to tvz for a terran player
actually: no, this isnt the same. tvz its atleast splitting/target fireing vs hitting fungals and getting good surrounds/baneling connections. If both players just amove into each other the battle is never as onesided as a pvz battle where the protoss player is lacking forcefields in the situation the op is describing.
I think using sen's games vs. parting are a bad example, he engaged pretty poorly in games 2 and 3 (and held the attack game 1). With the kind of army he was going for (1-1 lings) he should be wasting forcefields constantly from the protosses nat instead of just letting him march up to your third/nat with full forcefield energy AND your army is at a bad angle. Complaining about forcefields at that point is like complaining about engaging a sieged army from a choke.
I don't play Zerg or Protoss (as a matter of fact I haven't really played the game at all for ages) but from a spectator point of view I find that both forcefield and fungal can make for some boring fights since they restrict the other players ability to micro. It's pretty anticlimactic to see an army get destroyed without being able to do anything. Sure, once in a while it's fun to see a player land those perfect hits and destroy the opponent, but when it happens over and over it's not really that exciting.
So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
It's pretty sad this game doesn't promote micro more, and it instead has 'unable to micro' spells like force fields and fungal growths. Actually, I think the same applies to Broodlords too because broodlings trap your units in some cases. I'd rather have them replaced with guardians, that way you can at least micro & blink better than now.
On November 18 2012 21:47 tehcaekftw wrote: What if forcefields were made so that you cant place them on top of units, just like buildings? That would prevent that splitting army into 10 bits and win, but FF would still be good defensively.
Tier 1 Protoss cant be made stronger because of the warp in mechanic. They dont have a attackers disadvantage in the early game, because of this their units cannot roughly equal the strength of Terran or Zerg early game. If they were the same strength, Terran and maybe Zerg, wouldnt be able to ever tech-up because of the possible 4-gate all-in.
Instead, Protoss has the force field, it becomes effective a little later in the game, and gives Protoss a roughly equally strong Tier1 army.
The proposition is now: If you want to change Protoss Tier1, you first have to change the warp in mechanic.
The problem is, fixing FF now would require an overhaul for all matchups (I don't see protosses defending the 10mn medivac timing without FF). But yeah you're totally right, everybody from bronze to pros is annoyed by forcefields; low level protosses use them badly and complain, while at very high level it's terrans and zergs that struggle against protosses with good micro. The oracle AOE snare is a bit of the same on top of that, and overlaps with forcefields, and won't make the situation get better..
The difference between a stephano/life and a morrow/idra is battle micro. Stephano wins many of these engagements even after hitting a bunch of supply blocks. Hitting from 3 sides with optimal geography and then pulling back away from the forcefields, targeting sentries with the trapped units, slowing the advance. Sure you can win by 1A+hope he fucks up, but thats the strat for those of us in the lower leagues, you pro's gotta do better.
It's just not possible to change FF without throwing everything out and starting over. You'd have to do all kinds of other stuff. Changing forcefield will straight up kill protoss in early game PvT, it's already desperate with them. Roaches would need a massive nerf, which is only going to make 5-7 gate timings stupid strong, so you'd have to change warpgate to make it weaker at range/or require warp prisms somehow if too far from base. While you're at it throw dragoons (or some other effective 10-15 minute AA) back in so mutas don't mean 3rds have to be hugging the crap out of the main base for PvZ.
Late game massed infestor is a bigger problem for the matchup than zerg not wanting to micro or setup engagements from multiple directions.
I would love for Blizzard to remove forcefield, infestors, brood lords and collosus from the game and design something that isn't terrible to replace them.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
This.
If you remove even little the players ability to improve in name of micro, so whats the point of these spells? Offc you can try to pick your fights, but thats about it.
Offc. in the original there was stasis field, which did something similiar, but it didnt kill a BUNCH of units, or deny vital ghost emps and trap fe. vikings and mothership.
Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
i wrote a blog about spell casters a few days ago.. my conclusion is basically the forcefield fungal or whatever micro limiting / OP spells exist should be moved to late game higher tier units with high gas cost so they cannot be spammed. All toss would need imo is a beefy fast microable unit to last until colo and then your zealots can be your ff.. personally if people really think races should be focused around spell casters early game idk.. its not even good for new players..i think these spells should not exist at all..
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
On November 18 2012 22:23 Gladiator333 wrote: Too much work to do something about forcefields, I think it's better to balance the metagame around maps.
but that still isn't going to fix this lame aspact of the game.
I got to agree force field is an incredibly frustating spell for both sides. Especially because it forces this gamble game depending on the protoss skill, you move in and do damage if the protoss didn't pay enough attention / missed his ff and lose heavily if he did. The worst thing about it all is that it makes both sides unable to retreat in fights because the sentries are slow so P can't retreat yet zerg can't really dance back and forth either because the units get cut off. Also it forces the maps to have certain setups like a third that is choked enough etc. most times maps have been removed from the pool was because they were unbalanced in ZvP.
I don't think forcefield will be removed or altered heavily in HotS nor should it be. I'd just like to see changes that would make mass sentries uneffective like it should be, ie there should be abilities or units that invalidate FF making mass sentry unviable. Further more it would be great if sentryless play would actually be possible so protoss could compete on open maps too which would both open the variety for protoss itself but also in the map pool. All in all I think two changes are neccesary: - Zerg should be able to 'counter' mass forcefield earlier in the game. All the options that do now are not effective enough or come too late in the game. From what I've played the swarm host doesn't help much either here because I think it just comes just a tad late for mass sentry pushes nor does it make ff useless, in fact containing the locusts with ff and killing the hosts is very good. A couple solutions are possible but not of them ideal: roach burrow movement can be buffed by making it faster but removing the extra healing or letting it crush FFs when you unburrow underneath them, that way zerg can counter the mass FF by the 11 min mark. Another possiblity is just buffing the hydra a little bit, it's range already makes it counter FF by some degree and if they just had something like +10 hp they would be a viable option ZvP. Queens being massive could also be a cute way to solve the problem but it has weird implications on P air vs zerg (can't lift queen anymore but voidray and tempest get stronger). If only the swarm host had been the lurker... It would have been cooler and would be such a sweet and simple solution to mass sentry balls.
- Protoss should be able to play without sentries against zerg, that way maps can open up and you'd automatically see mass sentry less often because it wouldn't be good anyway on those open maps. Mothership core helps a bit already for defending the third and ideally zealot based armies get a bit more viable in PvZ. At the moment that's not really happening though in HotS because roaches/hydra stomp zealots way too hard with some simple kiting, something that hydra's can even do off creep now. Time warp could be the elegant solution for this but it's not good enough at the moment, the effect should cling to units or something really because fast units like roaches just move out of it way too fast. It's hard to make time warp good though without breaking it in PvT or in conjunction with storm.
At the moment it's looking rather grim for HotS though, sentries remain just as strong early on perhaps even stronger in PvZ and the mothership core only promotes sentry pushes even more. Since you'll be having the MsC anyway why would you not do a sentry push every game now.. It's completely safe, does garanteed damage (by forcing Z to make units) and the MsC interacts perfect with your clumped up sentry/stalker ball. Sentries even provide superb scouting for free now and have more lategame use just holding off locusts for a while.
On November 18 2012 22:23 Gladiator333 wrote: Too much work to do something about forcefields, I think it's better to balance the metagame around maps.
Arnt the maps already build this way because FF will otherwhise be too weak? And as stated, if FF get any weaker, zerg (and probably Terran), will just overrun Protoss.
On November 18 2012 22:23 leo23 wrote: Fungal and forcefield is just the bane of SC2, and if you want to change forcefields you would have to redesign P entirely.
Is this a legit argument? You are saying we clearly have a broken game but it takes too much time to fix sooo... o well.. or; lets try something else.. The best answer always has been and always will be pro-active patching which apparently everyone is too lazy to do >>
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
I think you could change fungal and FF quite easily without affecting the balance of matchups too much.
e.g. Fungal now acts like a plague - cast it on one unit, it does damage and spreads to a nearby unit. It still punishes units clumped up and rewards spreading out, but you can micro vs it
Forcefield just change it to a field you cast in a location which increases the damage taken by enemy units.
With the right numbers i can't see it screwing balance all that much, might change the metagame but is that so bad?
On November 18 2012 22:23 leo23 wrote: Fungal and forcefield is just the bane of SC2, and if you want to change forcefields you would have to redesign P entirely.
Is this a legit argument? You are saying we clearly have a broken game but it takes too much time to fix sooo... o well.. or; lets try something else.. The best answer always has been and always will be pro-active patching which apparently everyone is too lazy to do >>
In 4 months what more can you do... A protoss redesign would need another year of beta.
I agree with Morrow. How about making FFs a slow and lower the sentry costs to 50/50. With the lower gas-costs they would be also more available in the late game.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Great idea, would never think of it. Could you please provide a gm lvl replay of you smashing that all in with 20 lings ?
On November 18 2012 21:49 Mandalor wrote: totally agree with this. But it would be extremely hard to fix this, I feel. Maybe nerf ff (reduce their size, slow units and not block them, 2 ff max for a sentry, ...) and buff zealot stalker. Bunkers would have to be buffed as well then, I guess.
Increase size, slow units, make sentry a flying unit.
Honestly, it would be much better if the Twilight Council upgrades for Zealot and Stalker were the things that escalate protoss tier 1 to an equal level with Zerg and Terran, and Sentry was strictly relegated to being a defensive tool. If they buff Zealot charge, and maybe give Stalkers a second upgrade (Blink is really nice though), Sentries could see a movement speed nerf, or mana cost nerf and Protoss could just phase them out. Luckily, Sentry requires no specific tech, so I don't see it being an issue to have Sentries early.
On November 18 2012 22:32 Big-t wrote: I agree with Morrow. How about making FFs a slow and lower the sentry costs to 50/50. With the lower gas-costs they would be also more available in the late game.
lol you are suggesting this as if its no big deal. you can't just come up with a random solution by throwing around numbers and then hope it's fixed
I think the OP make some fair points, but overall I don't think the problem is with the spells ie forcefield or fungal.
If you look at every PvZ in this tournament, 2 facts are obvious: 1- nothing happens in the first 8 min of the game (as far as interactions go) 2- if the protoss have at any point up until broodlords higher/equal supply to the zerg, then the zerg is in trouble
For me that means that on one hand FFE is a bad strategy that consist in letting your opponent do whatever he wishes to during 8 minutes, and that on the other hand protoss units are overall much stronger than their zerg counterparts up until bl.
Forcefield is a great spell that boost positioning, allowing for protoss units to have even more effectiveness. But why do they have to rely so heavily on it is that because despite doing the seemingly most economically focused strat in the P arsenal (FFE) they have no way of preventing the zerg to be even more greedy, as they do nothing for 7 minutes.
If you take any other strategy game, like go or chess, and the opponent knows the 10 first move that you are going to make no matter what, of course he is going to exploit it and set up a perfect counter.
In the end, the only way for a FFE protoss to win is to rely on an all in. No other strat seems to work (look at hero vs sen game 5). By definition an all in is a VERY strong attack, and that the strenght of it is in the positional edge given by the forcefields does not mean that it is not a legitimate strenght.
In the end, I feel like protoss should find ways to disturb the zerg before the 8 min. If they did invest in earlier agression, they would not have the gas to make so many sentries early, and the game could not be decided by an all-in.
Basically the Z's edge is his econ (larvae mechanics) and the P's edge is his units strenght. Both should use them and try to prevent the opponent from using his.
Agreed, thanks for posting. I remember Gretorp's post about the problems with vortex, fungal and force field and found it regrettable that the discussion seems to center only on fungal lately. I'm a zerg player, but I'm not looking for an advantage, nerf infestors all you want, but force fields are the single one thing in this game that I constantly find frustrating, as a viewer and as a player.
This has been my empirical thesis I've been developing over the course of the last three months:
TvZ is balanced assuming terran has unlimited skill, and PvZ has im a early game toss rushes and nearly impossible to beat lategame zerg armies.
It's rough, and I don't know how to fix it at all but changing protoss would be the best catalyst for pvz and changing terran underused t3 would be the best catalyst for making tvz more forgiving.
Definitely a significant proportion of games are like MorroW described and its a major problem. The map pool doesn't really support diversity and so the meta game's a little stale.
On November 18 2012 21:45 randoomguy wrote: welcome to tvz for a terran player
actually: no, this isnt the same. tvz its atleast splitting/target fireing vs hitting fungals and getting good surrounds/baneling connections. If both players just amove into each other the battle is never as onesided as a pvz battle where the protoss player is lacking forcefields in the situation the op is describing.
No, it's even more onesided. Clumped bio vs fungal and banelings, that battle is over in 1/10th of the time that the PvZ battle will take.
I'd like to add that the reliance of Protoss in PvZ on FF's also heavily constricts map design.
On maps without a couple of easily defendable chokes it's so hard to defend a third (because you need more and more precise) ff's, that Protoss doesn't even bother with it, and instead just 2base all-ins literally every game.
We have seen this time and time again, from Crossfire to Dual Sight to Bel'shir Beach, even including "modern" maps like Abyssal City and Bel'Shir Vestige.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
Spells should limit opponents but also give them new opportunities to micro, think of storm and dark swarm. Both force fields and fungal are too restrictive in that sense. BroodWar had a couple of these spells too but they were high tier and uncommon enough to be met with excitement (lock-down, stasis). As soon as your backbone units enforce this kind of restrictiveness en mass it hurts the gameplay possibilities.
It's not an easy thing to fix but it is important to create awareness for, and a good read nonetheless.
On November 18 2012 22:40 tMomiji wrote: Why not just decrease their time?
That means 4 gate wars will happen again in every pvp...
Pretty bad rebuttle considering how easy - or hard - 4 gate is to hold all depending on your build or map presence. Just to help you understand.. you can 11 gate 2 zeal 2 stalker sentry robo immortal before a 4 gate even touches ur ramp if u control the map right.. there are other similar builds without that fast of a gate as well you just dont see any of them anymore because if people cheese they do korean 3 gate or something.
In response to the other guy.. yeah.. there is a beta of a game they could be redesigning toss, or anything else, out already any other excuse? lol
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
Again, read the post. It's not just about the all-in. You're not being reasonable at all.
On November 18 2012 22:53 DaCruise wrote: So according to the OP zerg only needs broodlords, infestors and corrupters. Maybe thats where the problem lies?
Fixt.
And to reiterate off my other post. Im not saying the mechanic is bad game design. Im just saying its not op
@Exo...
Ive read both the posts. Im only choosing to comment on a specific part. I agree that the game design is bad. I agree that limiting the your opponents micro is bad. It doesn't change the fact that he posted this due to watching an all-in succeed. Outside of that all-in, their is no imbalance like he implies imo. Valid game design complaints are at best what this thread is. And sorry, after reading his mech post Im going to take anything he says with a grain of salt
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
No, he's complaining about a game element designed to make micro from one side irrelevant.
Forcefields are bad because they make the engagement down to PROTOSS micro, not micro from both players. Just like fungal often brings ZvT down to micro from one player (the terran) with regards to avoiding the fungal.
He's not complaining about sentries because of an all in, he's complaining about an element of game design which is around taking away half of the game (one player's skill) and making it all about his opponents skill to win or fuck up.
You seem to be focusing on the immortal all-in, Morrow did not, he just mentioned it as the re-inspiration for the discussion, which is not at all a new discussion, and is the same issue which as been around since GSL season 1 (well, since SC2 existed).
If you want a tl'dr of his op,. here it is:
Forcefield sucks because it removes the ability of the zerg to micro, and makes the game all about whether the protoss can put down good FF or not.
This is such an awkward problem. Keep the FF as it is and have Zerg melt in seconds. Alter the FF and have Protoss melt in seconds.
This ability is ridiculous, no single spell should govern the outcome of a game so harshly (except "Hero" units, possibly). So, I think we're seeing this the wrong way. There's no need to change the FF in any way, we just need to give Zerg more tactical choices against it rather than simply evading them.
A possible solution would be to make some early/early mid game unit massive. Making Hydralisks massive (would probably require a change in design) would make them more viable without necessarily buffing them and would give Zerg a choice to sacrifice a few of its units to stomp the forcefields. The biggest problem here is, of course, that some units get an unfair damage advantage against Massive.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
I'm not saying you're wrong, and I'm not a high level player, but isn't this so obvious that we should assume pros have tried it? I think zergs stay in their base so long because they struggle to pump enough units. If you move out with too few units, you're not really slowing him down but take a high risk of throwing away units you need to survive. We saw that over and over in WCS.
On November 18 2012 22:55 Lonyo wrote: He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
No, he's complaining about a game element designed to make micro from one side irrelevant.
Forcefields are bad because they make the engagement down to PROTOSS micro, not micro from both players. Just like fungal often brings ZvT down to micro from one player (the terran) with regards to avoiding the fungal.
He's not complaining about sentries because of an all in, he's complaining about an element of game design which is around taking away half of the game (one player's skill) and making it all about his opponents skill to win or fuck up.
You seem to be focusing on the immortal all-in, Morrow did not, he just mentioned it as the re-inspiration for the discussion, which is not at all a new discussion, and is the same issue which as been around since GSL season 1 (well, since SC2 existed).
If you want a tl'dr of his op,. here it is:
Forcefield sucks because it removes the ability of the zerg to micro, and makes the game all about whether the protoss can put down good FF or not.
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.
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.
ive always felt that FF should have a health limit (the size of however many seconds its there), that automatically depletes 1 health for each second until the health is gone (then the FF disappears). Then, you should be able to target fire FF, depleting the health faster, and making it not so impossible to micro around perfect FF placements. Even semi-decent FF placements makes it incredibly hard for Z to micro anything. Therefore this would reward very strong Z micro with target firing and swarming through the holes you make (allowing for Z to actually do good damage in battles that right now are just "whoops, i guess thats a free half my army for him", and it rewards very strong P micro by keeping tabs on the health of your FF's and making sure to drop a new one behind/on top of the one that you just lost.
As a high level random player in the past (now I play mostly zerg) I understand the problem from both sides of the matchup. MorroW stated it very well in the thread and it makes a lot of sense, but we still have no solutions.
If looking at unit buffs and taking away the forcefield, we really need to take into account what qxc said in his first episode of "fixing the game" (if you haven't seen it, go watch it now) If we're looking at changing forcefield and fungal (which I would greatly prefer) we need to take into account some things 1. we don't want the opponent to be helpless if the spells are cast like they are now (no movement) (this means no projectile, because the end result is still the same)
what are some solutions then? well I don't really know. maybe we make the forcefield have health like entomb did so you can focus it down with decent micro maybe in this situation we buff the stalker to do a little more damage to armored units to compensate (not affective PvT THAT much) maybe we make fungal slow instead of snare, so you can spread to prevent chain fungals
there are a lot of possible solutions out there, and as long as blizzard recognizes the level of problem that we're at they will hopefully fix it.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
No, he's complaining about a game element designed to make micro from one side irrelevant.
Forcefields are bad because they make the engagement down to PROTOSS micro, not micro from both players. Just like fungal often brings ZvT down to micro from one player (the terran) with regards to avoiding the fungal.
He's not complaining about sentries because of an all in, he's complaining about an element of game design which is around taking away half of the game (one player's skill) and making it all about his opponents skill to win or fuck up.
You seem to be focusing on the immortal all-in, Morrow did not, he just mentioned it as the re-inspiration for the discussion, which is not at all a new discussion, and is the same issue which as been around since GSL season 1 (well, since SC2 existed).
If you want a tl'dr of his op,. here it is:
Forcefield sucks because it removes the ability of the zerg to micro, and makes the game all about whether the protoss can put down good FF or not.
Happens to terran aswell with inmortals all ins if you don't scout. Yes they are PITA. Yes, they are badly designed abilities since they are spammable and relatively low cost. The problem is how much re-design they need, both races. Abilities that CC should be always single target imho, like lockdown. My point is the OP talking like pro level tosses just rape everybody because they have the micro to do so. It's untrue and trying to state that goes against what he is trying to explain.
The biggest problem with PvZ is it's balanced through win/rate only, when one race has a 80% chance to win before X time, and the other race has a 80% chance to win after that time, they just adjusted the timing for that happening so the win-ratio would be somewhat equal. Protoss FF is no worse than Fungal Growth, and i don't see the OP talking about it like he should when talking about anti-micro abilities.
Thanks Morrow. I'm sure there are many other issues, which should and have to be fixed. we need more progamer opinions spoken publically (not in destiny's way ofc), otherwise, we end up with a shit game for the rest of its life.
Its not like theres a great range of zerg micro being denied. Even in the rare games FFs aren't casted against zerg (or more commonly the games where they're misplaced), I _never_ feel that there is some impressive micro going on outside of maybe the first few lings OR burrow, and burrow isn't denied. Most zerg micro outside ZvZ is concentrated solely in fungal, transfuse and pre-splitting BLs, and obviously FF has little to no impact at that stage.
As a balance issue FF has a lot to answer for. But thats a longwinded explanation that FF is too good at denying surrounds, sectioning zergs armies, denying retreats and punishing positional mistakes with the end result toss being too dependant on FF and the game being frustrating to both sides. SC2 is riddled with similar problems though, the mothership/vortex -> BL/infestor relationship suffers literally the exact same problem and frustrations from both sides.
What if the forcefields get some sort of HP, but not be a priority target.
that way people with micro can choose which forcefields they want to destroy and the shitty zerg with crappy micro will just continue to run his zerg units into the forcefield needlessly.
i dont really see any other option (with my limited experience) to fixing this without completely removing the forcefield altogether.
forcefields are the best new ability introduced imo. so unique and makes every engagement more interesting to the viewer, not just oh look he has more marauders than stalkers he stims and wins. without forcefields protoss would be absolute shit - even with a buff to their core units, which would be even more fragile since balancing that tipping point would be hard.
as for the anti micro? some of my favorite things to watch are great terran players baiting the forcefields with units and staying just outside the range, thorzaine comes to mind.
i mean its like the ONLY ability that doesn't affect units healthwise
Watch stephano's ZvP style, he microes his units in ways most other pro zergs don't. He targetfires sentries, kites, etcetera. As for P not being strong enough after broodlords, you should watch crank play, that guy absolutely DESTROYS zerg after having fought the broodlord army head (even if he doesn't directly win the fight) through amazing usage of warp-prisms.
On November 18 2012 23:05 Liquid`Nazgul wrote: 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.
That may be true.
Rather than really messing with forcefields, I have to wonder if giving them HP along with their 15 seconds would help alleviate some of the issue (I suppose similar to Entomb in HotS). It can't be so small as to be evaporated instantly in late-game armies, but it also can't be large enough to not attract being targeted down.
Similar to bringing a massive unit through a forcefield line, but in a meta where Thors and Ultras aren't really utilized (and you'd be silly to throw a Colossus away), this allows a tangible way for the opposition to not be completely stuck.
Add a spell to a zerg unit that's hardly used at the moment and/or is currently a 1 trick pony. Like a corruptor, overseer, changeling.
A spell that is visible on the unit, like roach tunneling claws. A spell that removes a forcefield and is balancable by tweeking the mana cost. It should probably be very high mana cost so it can't be spammed but gives zerg an escape route when he gets a forcefield donut around his army.
It should be a tech route you need to dedicate for though, which you only start when seeing lots of sentries and delays some other tech routes when you choose this one.
Gives more options, more interesting games. Both Protoss and Zerg get rewarded more for scouting. Zerg when he sees many sentries, protoss when he sees the unit has the anti forcefield upgrade.
Ok, burrow and medivac pickups were mentioned, but these are far away from the only options you have against forcefields. What's more important is baiting forcefields while the P army is out in the open by engaging early, setting up multi angle flanks, and chosing the right location to make the actual engagement. There is a lot you can do, see for example Parting vs Sniper. The immortal sentry allin is being figured out right now, there are not many P that still have success with this at the top level. Parting vs Sen shouldn't be an example, because they are far away from being on the same skill level tbh.
I feel Morrow's arguments aren't strong enough in trying to prove his point. I have seen this kind of speech many times when the game was in other times of metagame phase, and the solutions that solved the problems at the time were based on innovating.
Having said that, i do agree that forcefield is a somewhat boring spell and should be reworked.
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...
I wish people would stop mentioning how many other parental issues w ould have to be fixed as if that means they should stay broken, or that any issues should? It's true, and it would be an overhaul, but how is there any other option? Letting the game stagnate and people quit over it is a fast track to this game dying out.
After reading through some of this topic, the sense that I'm getting is a lot of people are talking about how to change FF when that shouldn't be the point of discussion. When asking to change FF, aren't people doing exactly what they constantly preach against? You're simplifying the game and making it easier to play. If the original complaint centers around FF shifting the micro demand to the Protoss and removing it from the Zerg, then shouldn't the discussion be about how to add micro demand to the Zerg to overcome even perfect FF situations? Probably something in the late early-game or the mid-game when FFs are really an issue?
With expansions on the horizon and in the future, it's much easier to fix by adding than to fix through complete redesign. Blizzard has had plenty of success with adding niche units to balance games through expansions.
I really love FF, can't do em with all the lag and gold-level play I display... but it was such an innovation especially coming from AOE or C&C franchises... Sentries are so fragile and it really divides the good and the rest with Protoss... as for these examples, there were only two high calibre Zergs in this tourney and if your not comparing their games, this isn't a fair sample... Code S/A Korean Zergs vs Korean Protoss show the real state of the game, when it is played to it's full potential...
Never saw an issue fighting or using Force Fields, not that I really use them as Protoss because sentries don't fit into my composition in a way that I would need Forcefields to push away armies. Always like seeing Force Fields as well, but it pains me how badly Zergs deal with them aswell. "Yay I gots my t1 army, now I greedily tech to t3. Awww a t2 based army crushes me that is optimized against my t1 army and while I held them off for 5 minutes I never felt the need to build anything against this composition, why did I lose?"
It is funny though that Forcefields make your units derp until you control them, while Fungal messes up any unit control. So Imo Forcefields do the job of forcing micro pretty well. Fungal does as well, but the issue with fungal is that it deletes orders that were given, which forcefields don't.
PvZ is a matchup were two races meet, that are really slow to develop new strategies. And Blizzard guiding those 2 races for some time, didn't really helped there. Now we get an Infestor nerf, before Broodlord Infestor even got close to perfection or before Protoss even tried to beat it. And the same thing goes on with Immortal sentrie, aside from a few special Zergs.
On November 18 2012 23:34 Zandar wrote: It's not about simplifying the game, Brian333, but there is some unfair micro balance here.
Protoss has to micro his ass off and gets frustrated by that, while zerg gets frustrated because any micro is useless. That's the issue
And the rest of my statement was that it's about balancing the micro demand not through changing FF, but through adding means for the Zerg to micro out of FF situations.
Aye I agreed on that part though, so didn't bother reacting to that, my bad
I also posted an idea for a solution:
On November 18 2012 23:23 Zandar wrote: Add a spell to a zerg unit that's hardly used at the moment and/or is currently a 1 trick pony. Like a corruptor, overseer, changeling.
A spell that is visible on the unit, like roach tunneling claws. A spell that removes a forcefield and is balancable by tweeking the mana cost. It should probably be very high mana cost so it can't be spammed but gives zerg an escape route when he gets a forcefield donut around his army.
It should be a tech route you need to dedicate for though, which you only start when seeing lots of sentries and delays some other tech routes when you choose this one.
Gives more options, more interesting games. Both Protoss and Zerg get rewarded more for scouting. Zerg when he sees many sentries, protoss when he sees the unit has the anti forcefield upgrade.
what about adding zerg some anti-caster unit (infested ghost anyone? :D), which will require micro from zergs to land emp's (or whatever ability) on sentries and micro from toss to deny this? And the same thing should be doable with infestors vs ghost/templar, make feedback/snipe/emp easier to land on infestors (or add oracle something like feedback because templars are slow).
Personally i don't feel like the problem is with FF/fungal but with the fact that you cant really prevent them from being casted.
Great post, valid points. However Forcecield falls under the general philosophy of SC2. The philosophy of a VERY unforgiving and (most of the time) one-sided game.
IMO it's not possible to change the forcefield without touching the rest of the units throughout the entire races. Because forcefield is "perfect" as it is right now, it fills the gap of weak Protoss early game and the evens out battles where P is unavoidably behind in supply.
Colossus, warpgate, marauders, marines, roaches, 4.6 speed lings, stalker being the most dps inefficient unit ETC; these are all variables that make the forcefield fit in to the current (in my opinion poor) state of SC2.
So... FF is the large offender, and Colossus is the minor offender to why PvZ sucks, NOT BROOD LORDS OR INFESTORS sadly enough.
Not to say that Fungal growth isn't broke as fuck, I believe it is, but Force Field is just as broken and available from the first few minutes of the game.
Combined with good building placement, 2 entire bases can be defended with nothing more than 1-3 Cannons and 1-3 Sentries.
PvZ is a shitty MU from this point on. Zerg really cannot be offensive when all offense can be shut down so incredibly cost-effectively.
Zerg cannot afford to tech up quickly because in order to make any T2 tech effective, you need at least 4 gasses and 40+ drones on minerals.
Zergs only option in PvZ becomes 3 hatch. All other options are already shut down by the mere existence of Force Field.
Now, knowing that Zergs only option is 3 hatch and Protoss CANNOT be attacked until Zerg is maxed (or preferably hive tech) Protoss is free to do whatever they want. Stargate isn't good, but since Zerg can't do anything about it, it works. Blink Stalkers isn't good, but throw a handful of Force Fields in front of those Stalkers, and they can become unstoppable. Immortals are only good against Roaches and nothing else really, but due to Force Field, Protoss can pick and choose how much army they want to fight, always putting themselves in an advantageous position.
Lets ignore all this 2 base play though, and fast forward to the thing everybody has been complaining about for the past month: BL/Infestor.
Why is this army so powerful?
2 major reasons: 1) It ignores Force Field 2) It mitigates Colossus
Both of these things shut down everything Zerg does so hard that when Zerg doesn't have to worry about them, Protoss doesn't know what to do. They cry imba.
Now, again, I will agree that Fungal is a broke ass spell, but everything else about the composition is rather mediocre, and the fact that Blizzard is considering addressing BL/Infestor without addressing what FF does to the PvZ MU makes me sad.
Much like Morrow, the prominance of Force Field play in PvZ has made me sick. To the point where I don't even bother playing SC2 anymore. I like ZvZ and ZvT, but having to play the stupidest fucking possible way simply to mitigate the power of that broke ass spell and knowing that I STILL have a 50% chance of losing to an allin while I am full on turtling makes me sick.
SC2 is a broken game. It's not "harsh" or "unforgiving" it's fucking broken, and it's not fun to play.
When I lose to sentry/immortal timings, I don't think "Damn, I got outplayed right there, my opponent is good as fuck" I think "this shit is broken..."
and your 'this shit is broken' mentality is wrong, because you are bad, like every person who has posted in this thread, including morrow (and me and you and all of us)
Both spells are broken, but please dont try to make it out like toss is some fucking unbeatable race Jermstuddog. This is like a case of the pot calling the kettle black. FF and Colosus are no where near as OP as fungal is. All 3 are bad game designs, but bad game design =/= overpowered.
I think Protoss could survive w/out FF in the early game if they
1. Give sentries a "sensor tower" like ability instead (preferably w/out it showing up on minimap) 2. Give zealots the Charge movement speed (regular movement not the ability) 3. Add Blink and Charge to the Cybernetics Core (stick air upgrades on the Forge or Twilight)
Imo the problem is protoss not being able to win in the late game with a fair chance, so they resort to timings and cheese of 2 or 3 base. I love watching forcefields and I hope they don't change them at all. Rather change the late game so protoss don't all -in every game ^^ Also, never seen a zerg pick up units from forcefields, and rarely using burrow movement either although this become redundant when colossi are out.
bl infestor is worse, watch rain vs drg game 1. talk about feeling helpless. all in can be hard to stop, since when is this new. if you know its coming most zergs stop it easy. ppl whine about it more than bl/infestor beacause it comes faster than bl/infestor which results in shorter games so i guess they would rather see an infestor army dominate late game. i think they really mad beacause the best foreigners can only play zerg and they would rather have sc2 decided by zvz.
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.
On November 19 2012 00:03 ohampatu wrote: and your 'this shit is broken' mentality is wrong, because you are bad, like every person who has posted in this thread, including morrow (and me and you and all of us)
Both spells are broken, but please dont try to make it out like toss is some fucking unbeatable race Jermstuddog. This is like a case of the pot calling the kettle black. FF and Colosus are no where near as OP as fungal is. All 3 are bad game designs, but bad game design =/= overpowered.
User was temp banned for this post.
Why was this banned? It is a direct response to Jermstuddog's post, who was really whiny and unreasonable, I believe this was a response to his mentality especially (that you should always try to improve instead of blaming it on the game, hence calling everyone here bad, because everybody here has room to improve). A misunderstanding led to this ban, I believe!
Edit: ok, language could be cleaner, but I think it was not meant as a ad-hominem attack but rather criticizing the attitude.
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.
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.
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 00:36 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 00:36 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 00:36 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 :
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.
Nice Post. I just wonder if any blue posters actually replied with their thoughts or this was just another "this is why I think the game is broken" post that falls on deaf ears.
What do people not understand, stop posting about nerfing FF. You cannot do it without completely reworking the Protoss race from the ground up, something you and everyone else in this thread knows is not going to happen. Unless you completely rework Protoss tier 1 and WG in general, you cannot touch the Sentry. It is too crucial to the survival of the P race, and any tinkering with it would be like tinkering with something like Larvae Inject (even though I wish they would touch both the P and Z races and rework them, I know it's not going to happen).
The only thing you can do is indirectly nerf FF through something like mana cost maybe, or possibly duration. That way it can still be used defensively, but it is much more difficult to use it aggressively. Even then, I don't see the merit in nerfing any type of Sentry aggression since it is literally the only option P has to punish a Z for being ultra greedy.
Doesn't this apply to terran as well to some extent? Fuck up with your splits/FF and get fucked by banes and a-move. Terran micro almost always dictates how the fight goes.
Zerg in general doesn't have a lot of micro potential, I think that is what is causing the problems, not force fields.
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
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.
What do you mean, people do try infestors and, less often, mutalisks.
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)
I don't play at a high enough level to really judge, but this is really the question. Are there no alternatives? In the lower ladder leagues, you can often break down a ffe with early roach or ling/baneling aggression. But on pro level, if it were viable, wouldn't people do it? It's hardly a new idea. I thought it was really striking in the WCS finals how zergs played 3 base 3 times in a row and got killed by that timing 3 times in a row. Why do they feel they have to play that way even after it failed over and over? And what else could it be?
for me its a case of nerfing z late game - and then giving z lair/ early hive tech a range of abilities (mirco focused?) to upgrade/morph your units with (equivalent of blink and charge).
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)
I don't play at a high enough level to really judge, but this is really the question. Are there no alternatives? In the lower ladder leagues, you can often break down a ffe with early roach or ling/baneling aggression. But on pro level, if it were viable, wouldn't people do it? It's hardly a new idea. I thought it was really striking in the WCS finals how zergs played 3 base 3 times in a row and got killed by that timing 3 times in a row. Why do they feel they have to play that way even after it failed over and over? And what else could it be?
its simple, fast 3 hatch can currently punished only by the best of the best with a robo all-in. Everyone else is currently dying left and right to basic roach ling. If Zerg don't die or doesn't get attacked to an all-in you have always a huge advantage in the midgame/late game. Basic pressure builds don't work vs. Zerg anymore. Because if zergs knows you don't all-in they play greedy, and basically have already won the game (just it doesn't seem like it because no one attacks).
Up to this point it is now the Zergs job to not fuck up.
This is the same for Terran, also their pressure builds are nerfed, Zerg gets too much econ to easy, which easily breaks mid/late game forcing the opponent to do even more all-in timing attacks to have a chance.
PS: Imho this can only be fixed if there is a nerf to zergs ecoboosting mechanic. Then it wouldn't feel for P/T like they are playing vs. the clock.
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
He suggested that zergs go 2-base tech instead of a "greedy" fast 3 hatch. While I pointed out that Protoss is already going to be ahead in econ and tech from a nexus first into double gas if a zerg stays on 2-base. I don't know how your response is relevant at all.
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
On November 19 2012 01:09 orBitual wrote:
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
He suggested that zergs go 2-base tech instead of a "greedy" fast 3 hatch. While I pointed out that Protoss is already going to be ahead in econ and tech from a nexus first into double gas if a zerg stays on 2-base. I don't know how your response is relevant at all.
no actually i did not, 3 hatch is still the best opening vs. toss, because i know that robo all-ins can be stopped if played smart (this was done months ago already, but zerg players got lazy, immortal sentrie all-ins are nothing knew and existed for a long time).
econ, pure roach ling defense certainly isn't the way to deal with it (at least on alot of maps)
Why is everyone so eager to make all the races identical in every way? This kinda irritates me. If protoss has this one advantage, then zergs have to find their own advantages. There are many different approaches to trying to defeat Immortal all-in, and many of them do not involve fighting the army straight up. There are strategies which just cut a lot of drones and Try to overwhelm your opponent's force with speedlings as they move out. There are muta rush strategies into basetrades (Or in some cases just basetrades with roaches), and then there are various forcefield countering strategies such as banerain rush and really fast infestor. The Zerg, I believe, should always have a disadvantage fighting partning's allin so they find their edge elsewhere. The larger problem which is that zerg has relatively little to gain through micro in the early game is not going to be fixed by removing forcefields.
Ok, just throwing out 2 idea's (May have been suggested already, so not sure).
First thing, give forcefield a cool down equivalent to how long the forcefield lasts. I can't remember the numbers, but this way, if you want to throw down 8 forcefields at the same time, you need 8 sentries, and not just 2 sentries with maximum energy.
First problem with that? Protoss army now becomes very very weak. It now adds to the "Make one micro mistake, and you lose" problem.
Now, to slightly counter that. Change Guardian shield. Make it an effect that gets cast on the ground, similar to the Oracle time warp ability. Make it either add Armour to both melee and ranged attacks, or make it a bit like a shield battery spell. Either way, the point is, if zerg engages when the sentries have energy, the fight will become more favorable for the protoss. Giving a zerg a reason to engage early and force the ability to be used, so it drains energy and they can back off and force another one as they get even closer to their expansion.
On November 19 2012 00:44 superstartran wrote: 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.
I posed an alternative when he responded to my post:
On November 18 2012 23:22 divito wrote: Rather than really messing with forcefields, I have to wonder if giving them HP along with their 15 seconds would help alleviate some of the issue (I suppose similar to Entomb in HotS). It can't be so small as to be evaporated instantly in late-game armies, but it also can't be large enough to not attract being targeted down.
Similar to bringing a massive unit through a forcefield line, but in a meta where Thors and Ultras aren't really utilized (and you'd be silly to throw a Colossus away), this allows a tangible way for the opposition to not be completely stuck.
As much as ff is bad, fungal is even worse, I don't even watch sc2 because of it. 'Pew! Now your zealots are rooted. Better go do something else, because guess what's going to happen once the first fungal end? Pew! Second fungal! Third fungal!"
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
On November 19 2012 01:09 orBitual wrote:
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
He suggested that zergs go 2-base tech instead of a "greedy" fast 3 hatch. While I pointed out that Protoss is already going to be ahead in econ and tech from a nexus first into double gas if a zerg stays on 2-base. I don't know how your response is relevant at all.
no actually i did not, 3 hatch is still the best opening vs. toss, because i know that robo all-ins can be stopped if played smart (this was done months ago already, but zerg players got lazy, immortal sentrie all-ins are nothing knew and existed for a long time).
econ, pure roach ling defense certainly isn't the way to deal with it (at least on alot of maps)
Can you provide a way to reliably stop an immortal/sentry build that doesn't rely on the protoss messing up ff? What is this "playing smart" that no pro gamer bothers with?
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
On November 19 2012 01:09 orBitual wrote:
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
He suggested that zergs go 2-base tech instead of a "greedy" fast 3 hatch. While I pointed out that Protoss is already going to be ahead in econ and tech from a nexus first into double gas if a zerg stays on 2-base. I don't know how your response is relevant at all.
no actually i did not, 3 hatch is still the best opening vs. toss, because i know that robo all-ins can be stopped if played smart (this was done months ago already, but zerg players got lazy, immortal sentrie all-ins are nothing knew and existed for a long time).
econ, pure roach ling defense certainly isn't the way to deal with it (at least on alot of maps)
Can you provide a way to reliably stop an immortal/sentry build that doesn't rely on the protoss messing up ff? What is this "playing smart" that no pro gamer bothers with?
- its all about killing high energy sentries, though stephano is one of the only zergs i see microing like this regularly. - besides wasting energy as early as possible - Engaging in a position that can not be completely shut down by just 3 force fields - Contaminate
MorroW you know as well as I know FF isn't the only issue.
We've been through this. The game design is fundamentally flawed and Protoss have to do certain things in order to get the win or else they will get run over rather easily.
On November 18 2012 21:53 syriuszonito wrote: So true, this matchup is awful right now and forcefields are one of main reasons for it (2nd is infestor). I feel like right now toss all ins are way too powerful (and relatively easy to perform) and as you mentioned there is barely any way for zerg to defeat them even with great unit control because all you can do is wait for toss to make a mistake. I think together with infestor nerf there should be some change to weaken toss midgame or its gonna be even worse.
Stop. Right there. Weaken Protoss midgame? Yea good plan lets make midgame PvT even more difficult for Protoss. You can't weaken forcefields, or immortals really without obliterating TvP balance.
Or early P gameplay in general. Sentries are half the reason why P can go low ground to their expansion half the time.
On November 19 2012 01:09 orBitual wrote:
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.
I think this is a funny post. Protoss can nexus first and take faster gas then zerg, and then demands zerg try a lower econ alternative? So we can be behind in all phases of the game instead of just two?.....
Do you see P players complaining that mathematically it is impossible for them to keep up in supply with a Z who perfectly macros? A Z player can hit 200 supply extremely fast (with perfect macro it's somewhere around the 12 minute mark), while a P player at best is sitting somewhere around 110-120. Most of that 200 supply is drones too, so please don't talk like P has some sort of crazy advantage over Z economically when that clearly isn't the case.
He suggested that zergs go 2-base tech instead of a "greedy" fast 3 hatch. While I pointed out that Protoss is already going to be ahead in econ and tech from a nexus first into double gas if a zerg stays on 2-base. I don't know how your response is relevant at all.
no actually i did not, 3 hatch is still the best opening vs. toss, because i know that robo all-ins can be stopped if played smart (this was done months ago already, but zerg players got lazy, immortal sentrie all-ins are nothing knew and existed for a long time).
econ, pure roach ling defense certainly isn't the way to deal with it (at least on alot of maps)
Oh, so instead of droning up a third base, zergs should use a portion (how much?) of their 2-base econ to spine up a hatch (which one?) and then pump roach-ling off <2-base econ, to stop an all-in that can turn around and be ahead in tech and econ. Sick.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
This is actually so true. I never really realised it before.
Watching Zerg getting force fielded isn't fun at all. It's more like a sigh moment. It's like mid boxing match just giving one of the players a gun. o.O
On November 19 2012 01:04 Bagi wrote: Doesn't this apply to terran as well to some extent? Fuck up with your splits/FF and get fucked by banes and a-move. Terran micro almost always dictates how the fight goes.
Zerg in general doesn't have a lot of micro potential, I think that is what is causing the problems, not force fields.
exactly. the problem is on the zerg side of things because they simply have no units that allow great micro. a nerf/change to force fields wouldnt change that. in tvz it is the same thing. zerg just a moves all his stuff and fungals a bit while terran needs to micro like crazy in order to not get completely obliterated.
A few ways to mitigate forcefields during an early timing attack:
Bring your units out of your base and meet the protoss units as they are moving across the map. Zerg early and midgame units are the fastest in the game. You need to take advantage of this and run around baiting forcefields before you are stuck in a choke at your base. Think of it like tanks that have to siege up every time the opponent postures in the middle of the map. But instead of buying time, you are lowering available energy.
You can also use counter attacks, though most people know about these. If the toss walls off, try using a nydus.
With your units out on the map, you can get amazing surrounds that leave forcefields useless. And if the toss does burn them all to completely surround themselves, you can fungal the whole pack and finish it off that way.
Basically, forcefields are a crutch for the protoss player. The toughest opponents for toss to face all abuse the fact that toss needs forcefields to survive. Try to control where and when they are used, make that place somewhere far from your base, and then regroup and do it again. Contrary to how it seems, toss doesn't have unlimited forcefields.
It's amazing that shortcommings to game design really start to apear with player's better micro skills, Fungel/FF both benifit extremely much from it of one side only, while the other player tries what he might his fate is in the hands of his opponent, and without those units the race will be broken as hell.
I honestly have no solution because i simply am not of that level, though i fully agree a RTS should never take micro away from one player and give full control to the other.
Both would need a replacement unit/buff for protoss early game to not get overrun and for Zerg late game to give his broodlords a chance to survive.
This is a blast from the past. Sadly I have not seen any inclinations that Blizzard are thinking about changing force fields, I suspect we'll be stuck with those for the foreseeable future.
I said it years ago and I'll say it again, whoever sat in that meeting and thought that cast-able terrain was a good idea on a unit should've been fired. That kind of unit has no place in an rts, and it sure as heck has no place in starcraft. Why the community didn't uproar enough to have it ousted is beyond me. You just cannot balance such a unit.
It was a cool idea... but someone smart should've corrected the guy and said, "Good idea; we aren't doing it." That guy wasn't there, they all high-fived and congratulated each other, exclaimed how the community would love their innovation, and marched off ignorantly, not knowing what they had done.
An rts has a map. We all know the map is crucial for balance sake. Maps balanced broodwar alone. How does a unit that changes the map make any sense?
An rts also, because of the map, has certain distances between bases, expansions, mineral deposits, etc. How does removing that distance make sense? I'm talking about warp-in. Cool idea, bad design. That's another topic, and I probably just lost credibility by bringing it up, but that's what I saw during beta. You just can't do that.
That said, force fields do more harm to the genre than warp-in. I could bite my tongue on warp-in, but I'd love to see force fields go. They alone make me hate zvp. I'd rather fight impossibly strong gateway units than watch my units die for free in a little ball while doing 0 dps.
Why are there so many posts from bronze league people trying to explain how they beat immortal sentry? I don't think you guys get it. This has nothing to do with that.
OP and many others ignore the fact that Zerg units, ie. lings, roaches, are some of the fastest in the game. This allows amazing hit and run, flanks, counter-attacks, that simply are not possible for Terran or Protoss. "Oh you're moving out with 3immortal timing? Let me bait out forcefields and slow you down while I get more units/spines in position to hold your push."
Look at how Stephano plays. He makes really good use of Zerg potential. Ive seen the man flank collosi with zerglings. He took advantage of zergling mobility to kill a unit that is designed to hardcounter zerglings.
It might seem like Zerg rely on Protoss to make a mistake with regards to forcefields. Well then, the Protoss (and Terrans) rely on Zerg to not abuse their mobility. /edit: And there isn't a damn thing we can do about Zerg mobility. See how similar the scenario is?
On November 19 2012 02:02 therockmanxx wrote: Why are we discussing this again :/
He ended his post saying the thread would at least be seen by blizzard employees. It can't hurt, regardless how farfetched it is that blizzard would change this mechanic.
Disablers can be fun, they are fundamental part of Dota. And there are similar issues - a whole game may depend on hitting good Black Hole, Chronosphere, Song of the Siren etc. So I don't believe that we need RTS with no disabling spells, but I agree they may be too overwhelming currently in SC2 and need some fixes.
I think the way spells work in SC2 is too conservative: simple rules, to avoid complicated explanations. However, for good gameplay the rules may require to be more complex. For example: using a certain ability reduces some "cooldown power meter" which restores with time. So that you can't just make 50 spell casters and cast that ability endlessly and recklessly, you are still limited to a reasonable amount of uses for a period of time.
I agree that FFs prevent micro on the Zerg end, but I don't think it's correct to bunch them into the same category as fungals (Blizzard preventing micro). For starters, FFs aren't as abusive in other matchups. Taking a look at PvP and PvT, the early-mid game features some intensive micro battles where FFs can play a huge role in fights (w/o the spammy nature you see in PvZ). In those two matchups, you have the option to invest heavily into massing low tier units or tech for "counters" to FFs at through dropships, blink stalkers, or early massive units. Zergs don't have that option so you're left with these engagements where it looks like a straight "mass and a-move" approach with the Protoss skill determining the outcome.
Basically, rather than focusing on FFs as the issue, I think we should look at the Zerg race for possible solutions. IMO a criteria that should be filled is having the "FF counter" as an outlier tech just so that the natural progression won't counter everything (as what you have with Infestors). If you agree with that opinion, then the simplest solution would be to make Swarm Host massive (but then you run into the problem of them being useless unburrowed). Another solution could be to give Locusts innate burrow-move.
Example game: Protoss: OHO! A fight is a brewing. Zerg sets up the most beautiful surround in history Protoss: HOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLD! let me just open up my map editor FFFFFFFFFFFfffff FF!F!F!F! G Protoss: A perfect engagement indeed.
On November 19 2012 02:02 therockmanxx wrote: Why are we discussing this again :/
He ended his post saying the thread would at least be seen by blizzard employees. It can't hurt, regardless how farfetched it is that blizzard would change this mechanic.
The problem is that it isn't just FF. I thought it was a long time consensus on TL that the problem comes from warp-in which makes way for very strong timing attacks because it negates defenders advantage. This leads to somewhat weaker t1 units for P which then leads to the necessity of a strong "defense". et voila FF hits the playing ground. But suddenly P can use those FF offensively (blocking Z ramps but also blocking repairing SCVs). And here we are now on the ruins of warpgates. (weak t1 also lead to strong t3 ground forces -> collosi)
So to "fix" this we would need to get rid of warp-in because otherwise P would get overrun from both T and Z in the earlygame.
Agree with Morrow on most. I have a bitter feeling after watching day 2 ZvPs. I see two issues with sentries and force fields First is - cast range - 9 if I am not mistaken - it is far more than the range of roaches and slightly more than the range of hydras creating that invulnerability effect for the protoss army. For me a reasonable tweak would be increasing hydra range which would make the protoss unable to put force fields behind them - or risk losing the casting sentry. Second is - force field is too efficient near zerg bases - using the hatchery to complete the wall. Might sound too drastic but I am thinking about creep preventing force fields from being placed or cutting duration time.
You see, hey! you see this painting? It's called "Tester's Split". The artist started the movement of Forcefieldism, truly a visionaire.
-But now everyone copy it! -Hey don't say that, it is only for survival, they need to copy it because that's the only thing that sells out of automated paintbrush artists. They say that Fungalism lost it's grace. Actually those two are the opposite of each other in terms of represented ideas.
-But what about Terranism? -Ah these resemble the old works of pre-automated paintbrush, paintbrushes used for this are illegal, black-market and stuff. Government banned it. Something because of this "Bunker" painting, I don't know the details, i think no one knows anymore.
-But i heard the Avantgarde is coming, maybe they will change the current state of automated paintbrush art? After all they were masters of old Paintbrush, Van Jae Dongh and others! -I am not so sure...
How about the whole Protoss & Zerg macro mechanics. Now THAT's what I call fundamental issues. But go ahead, keep complaining about sentries and infestors and whatnot
Great post by morrow, I have been thinking about the same thing since the beta. The new thing here is not the explanation of how forcefields are badly designed or whatever, the new thing is that people with authority are actually comming forward to discuss the problems.
Great Job! Should have been done a long time ago, hopefully something will come out of it.
On November 19 2012 02:15 Giantt wrote: Agree with Morrow on most. I have a bitter feeling after watching day 2 ZvPs. I see two issues with sentries and force fields First is - cast range - 9 if I am not mistaken - it is far more than the range of roaches and slightly more than the range of hydras creating that invulnerability effect for the protoss army. For me a reasonable tweak would be increasing hydra range which would make the protoss unable to put force fields behind them - or risk losing the casting sentry. Second is - force field is too efficient near zerg bases - using the hatchery to complete the wall. Might sound too drastic but I am thinking about creep preventing force fields from being placed or cutting duration time.
This idea about creep nehating forcefields is rly good, protoss would need an or some obs plus it would make the push slower with the main army staying offcreep and a few stalkers poking the hatcheries !
1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
I was hoping he was going to give suggestions. Stating something is flawed (that has been known for 2 years) doesn't do a whole lot. Perhaps it'll get people talking, but a bunch of people saying "this is so true!" is the equivilent to people bitching about 2b allins in LR threads.
In all honesty, I hope some zerg out there comes out with a surefire way to beat this, and it ends up being a build where you scout early and delay getting some part of the standard 3base/60 drones that makes every other PvZ build feel kind of weak.
On November 19 2012 02:24 WhatsInAName wrote: 1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
Last week: "Zerg so easy to play and is OP."
This week: "Protoss so easy to play and is OP."
What race do you play? Either of them? Have you experienced the build done to you (properly, not some terrible diamond player doing it)? I hope so, you should realize that Sen can't attack. He doesn't have enough to warrant suiciding his army. Throwing 30 lings at the small army while it moves out doesn't kill anything. He HAS to wait for Parting to move across so that he can build a bigger army, let his creep get a bit further out, maybe build a few spines, wait for roach speed or +1, etc. It's not NEARLY as easy as you say it is.
If you have experienced it and won, and Morrow said, it's because the protoss fucked up, not because you magically found the solution.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
They reduce the ability to micro? Maybe. But then again, you have to micro 3x as much to avoid them. Hmmm...
On November 19 2012 02:15 Giantt wrote: Agree with Morrow on most. I have a bitter feeling after watching day 2 ZvPs.
If you mean the BWC with the two days of PvZ then I would like you to consider that it was the 5 best Korean Protoss against 2 middle tier Korean Zergs plus Stephano plus some foreign Zergs. It was kind of expected that this tournament would be P heavy at the top due to the massive skill difference in qualified players between the races. If the Korean qualifier was held last week (hypothetically, disregarding logistics, scheduling etc) then I am very certain this tournament would not have looked so P heavy.
On November 19 2012 02:24 WhatsInAName wrote: 1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
Last week: "Zerg so easy to play and is OP."
This week: "Protoss so easy to play and is OP."
What race do you play? Either of them? Have you experienced the build done to you (properly, not some terrible diamond player doing it)? I hope so, you should realize that Sen can't attack. He doesn't have enough to warrant suiciding his army. Throwing 30 lings at the small army while it moves out doesn't kill anything. He HAS to wait for Parting to move across so that he can build a bigger army, let his creep get a bit further out, maybe build a few spines, wait for roach speed or +1, etc. It's not NEARLY as easy as you say it is.
If you have experienced it and won, and Morrow said, it's because the protoss fucked up, not because you magically found the solution.
Watch how Stephano deals with Protoss. Baiting, sniping, surrounding. It's not always perfect, but after watching him, you come to realize that it is not a balance problem, all the other zergs are just simply bad.
The problem with the forcefields is an obvious one, that has been complained about in basically every matchup involving protoss. However, Blizzard cannot change the forcefield without creating glaring imbalances in PvZ, PvT, and PvP. Simply put, without the forcefield Protosses would get dismantled early game vs Zerg and Terran. Many pushes would arise which would be simply impossible to hold. In the case of PvP, it would simply make the matchup even more erratic, and four-gate all-in prone. Changing forcefields would completely jeopardize the game for some time.
On November 19 2012 02:36 BrokenMirage wrote: The problem with the forcefields is an obvious one, that has been complained about in basically every matchup involving protoss. However, Blizzard cannot change the forcefield without creating glaring imbalances in PvZ, PvT, and PvP. Simply put, without the forcefield Protosses would get dismantled early game vs Zerg and Terran. Many pushes would arise which would be simply impossible to hold. In the case of PvP, it would simply make the matchup even more erratic, and four-gate all-in prone. Changing forcefields would completely jeopardize the game for some time.
Whats wrong with tweaking other races? Balancing a game around one ability is terrible thing to do.
On November 19 2012 02:24 WhatsInAName wrote: 1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
Last week: "Zerg so easy to play and is OP."
This week: "Protoss so easy to play and is OP."
What race do you play? Either of them? Have you experienced the build done to you (properly, not some terrible diamond player doing it)? I hope so, you should realize that Sen can't attack. He doesn't have enough to warrant suiciding his army. Throwing 30 lings at the small army while it moves out doesn't kill anything. He HAS to wait for Parting to move across so that he can build a bigger army, let his creep get a bit further out, maybe build a few spines, wait for roach speed or +1, etc. It's not NEARLY as easy as you say it is.
If you have experienced it and won, and Morrow said, it's because the protoss fucked up, not because you magically found the solution.
Watch how Stephano deals with Protoss. Baiting, sniping, surrounding. It's not always perfect, but after watching him, you come to realize that it is not a balance problem, all the other zergs are just simply bad.
Yeah, that's why Stephano couldn't even get out of his group at WCS.
Are you talking about the Stephano who lost to Mana's Sentry Immortal all ins at ESWC? The same guy who got stomped, absolutely stomped by Seed in a 3 base Immortal push recently at IPTL. Is that who you're talking about?
Oh but he won a weak tournament like Lonestar, beat a couple of Code B and one Code A player barely 3-2, so he's the best Zerg in the world for sure and we should all look up to him for guidance.
infested terran eggs break forcefields and instead of turning into the highest dps unit in the game after the cooldown they explode like banelings. DONE
On November 19 2012 02:36 BrokenMirage wrote: The problem with the forcefields is an obvious one, that has been complained about in basically every matchup involving protoss. However, Blizzard cannot change the forcefield without creating glaring imbalances in PvZ, PvT, and PvP. Simply put, without the forcefield Protosses would get dismantled early game vs Zerg and Terran. Many pushes would arise which would be simply impossible to hold. In the case of PvP, it would simply make the matchup even more erratic, and four-gate all-in prone. Changing forcefields would completely jeopardize the game for some time.
Whats wrong with tweaking other races? Balancing a game around one ability is terrible thing to do.
Yes, it certainly is. It has a trickle down effect.
I really hope hots will be as chaotic as it gets. balance asside - the metagame in wol has ironed out in a way so disgusting I will cry no tear for it beeing gone soon tbh...
On November 19 2012 00:44 superstartran wrote: 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.
I posed an alternative when he responded to my post:
On November 18 2012 23:22 divito wrote: Rather than really messing with forcefields, I have to wonder if giving them HP along with their 15 seconds would help alleviate some of the issue (I suppose similar to Entomb in HotS). It can't be so small as to be evaporated instantly in late-game armies, but it also can't be large enough to not attract being targeted down.
Similar to bringing a massive unit through a forcefield line, but in a meta where Thors and Ultras aren't really utilized (and you'd be silly to throw a Colossus away), this allows a tangible way for the opposition to not be completely stuck.
No. You can't give FF health. Destroy able forcefields ruin PvP and make 4 gate super over powered again. Roach max still works better too because roaches can focus fire with great efficiency. And stimmed bio would rip through them. You cannot nerf FF without redesigning Toss. Period, end of story.
to balance forcefield with HP it would have to have enough HP to tank 2 volleys from about 15 roaches or so... this will probably cause toss to plant 1-2 extra forcefield per every 4-8 during an engagement in mid/late game vs roaches
not a HUGE deal imo
also, the forcefields should not be auto-acquired targets from an attack move
whatever happened to baneling/roach bombs? check..
that's what I thought
my friend brought up a good point: believe it or not, zerg is actually designed around micro, but macro. yea.. Top tier players don't necessarily stand out due to micro, but macro, because guess what? Zerg is a MACRO heavy race. what? we playing the same game brah?
direct quote from him lol "no offense, theres a reason jd's been in sc2 pro games for like 1.5 months and is already better than you, morrow"
I think some people here in the community, and a lot of folks over at Blizzard need to swallow their pride, realize that FF is fundamentally broken and that, the only real way to fix the game now is to do it the hard way, remove FF and re-design Protoss to not be reliant on FF at all.
And if you believe FF actually added anything to the game, let me give you another point of view to look at. You say forcefield added complexity to the game, you argue that removing it just simplifies the game. Well I say FF adds unneeded complexity and no depth. FF as Morrow has pointed out just puts all the emphasis on the Protoss, either he FFs and micros perfectly, or he fucks up and he looses. The spell is too polarizing and it removes micro from one party, thus it doesn't add any depth, furthermore since there is no way to actually micro against it, you can only try to outproduce and out-last FFs, it further compounds the issue.
If you remove FFs and buff toss to compensate, you actually add depth back to the game, because now the game becomes an issue of who can micro/control better, now "how much the protoss fucked up".
Now to buff Protoss you probably would have to do it with the GW units, you can't make these too strong because of Warp mechanic, well no more a perfect time to also fix Warp in mechanics, make it so that standard GWs produce faster and WG warps in longer proportional to how far the warp point is. Now Toss units can actually be buffed, toss gets defenders advantage, and they could fight toe to toe with zergs.
While on the issue why not also remove FG, and rebalance zerg in a similar way. perhaps buff some unused units like the Hydra.
On November 19 2012 02:24 WhatsInAName wrote: 1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
Last week: "Zerg so easy to play and is OP."
This week: "Protoss so easy to play and is OP."
What race do you play? Either of them? Have you experienced the build done to you (properly, not some terrible diamond player doing it)? I hope so, you should realize that Sen can't attack. He doesn't have enough to warrant suiciding his army. Throwing 30 lings at the small army while it moves out doesn't kill anything. He HAS to wait for Parting to move across so that he can build a bigger army, let his creep get a bit further out, maybe build a few spines, wait for roach speed or +1, etc. It's not NEARLY as easy as you say it is.
If you have experienced it and won, and Morrow said, it's because the protoss fucked up, not because you magically found the solution.
Watch how Stephano deals with Protoss. Baiting, sniping, surrounding. It's not always perfect, but after watching him, you come to realize that it is not a balance problem, all the other zergs are just simply bad.
Yeah, that's why Stephano couldn't even get out of his group at WCS.
Are you talking about the Stephano who lost to Mana's Sentry Immortal all ins at ESWC? The same guy who got stomped, absolutely stomped by Seed in a 3 base Immortal push recently at IPTL. Is that who you're talking about?
Oh but he won a weak tournament like Lonestar, beat a couple of Code B and one Code A player barely 3-2, so he's the best Zerg in the world for sure and we should all look up to him for guidance.
On November 19 2012 03:24 dacimvrl wrote: Zerg complaining about toss being op.. check..
comparing stephano vs top code S protoss? check..
whatever happened to baneling/roach bombs? check..
that's what I thought
my friend brought up a good point: believe it or not, zerg is actually designed around micro, but macro. yea.. Top tier players don't necessarily stand out due to micro, but macro, because guess what? Zerg is a MACRO heavy race. what? we playing the same game brah?
direct quote from him lol "no offense, theres a reason jd's been in sc2 pro games for like 1.5 months and is already better than you, morrow"
On November 19 2012 03:24 dacimvrl wrote: Zerg complaining about toss being op.. check..
comparing stephano vs top code S protoss? check..
whatever happened to baneling/roach bombs? check..
that's what I thought
my friend brought up a good point: believe it or not, zerg is actually designed around micro, but macro. yea.. Top tier players don't necessarily stand out due to micro, but macro, because guess what? Zerg is a MACRO heavy race. what? we playing the same game brah?
direct quote from him lol "no offense, theres a reason jd's been in sc2 pro games for like 1.5 months and is already better than you, morrow"
tldr: it's the macro + you are doing it wrong
Didnt read MorroW his article ... check...
like the ridiculous points about how he's literally complaining because zerg doesn't have to pay as much attention to a fight as a protoss?
and then saying better zerg players cant stand out from lesser zerg players in micro?
yeh, the answer is: "learn to macro and be creative" check..
Completely agree and 100% convinced Blizz won't change it.
Protoss in my opinion has at least two large design flaws (FF + WG) and I'm sure Blizz will do nothing about it and try to solve it by adding new units because adressing these would probably mean a complete redesign of Protoss.
All we can do is hope that it actually works and all matchups become entertaining and the game actually provides a good means of determining who is the better player.
So as many would agree, removing forcefield would be too great a game changer to balance. So how about tweaking a bit how forcefields work. Right now, something minor that can be fixed is units trapped inbetween forcefields can't overlap one another, similar to burrow. So that way, protoss just can't make two lines of forcefields and trap 20 more units than it should. Instead any overlapping unit should be pushed to the outside. Protoss still score with a trap, but can't take as many units as they'd hope. It doesn't fix everything, but its reasonable debuff and a reasonable steady start
On November 19 2012 03:24 dacimvrl wrote: Zerg complaining about toss being op.. check..
comparing stephano vs top code S protoss? check..
whatever happened to baneling/roach bombs? check..
that's what I thought
my friend brought up a good point: believe it or not, zerg is actually designed around micro, but macro. yea.. Top tier players don't necessarily stand out due to micro, but macro, because guess what? Zerg is a MACRO heavy race. what? we playing the same game brah?
direct quote from him lol "no offense, theres a reason jd's been in sc2 pro games for like 1.5 months and is already better than you, morrow"
tldr: it's the macro + you are doing it wrong
Didnt read MorroW his article ... check...
like the ridiculous points about how he's literally complaining because zerg doesn't have to pay as much attention to a fight as a protoss?
and then saying better zerg players cant stand out from lesser zerg players in micro?
yeh, the answer is: "learn to macro and be creative" check..
Damn, you open my eyes. Your friend must be a very insightfull person to come to this increadibly well argued position. MorroW made some solid points, but this, its so much better. Zergs will just have to macro better and be more creative with their units in the first ten minutes.
This is something I've been thinking about for a long time as well. Having played against MorroW in BW (got stomped 4 games in a row on iccup at start of new season by his beast 2 base terran pushes) I know he's a great player, and has an understanding of the game that some of the top professional players may not have. I notice that even he himself cannot come up with an idea to have protoss not rely solely on FF to keep them alive, and for it to be fair for the other races as well (mostly zerg though). So I propose this. At lair tech, you can start dropping creep from overlords, this can stay, infact this is what I'm talking about. OVERLORDS CAN DROP CREEP ONTO FORCEFIELDS Now before anyone says "LOL U CRAZY ZERG SO OP ROACH RUN OVER FF LOLOLOL GG EZ NO RE" No, that is not what I'm saying. I believe that once overlords can drop creep after getting lair tech, they should be able to spread creep over FF and allow certain units (probably just lings and MAYBE drones [but I doubt it] to walk/run over them) This way, the zerg has a LITTLE bit more dps against the front lines of units hiding behind the FF, as well as more ability to do amazing things with good control....imagine protoss player getting a sick line of FF cutting off the zerg army, but zerg has speed overlords with his units and micros them to spread creep over the FF allowing his 3/3 speedlings in from the front, and at the same time he creates a flank and runs more speedlings in from another angle unprotected at the time by FF's, all while controlling his infestors and keeping key protoss units fungal'd down and spamming IT's everywhere. Don't know if this would be liked by anyone, maybe because zergs don't want to try and micro or because protoss GW units are just too weak against zerglings but it would really allow for some interesting gameplay. And really? A spell that literally blocks ALL units from going past it (with exception of tier 3 ultra)? At least make queen massive please. Or have it grow with hatchery size, small, medium at lair, massive at hive maybe? Like I said, this is just a suggestion, but really, I haven't heard one that comes close to being this creative.
2. Remove collision detection when force fields are initially raised.
3. If any unit exists inside the forcefield, it gets frozen just like Stasis from BW with one caveat: Units trapped inside automatically attack their force field at 50% reduced fire rate (still unable to use spells).
What this promotes:
- Caster can choose to freeze small chunks of an army rather than block huge chunks. Both choices have their advantages and disadvantages.
- FF's being destructible promotes better micro from the defender.
I remeber when MC destroyed JulyZerg with FF in early 2011. Similar response by the community. 18 months later no change from Blizzard. However on these 18 months LOL exploded and SC2 dwindled. Unfortunately this does not bode well for this game future.
This has been an issue from the beginning. I couldn't agree more with what Morrow writes. This is an objective and well articulated point of view, and I'm glad someone took the time to write it on b.net... I generally stay as far away from there as possible.
I find it curious that the issue of "anti-micro" abilities didn't reach mainstream concern until people started raging about infestors. (which, also curiously, didn't seem to be a problem at all until about two months ago. News flash... they're the same as they've always been.) Now that zergs are using them more, protoss are totally against the anti-micro abilities... but before they just used to say "lolol l2flank noob" as if it were that simple.
Another valuable point... Many people refer to zerg as more a-move centric in their playstyle, but were it not for forcefields maybe we'd have an opportunity to micro more? I have high hopes that by legacy of the void we can see a changed FF and buffed individual gateway units.
There is nothing wrong with FF. Its the fact that FF's are the only options to surviving against the zerg which is the problem. Not FF's themselves. We need FF's against terran pushes or we will die by 10 minutes. If we get a nerf to zerg then we wont heavily rely on the ff micro.
On November 19 2012 04:00 nyaru267 wrote: There is nothing wrong with FF. Its the fact that FF's are the only options to surviving against the zerg which is the problem. Not FF's themselves. We need FF's against terran pushes or we will die by 10 minutes. If we get a nerf to zerg then we wont heavily rely on the ff micro.
They need to keep it as it is... I've been playing HotS for about 4 days so far and havent lost a single PvZ. The mothership core, good scouting and viable stargate midgame is pretty much super strong. I haven't even made a sentry in the past 4-5 games.
the mother core stops almost all of the roach pressure you would take damage from in the early / mid game as well
On November 19 2012 03:38 therockmanxx wrote: Protoss is gonna have better defense in early game in HotS If you are gonna change the FF now its the time !
i don't think a mo-core is justification enough to remove ff's all together. i'm not saying they need to stay the way they are, but GL balancing a completely new FF as well as the other stuff in HotS. I'm all for a change, but I don't see it being an easy fix at all.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Next time try to actually read the text
wonwonwon isn't 100% fireproof as the OP is trying to state. If he watched WCS he should had seen suppy vs parting game 1, those freaking inmortals had like 30 kills each one.
It's about the mechanics of forcefield and not about the immortal/sentry all-in. Furthermore he doesn't even say what and how it should be changed
He is complaining about the mechanics of a spell based purely off of one build in one MU. I have watched all of his QQ about the beta. Even his mech posts were horrible. And then pretty much abandons the thread and doesn't even contribute after he posts it.
Im not saying he mentioned a change at all. But he is complaining about a unit based off an all-in. This is no different at all than in GSL Open Season 1 when MC went rapefest on people.
How did they cope? They learned to re-act to what they were scouting. Currently zerg are trying to 'prepare' for the all-in at their base. This is wrong. You can scout the all-in coming a good 2 minutes before hand. And that is more than enough time to get enough units outside his base to bait/waste FF's. Its only 7 sentries and 3 immortals. Every little bit you slow him down makes it that much more beatable. Shit, even parting just lost recently when playing vs actual good Koreans.
Its not the spell, its your mentality and the fact that your responding wrong to the build. If you let him walk into your base without engaging him at all across the map, then your gonna have a bad time.
You're really being dense. If you read the post carefully you will understand that MorroW isn't complaining about balance AT ALL. What he's saying, and this is something we've known for a while, is that FF by itself changes the way the PvZ matchup is played, which is almost defined in a good portion of each match, by correct or incorrect FF useage. It isn't stating the ability is OP.
Even if the response is correct, and the all-in is stopped, that is in no way related to the discussion at hand. The thing being discussed is that the mere existence of the FF mechanic means the matchup is played around it, and that it damages the way micro is involved in the battles. There's no way around it, for Protoss, if you're good at micro, you can control the outcome of a battle pretty much perfectly, if you're bad at micro, you better not make any sentries and just turtle inside your base, since 1 botched FF will kill you. For Zerg, of course the all-in is beatable, that isn't the problem, it's that battle micro can't have any effect on the outcome of a battle, solution? A-move, which is boring, regardless of who wins.
What I fail to understand is why this is being discussed right now since this is an issue that has existed since day 1, FF has always been detrimental to the metagame, even in PvT, in which it's so necessary it just can't be avoided. Without them Terran bio will just walk over you, but since it is actually a very powerful ability, it means gateway units can't be too good, or they'd be grossly overpowered when used in conjunction with FF and warpin.
It's a really tough thing to solve, I don't know a way in which FF could be changed that doesn't make Protoss ridiculously weak
On November 19 2012 03:59 Crushgroove wrote: I find it curious that the issue of "anti-micro" abilities didn't reach mainstream concern until people started raging about infestors. (which, also curiously, didn't seem to be a problem at all until about two months ago. News flash... they're the same as they've always been.) Now that zergs are using them more, protoss are totally against the anti-micro abilities... but before they just used to say "lolol l2flank noob" as if it were that simple. -Crushgroove
People have been calling forcefield OP since the beta, it's just that we haven't always been able to succinctly describe why it's a problem of game design instead of "FF OP".
On November 19 2012 04:00 nyaru267 wrote: There is nothing wrong with FF. Its the fact that FF's are the only options to surviving against the zerg which is the problem. Not FF's themselves. We need FF's against terran pushes or we will die by 10 minutes. If we get a nerf to zerg then we wont heavily rely on the ff micro.
Uh that implies there is still something wrong then lol.
Also if they removed/changed forcefield drastically then obviously protoss would have to be buffed to compensate. It's not like morrow was saying "Forcefield should be made not to matter as much but make sure protoss receives no buffs".
Anyone who thinks they could nerf forcefield and then not buff to compensate is just being silly. Also if we nerfed zerg so that protosses don't have to rely on FF, tosses wouldn't stop making sentries. That would make zvp unwinnable that way as if you could barely win a fight vs an army without FF imagine an army with FF, no way a toss would lose then.
Also zvt would go to shit to, have to think can't just nerf units so that toss doesn't "have" to use forcefield. Would nerf forcefield (remove would be better) and rebuff units from there. I know it won't ever happen, but a man can dream. I feel this would make zvp/tvp much better to watch and would be a drastic first step in making zvp not incredibly boring to watch and play.
Im scared right now because I can hear the nerf bat whistling through the air towards the Fungal Growth, but no one has really talked about the force field in so long that Blizzard is probably going to overlook this T_T Hopefully the dominance of these all-ins at the WCS will get the ball rolling
Someone on reddit mentioned hydras as a way of dealing with this. Their longer range will make it easier to micro against the FF. I think it would fit perfectly balance wise too. Zerg will need to get their late game nerfed by reducing the effectiveness of infestors but then the mid-game of zerg might suffer against protoss all-ins. Hydras will be good in the mid-game against the protoss all-ins but lose effectiveness in the late game as protoss gets colossus.
On November 19 2012 04:11 InstantKarma wrote: Someone on reddit mentioned hydras as a way of dealing with this. Their longer range will make it easier to micro against the FF. I think it would fit perfectly balance wise too. Zerg will need to get their late game nerfed by reducing the effectiveness of infestors but then the mid-game of zerg might suffer against protoss all-ins. Hydras will be good in the mid-game against the protoss all-ins but lose effectiveness in the late game as protoss gets colossus.
Bad idea. just make overlords spread creep on ff's and allow lings to run over them. Doesn't affect other match ups and makes it so zergs have to do some sweet micro if they wanna get their lings at the toss army.
This has been a problem, however the issue with fungal growth is this x10. For forcefields there at least exists some (limited) options for dealing with it after they go out, such as roach burrow movement and (rarely seen) overlord picks-ups/drops.
However, if fungal growth lands, it lands. Done. And the likelihood and ease of chaining fungal growths (with very little possible response from the opponent) is very high.
Yes, this is a problem, but the problem with fungal is the same but amplified. I'd fix fungal first, as the forcefield problem only affects 1 match-up really, while fungal is screwing 2 and even all 3 matchups involving zerg atm.
I agree, I think it would be better to buff something zerg has slightly instead of nerfing protoss in this interaction. Burrow move is essentially useless (while drops are still somewhat useful) and that would probably be the best direction. Shame like you said colossi shred the ground army anyway. I know it's different in HotS, though. Viper gives zerg the options for micro control that you desire, I think.
Just so everyone knows, if you changed FF so it no longer blocked movement completely, PvP would be an even shittier matchup.
Anyway, both FF and fungal growth are bad skills which shouldn't have existed in the first place. Neither are really that hard to use but both are incredibly good. FF is more skill-requiring, but there still isn't much zerg can do. I would however like to see how immortal sentry builds do against vipers (the most intelligently designed HotS unit, imo). It seems like that would add an interesting twist to immortal sentry builds, and even lategame P pushes before BL. ZvP matchup has sucked for a long time, but if they want to fix any particular matchup, they should fix PvP first, then work on the other matchups. PvP is just total trash.
On November 19 2012 04:27 Blargh wrote: Just so everyone knows, if you changed FF so it no longer blocked movement completely, PvP would be an even shittier matchup.
Anyway, both FF and fungal growth are bad skills which shouldn't have existed in the first place. Neither are really that hard to use but both are incredibly good. FF is more skill-requiring, but there still isn't much zerg can do. I would however like to see how immortal sentry builds do against vipers (the most intelligently designed HotS unit, imo). It seems like that would add an interesting twist to immortal sentry builds, and even lategame P pushes before BL. ZvP matchup has sucked for a long time, but if they want to fix any particular matchup, they should fix PvP first, then work on the other matchups. PvP is just total trash.
Immortal Sentry against Vipers? So, 8 minute Hive?
Basically SC2 needs a complete redesign from the ground up. There are so many things wrong with this game at the core level, that everything else revolves around, that simple fixes just aren't going to cut it. Sadly, I'm pretty sure Blizzard is too set in their ways to even consider the possibility of completely reworking the races. HoTS already has a release date set in stone. I don't even expect them to do all the things they wanted to make work with this beta (I'm looking at you mech TvP). I mean, they didn't even really try very had... Warhound didn't work out, so they just scrape it along with the idea of making mech TvP work. There's just too many things wrong with this game from anti-micro abilities, to the hard counter system, to even the ability for either race to win at any point in the match. I've just been very disappointed with the direction of SC2 for a long time now and I just don't think Blizzard cares enough to makes the radical changes this game needs.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
On November 19 2012 04:09 Faent wrote: Good read, I basically agree with this 100%
Im scared right now because I can hear the nerf bat whistling through the air towards the Fungal Growth, but no one has really talked about the force field in so long that Blizzard is probably going to overlook this T_T Hopefully the dominance of these all-ins at the WCS will get the ball rolling
What dominance of all ins. The best players won. WCS was how it was suppossed to be.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
Ya I'm just wondering if there's some way to make a zerg build that does something like, say, doesn't saturate the third base until they have some confirmation that this attack isn't coming. If protoss gets a build to FFE and then kill a 10 minute 3hatch/60drones, but zerg can figure out a way to scout it, and then sit on "two and a half bases" to counter it, it might be a good thing for making the match up less predictable as a whole.
However I'm not a zerg player much less a pro zerg player. I am something of an SC2 watcher, though!
I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
One of the things that makes FF such a challenge to face is that it is instant-cast and spammable. Much like Fungal Growth, opportunities to react are severely limited. If you offer your opponent a chance to micro well and he does, you get punished hard.
From a casual viewer's perspective, the tension isn't always apparent. A battlefield with 2 armies moving around, poking, trying to bait FFs doesn't look like a fight. When the FFs go down, the battle may be over, even though it might appear to have just started. I think this needs to change.
What if FFs were deployed more like bunkers, and less like psi storm? Give Sentries the ability to construct FFs, with a brief channel duration, giving a quick opponent time to react. Give FFs a solid core with hitpoints or shields, so that there's an option of busting an offensive blockade, like in ZvT. Good FFs will still be good. Protoss players will still be able to shape battlefields beyond what the natural terrain offers, but good opponents will have more options when reacting.
Wow, really? Just make the overlords drop creep on the FF's somehow and allow lings to run over. That simple. It might require a little bit of an upgrade to the overlord's creep puke...like a little ranged one on CD or something that could target FF's. Would require micro, and allow the zergs units to not ALL be completely useless.
A lot of people here, probably not zerg players seem to think it's possible to get drop play and tunneling claws out in time to stop the immortal allin. I find that very unlikely, unless the toss doing the allin is way behind on his timing, in other words he's bad. So no, they aren't really options. Not if you want to take an early third.
I don't think ffs should be nerfed or removed. In all honesty I hate nerfs, I'd rather see shit getting buffed. So maybe decrease the build time of tunneling claws? I honestly don't know. Decrease build time for spine crawlers? And buff something of protoss.
In all honesty I'm not sure action NEEDS to be taken against FF. All though I find both FF and fungal rather obnoxious. If a spell becomes the corner stone of every game, it just becomes very unexciting.
On November 19 2012 05:06 nanoscorp wrote: One of the things that makes FF such a challenge to face is that it is instant-cast and spammable. Much like Fungal Growth, opportunities to react are severely limited. If you offer your opponent a chance to micro well and he does, you get punished hard.
From a casual viewer's perspective, the tension isn't always apparent. A battlefield with 2 armies moving around, poking, trying to bait FFs doesn't look like a fight. When the FFs go down, the battle may be over, even though it might appear to have just started. I think this needs to change.
What if FFs were deployed more like bunkers, and less like psi storm? Give Sentries the ability to construct FFs, with a brief channel duration, giving a quick opponent time to react. Give FFs a solid core with hitpoints or shields, so that there's an option of busting an offensive blockade, like in ZvT. Good FFs will still be good. Protoss players will still be able to shape battlefields beyond what the natural terrain offers, but good opponents will have more options when reacting.
Sorry for the double post, but this too is an acceptable idea in my opinion. It allows for some cool decisions to be made by the other player. Although now that I think about it...terran armies with stim would be really OP against this since their target fire dps is out of control
Dealing with forcefield from a balance perspective fucks my mind up so much that every time that I type a couple of paragraphs I just end up deleting them because it would take FOREVER to address everything you'd have to change after removing forcefields.
In the end, after all the hard work balancing, I think that removing forcefields (and warpgate for that matter) would be really good for the game.
Also, I'd be curious to see how gateway units would be buffed as a result of these 2 changes. More life? More Damage? Cheaper? Very hard to say, because if they just straight up got stronger it might become stupidly hard to defend things like really early pressure -- perhaps gateway openings vs. zerg would become sick good.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Spells that block micro dont belong in a RTS, armies should be able to retreat if they think they are gonna lose the engagement. Forcefield and Fungal Root need to get out.
Protoss players should be asking for a better designed race.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
obviously the best thing to watch is a 160 food zerg army run around behind invisible hexagonal fields like their heads are cut off while they get blasted or when u get like 10 roaches stacked into a tiny area by surrounded force fields. Makes for great watching of games......... ><
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
Yeah, I didn't really get that either. Anything other than a 3-0 is a surprise to me when high level Code S players go up against foreigners.
Very well written MorroW as always, really highlighting the core part of the issue here.
Forcefield creates a dynamic in Protoss vs Zerg that neither Protoss players nor Zerg players are happy with.
Because Forcefield is so good, Protoss units are weak without it because they'd be overpowered once combined with forcefield. We can't ever address the weakness of gateway units against Roaches until we've addressed how powerful Forcefield currently is.
We can't ever change the "turtle to Broodlord" mentality of Zergs in ZvP until we've addressed Forcefield and given Zerg another way of playing the match up pre-Hive Tech.
Forcefield is also a problem in TvP (for the same reasons already discussed) early game but it is not NEARLY as pronounced as it is in Zerg vs Protoss.
With Blizzard now finally taking a look at Fungal Growth which tends to follow the same exact pattern as Forcefield in a lot of ways, perhaps they can finally take a look at Forcefield.
On November 19 2012 05:23 Xanbatou wrote: Why don't they replace forcefield with that time warp ability from the oracle? Wouldn't that solve these problems?
Not by itself it wouldn't.
If Forcefield leaves Protoss needs to have stronger gateway units to compensate similar to their relative strength in Starcraft 1.
Time Warp is a much better designed spell which merely WEAKENS the micro potential of an opponent rather than completely remove it, but Forcefield's design allows for Protoss to have weaker. more fragile gateway units than they would be able to have were it not in the game, so the first step we'd need to take after removing it would be to compensate Protoss early game units with additional health and shielding.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
Well it's hard to understand when we are speaking about FF's being imbalanced, bad design, both or neither and you write down that. In the context is hard to get that you are actually talking about Zerg being OP or something
Morrow mentioned points from both sides...protoss too weak without it, and when used well, forcefields are really really good. Don't see why people are treating this as a purely "omg fuck protoss" OP.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
If a less skilled (I don't think I need to tell you Koreans tend to be pretty hardcore as far as training goes) player can get a really close match with his far superior opponent, this points towards imbalance, quite simple logic really. I'm sure Vortix and Suppy have had their good runs through some tourney's, this is still not the level of a 2nd place Code S finalist.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Hmm..why then TLO never loses to 7gate immortal sentry all in? Or why Bly loses so rarely to it? Coz they know how to counter it but i dont understand why dont other progamers use it....why?..
Well, in EU I have started to face TLO style more and more...
If the cause of this discussion is the Immortal Sentry all in, then I suggest that zerg does what they suggested protoss does to beat the Broodlord Infestor late game: Just kill the opponent before they get to the tech or strategy you are trying to avoid.
I have to think the immortal Sentry all in is largely effective, because zerg has so much invested in droning and a very greedy opener, taking a fast and undefended 3rd base, often times with 2 or less zerglings. After that, teching and droning and playing greedy is punished badly. Surely there must be another method to beat the protoss strategy, it is just going to take time for some zerg to think of a way (like EGSuppy successfully did, barely) and once a method is found, the metagame will change overnight.
I used to recall an unstoppable 7 roach rush that protoss could not stop, but eventually we found a way to slow it or stop it. It's going to take time for zerg to figure out the current meta.
FF is a mechanic that is needed - otherwise warpgate and all the teir 1 and 2 units would need changing completely.
At least FF doesnt lock units in place and deal damage (oh snap....)
Swapping the Roach and Hydralisk positions on the tech tree is key to handling forcefields.
As a properly-adjusted hatchery tech unit, the Hydralisk could be weak enough against zealots to make a Protoss aggression dangerous without having lots of forcefields.
They could also have the range to handle sentry-heavy armies. Terran doesn't suffer nearly as much vs forcefields because most of their army can shoot back when they are divided or trapped. The current Roach, on the other hand, just twitches around helplessly and explodes.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
On November 19 2012 05:46 Ooshmagoosh wrote: Swapping the Roach and Hydralisk positions on the tech tree is key to handling forcefields.
As a properly-adjusted hatchery tech unit, the Hydralisk could be weak enough against zealots to make a Protoss aggression dangerous without having lots of forcefields.
They could also have the range to handle sentry-heavy armies. Terran doesn't suffer nearly as much vs forcefields because most of their army can shoot back when they are divided or trapped. The current Roach, on the other hand, just twitches around helplessly and explodes.
See that's a bandaid solution though and also creates another problem because Hydralisks also shred gateway units so easily because their DPS is so high.
It isn't a simple matter of "how can Zerg counter Forcefield better" it's a matter of changing the way Protoss works so that they can rely on Forcefield less and then directly nerfing Forcefield.
I totally agree, right now there are three elements in the game which makes it a nightmare to balance gameplaywise. first is the infestors ability to freeze units in their place, once it happens you can't do shit other than to see your units gets chained fungeled to death.
Second is the Protoss ability to instantly warpin units on the map from everywhere from pylons, this basically nullifies the defenders advantage and was also the TRUE reason why the amulett energy was removed for High Templars. And all the godamn PvP 4-5 warpgate bullshit. Yes, its a cool mechanic that makes protoss unique, fine let the warprism still be able to do this, let protoss warpin units close to its nexus and so forth.
Third is of course ForceFields. They are like the previous two mentioned, you really can't do anything than to hope your opponent messes up.
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
On November 19 2012 05:51 Integra wrote: I totally agree, right now there are three elements in the game which makes it a nightmare to balance gameplaywise. first is the infestors ability to freeze units in their place, once it happens you can't do shit other than to see your units gets chained fungeled to death.
Second is the Protoss ability to instantly warpin units on the map from everywhere from pylons, this basically nullifies the defenders advantage and was also the TRUE reason why the amulett energy was removed for High Templars. And all the godamn PvP 4-5 warpgate bullshit. Yes, its a cool mechanic that makes protoss unique, fine let the warprism still be able to do this, let protoss warpin units close to its nexus and so forth.
Third is of course ForceFields. They are like the previous two mentioned, you really can't do anything than to hope your opponent messes up.
Warpgates are fixed easily, one can always add a malus for warping in units far away from an already established or currently warping in nexus. Obviously distance should be so far that protoss can warp in on the edge of their base unimpedet.
edit: not that this is the thread to discuss this...
i completely agree with morrow, something needs to be done with the way FFs pan out, i am not sayng nerf this or buff that but ever since the game launched there has been something fundamentally wrong with FFs, even Dustin Browder said that the beta of HoTS is a good ground to do some crazy changes for testing
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
all disguise to either prevent a nerf, or to get a nerf of protoss in compensation of fixing infestors...
people should discuss such huge changes in HotS forum, 100% sure that something as elemental will change in WoL
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
all disguise to either prevent a nerf, or to get a nerf of protoss in compensation of fixing infestors...
My main race is protoss so please dont pull the bias card
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
I disagree with your point about the timing of this post.
I think this post's timing is good because it details one of the reasons why it's so hard for Blizzard to just up and nerf Fungal Growth. It's integral in helping Zerg actually deal with Forcefield because of how strong that spell currently is which creates in my mind a really terrible dynamic.
How do you counter this overpowered spell? You use THIS overpowered spell! Well then how do you counter THAT overpowered spell? You use THIS overpowered spell! >.< ( FF > Fungal > Vortex)
The problem are the spells themselves, and not because they deal damage no, spells in Starcraft 1 dealt far more damage than anything currently in play in Starcraft 2, no rather because they negate the ability for players to control their units and in a game where the damage output of units is so high that ability to negate control is frankly completely broken.
What this game needs is not a focus on one particular spell or unit, but rather a refocus on the core problems with Protoss and Zerg design that necessitates these spells and units being in the game in the first place.
How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
How does that solve the problem that without Forcefield Protoss units get annihilated by Zerg armies?
Without good Forcefields, Zergling/Roach armies absolutely decimate everything Protoss can field pre-Collosus tech, which is one of the reasons Protoss players are so defensive about Forcefield when we discuss countering or removing it.
We cannot simply nerf Forcefield without compensating Protoss in some other way, the same is true also of Fungal Growth even though both spells do need to be nerfed, they serve such a key role in allowing the race to stay viable that we can't simply nerf the spell without compensating the race.
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
all disguise to either prevent a nerf, or to get a nerf of protoss in compensation of fixing infestors...
My main race is protoss so please dont pull the bias card
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
How does that solve the problem that without Forcefield Protoss units get annihilated by Zerg armies?
Without good Forcefields, Zergling/Roach armies absolutely decimate everything Protoss can field pre-Collosus tech, which is one of the reasons Protoss players are so defensive about Forcefield when we discuss countering or removing it.
We cannot simply nerf Forcefield without compensating Protoss in some other way, the same is true also of Fungal Growth even though both spells do need to be nerfed, they serve such a key role in allowing the race to stay viable that we can't simply nerf the spell without compensating the race.
Well you make it a single target spell like feedback and give it less range than ff. Now you have micro.
People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
How does that solve the problem that without Forcefield Protoss units get annihilated by Zerg armies?
Without good Forcefields, Zergling/Roach armies absolutely decimate everything Protoss can field pre-Collosus tech, which is one of the reasons Protoss players are so defensive about Forcefield when we discuss countering or removing it.
We cannot simply nerf Forcefield without compensating Protoss in some other way, the same is true also of Fungal Growth even though both spells do need to be nerfed, they serve such a key role in allowing the race to stay viable that we can't simply nerf the spell without compensating the race.
Well you make it a single target spell like feedback and give it less range than ff. Now you have micro.
It still isn't an even trade.
You're giving Zerg another way of countering Forcefield sure but you're not giving anything to Protoss that lessens their dependence on Forcefield in the first place and we aren't also addressing the late game issues that favor Zerg in the Zerg vs Protoss match up that have led so many Protoss players into all inning pre-Hive tech by abusing Forcefield....
See how complicated this is? The spell is a cornerstone of the race in the match up and nerfing or removing it requires a fundamental rethinking of the match up's dynamics and the race designs that create that dynamic. That is what Blizzard NEEDS to do right now. Nerfing both spells and calling it a day will not solve the problems they'll simply bandaid them.
On November 19 2012 06:03 JBrown08 wrote: How about we give Zerg an anti-energy spell like the other two races? Maybe put it on a unit besides the infestor so that Zerg has to make something else and micro an additional caster.
How does that solve the problem that without Forcefield Protoss units get annihilated by Zerg armies?
Without good Forcefields, Zergling/Roach armies absolutely decimate everything Protoss can field pre-Collosus tech, which is one of the reasons Protoss players are so defensive about Forcefield when we discuss countering or removing it.
We cannot simply nerf Forcefield without compensating Protoss in some other way, the same is true also of Fungal Growth even though both spells do need to be nerfed, they serve such a key role in allowing the race to stay viable that we can't simply nerf the spell without compensating the race.
Well you make it a single target spell like feedback and give it less range than ff. Now you have micro.
It still isn't an even trade.
You're giving Zerg another way of countering Forcefield sure but you're not giving anything to Protoss that lessens their dependence on Forcefield in the first place and we aren't also addressing the late game issues that favor Zerg in the Zerg vs Protoss match up that have led so many Protoss players into all inning pre-Hive tech by abusing Forcefield....
See how complicated this is? The spell is a cornerstone of the race in the match up and nerfing or removing it requires a fundamental rethinking of the match up's dynamics and the race designs that create that dynamic. That is what Blizzard NEEDS to do right now. Nerfing both spells and calling it a day will not solve the problems they'll simply bandaid them.
This post is about FF. I was merely addressing that issue. But realistically you could make this change and nerf fungal. I didn't state that this was the only change needed, but it would help being able to do something about the spell. Seeing as you know toss already has feedback and all.
Forcefield is an interesting ability for sure, but it should have never been made so low tier.
It should have been designed in such a way that you could rush for it to make a difference in the tier 2/2.5 midgame, but not in the early game at tier 1.5.
One of the disturbing design decisions in the game is the lack of upgrades required for spellcasters.
For protoss, only blink (not energy), hallucination and psi storm require an upgrade.
For zerg, only burrow (not energy) and neural parasite require upgrades
Terran has a lot more (which I believe is a result of the openness of the terran tech tree): stim (not energy), cloaking for banshee and ghost, 250mm strike cannons, weapons refit (yamato cannon) and seeker missile
Notice how a lot of those are pretty rare or useless: hallucination, neural parasite, strike cannons, yamato, seeker missile. One could argue that these spells are useless because of their upgrade requirement, but I think it's also the case that these casters start with much better spells that require no upgrade:
Sentries have forcefield and guardian shield, which are both better by far than hallucination.
Infestors have infested terrans and fungal for no upgrade cost, both of which are vastly superior to neural.
Ghosts start with snipe and EMP, and all they have to do is upgrade their cloaking field or buy nukes. Nevertheless, they start with some pretty powerful and necessary upgrades right out of the gate.
Ravens even have 2 pretty good spells in PDD and auto turret, and although SM is pretty good, it is hard to get because its so expensive, and also suffers from short casting range (6).
SC2's designers completely abandoned the BW spell casting paradigm: 50 or 75 energy spell to start out with, and more powerful spells to upgrade later that cost 100, 125 or for especially powerful spells, 150. Each caster would also get an upgrade that allowed their max energy to increase, and also their starting energy to increase proportionally.
By having different tiers of spells that could be progressively unlocked, the game could tailor the power of each spell and the timing more precisely, ensuring that units wouldn't be instantly powerful right out of the gate as they are now.
How does this relate to the sentry? Well if the forcefield were a 100/100 upgrade on the twilight council, it would strengthen that tech path, allow rushes to that tech, allow hallucination to become default and be buffed, and ensure that protoss isnt dependent on the sentry in the early game through other buffs.
Taking this ability out would be a mistake since it has a lot of uses: it just needs to be postponed.
Other options:
1) Create units like the archon that are decently fast, mobile and massive that can be used to crush forcefields with good control. Imagine if tanks were massive when in tank mode. Or queens. But failing that, maybe a new armor type that allows forcefields to be crushed.
2) Adding health/armor to forcefield and making them immune to a-move, forcing the opponent to micro to kill them.
Forcefield should certainly be strong, but it should also be counterable.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
Curious>>>>Titan yet lost = imbalance. Right?
Wrong. Curious didn't play well this tournament. I know logic is hard to comprehend.
I don't know if it's been mentioned, but what if you made force field 40 energy and gave it some health (200-300). It would still dissipate normally. I don't actually play toss, so I'm not sure how viable it is. Anyone have some input?
I agree with most of the issues mentioned in the op, but I also see it another way.
I see PvZ in SCII alot like PvT in BW. There you had to use mines to prevent toss from overrunning you. You use mines perfectly, toss army melts. You dont, Terran gets demolished. Tosses had to find ways to attack different locations at once, drop, recall, ect and never attack T army unless P has a huge advantage. I dont know, maybe Zergs need to find ways to outplay protosses instead of relying on strats like fast BL + infestor.
On the other hand, I hate watching baseraces and this is what happens most times a Zerg decides not to engage the army of protoss but attack different locations on the map.
I think queens that destroy force fields would be great:
[*]They are fragile so you have to micro them carefully to the front of the battle to kill a force field [*]Zergs can't destroy force fields offensively because queens are slow off creep. [*]You don't change any balance n the game (or do you?)
Issue solved. Next coinflip problem: mothership please.
I agree - reducing the effects of forcefield (and fungal) on games isn't a matter of balance, it's a way to improve the metagame. I wouldn't argue that it's impossible to win versus protoss if they land perfect forcefields or anything like that, but I think forcefield in its current form makes games much less fun to watch and play than it would otherwise be.
Maybe time warp could serve as a means of replacing forcefield, forcefield should be changed so that is does not deny micro to the same degree, or more methods should be introduced into the game to allow players to circumnavigate forcefields with strong micro.
Yes, Protoss units would need to be stronger to compensate, but I think most people involved with the game agree that reducing the potential of forcefields to deny micro and influence games would be a positive change.
Blizzard is likely looking to scale back force field with HOTS. Mothership core is a buff to Protoss early game allowing them to delay robotics/obs meaning faster gateway upgrades as well as buffing pure defense. So with that blizzard should be free to nerf forcefield.
On November 19 2012 06:49 RifleCow wrote: Blizzard is likely looking to scale back force field with HOTS. Mothership core is a buff to Protoss early game allowing them to delay robotics/obs meaning faster gateway upgrades as well as buffing pure defense. So with that blizzard should be free to nerf forcefield.
I'm not up to date on HotS gameplay, but doesn't recall make forcefield a lot more powerful? You can use all your energy and kill a hatchery and then just warp out.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
Curious>>>>Titan yet lost = imbalance. Right?
Wrong. Curious didn't play well this tournament. I know logic is hard to comprehend.
Yeah Curious lost because he played badly, but Creator almost lost even though he played great, because Zerg OP, sure... LOL... Your logic is superb.. air tight!!!
Creator played great and lost to Parting, Protoss is imbalanced...
On November 19 2012 04:36 Scootaloo wrote: And this is all based on game against Sen? A guy who has dissapeared from the planet for most of last year?
Seems like zergs getting ahead of themselves due to just 1 tournament win, remember when Fruitdealer won GSL? Was zerg OP then?
For gods sake stop the premature zerg tears.
Read first next time, because right now you make yourself look like a complete tool.
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
I disagree with your point about the timing of this post.
I think this post's timing is good because it details one of the reasons why it's so hard for Blizzard to just up and nerf Fungal Growth. It's integral in helping Zerg actually deal with Forcefield because of how strong that spell currently is which creates in my mind a really terrible dynamic.
How do you counter this overpowered spell? You use THIS overpowered spell! Well then how do you counter THAT overpowered spell? You use THIS overpowered spell! >.< ( FF > Fungal > Vortex)
The problem are the spells themselves, and not because they deal damage no, spells in Starcraft 1 dealt far more damage than anything currently in play in Starcraft 2, no rather because they negate the ability for players to control their units and in a game where the damage output of units is so high that ability to negate control is frankly completely broken.
What this game needs is not a focus on one particular spell or unit, but rather a refocus on the core problems with Protoss and Zerg design that necessitates these spells and units being in the game in the first place.
Actually, tying these problems to eachother is pointless, even if you balanced out the Infestor and FF with eachother you'd be having massive issues in PvT because any early game allin, especially when stim is included, would just be an insta win, not to mention PvP would become even more of a clusterfuck then it already is.
In 2 years Browder has refused to change the forcefield, mostly because it requires the redesign of the entire warp gate mechanic, the chances of them doing anything with this are remote. Fungals however, already being majorly patched once, and at worst will require some slight buffs to general zerg units to compensate for a nerf, are far easier to patch then having to redesign the entire core mechanics of the protoss race.
This is not about what would be best, in that case the entire game needs to be changed to allow for the depth of play that brood war provided, this is about what is feasible patch-wise, balancing zerg stats to compensate for fungal seems much more so then drastically overhauling the protoss core mechanics.
Both fungal and FF's are hard to play with and against. The main problem that messes any player whether it be Z or P is micro. Like he said, protoss needs to have good micro in order to throw down FF's but it also takes good micro for Z in order to navigate around the FF's and use fungal. I think there really isnt anything blizzard will do for WoL until HOTS unless they find an even balance between the two abilities.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
Curious>>>>Titan yet lost = imbalance. Right?
Wrong. Curious didn't play well this tournament. I know logic is hard to comprehend.
Yeah Curious lost because he played badly, but Creator almost lost even though he played great, because Zerg OP, sure... LOL... Your logic is superb.. air tight!!!
Creator played great and lost to Parting, Protoss is imbalanced...
Did you watch Curious play? The guy played horribly.
Make forcefields to use pylon power as their benefit. If you are near pylon then forcefields activate faster (almost instantly) but if you are out of range then there is delay. Delay could be shown by ground circling forcefield and when done it "builds" it and its up (1 second-2 seconds etc can changed).
Add zerg research called "Slimey Tumor". It gives oldest tumor most spell protection and youngest one less. For example, forcefield is casted next to oldest tumor and it vaporizes forcefield away quickly.
For Fungal there could be art showing fungal launching and then it would have 3 phases. Big air units it only deals minimal damage but smaller flying units more damage.
1. Minimal amount of damage. Huge units stopped other units can move normal still. 2. Some period of time fungal emerges and starts to slow down units. Bit more damage. You can still try to escape. 3. Fungal stops every unit own/enemy and deals full damage.
On November 19 2012 05:02 Doublemint wrote: I respect Morrow and just generally find his opinions interesting - but judging from the WCS where the top 3 actually were the best and most well rounded players there I am not sure this is the right way to start a discussion about FF.
Sen is an excellent player - but he went 2:1 against Grubby. Some might even say that a victory is not out of reach on a good day for Grubby. And at the same time saying that constant Code A/S Contenders should not be able to beat Sen in a convincing fashion is, well, questionable to say the least. Rain/Creator/Parting are all WAY BETTER than Grubby - and I am one of the Grubby cheer-cannons. So why did Korean Ps win so convincingly? I am inclined to say it's because the best Korean Zs and Ts were not present due to the format(not participating in WCS KR/already eliminated/whatever), just as simple as that.
Creator nearly lost to Vortix, Parting nearly lost to Suppy, both barely edged out in tense matches with a 3-2 final score. Both these players are quite superior to their opponents, - they still won, but I think it is evidence for imbalance.
As an aside, if Blizzard ever decides to go with the destructable forcefield idea, I hope they'd consider having shield upgrades buff the hit points. I also felt this way with (RIP) entomb, it's so silly that a spell creates a shield with static health, yet units keep gaining more damage as the game progresses.
What kind of crazy logic is that ?
??? Creator >>>> Vortix yet still almost lost = imbalance. Not hard to get.
Curious>>>>Titan yet lost = imbalance. Right?
Wrong. Curious didn't play well this tournament. I know logic is hard to comprehend.
Yeah Curious lost because he played badly, but Creator almost lost even though he played great, because Zerg OP, sure... LOL... Your logic is superb.. air tight!!!
Creator played great and lost to Parting, Protoss is imbalanced...
This makes perfect sense to me?
Zerg plays awful - loses.
Protoss plays great, zerg plays average and almost wins - zerg op
On November 19 2012 05:46 Ooshmagoosh wrote: Swapping the Roach and Hydralisk positions on the tech tree is key to handling forcefields.
As a properly-adjusted hatchery tech unit, the Hydralisk could be weak enough against zealots to make a Protoss aggression dangerous without having lots of forcefields.
They could also have the range to handle sentry-heavy armies. Terran doesn't suffer nearly as much vs forcefields because most of their army can shoot back when they are divided or trapped. The current Roach, on the other hand, just twitches around helplessly and explodes.
See that's a bandaid solution though and also creates another problem because Hydralisks also shred gateway units so easily because their DPS is so high.
It isn't a simple matter of "how can Zerg counter Forcefield better" it's a matter of changing the way Protoss works so that they can rely on Forcefield less and then directly nerfing Forcefield.
Perhaps I should have said that the hydralisks could do damage equivalent to that of a BW hydralisk ie, less damage to 'small' targets, like 6 (+4 vs armored).
The issue isn't the Protoss units themselves (blink and charge are amazing upgrades) but rather the incredible power of the other race's low-tech units. The Roach murders Zealots, and with their speed upgrade, can fight Stalkers pretty well. The old Hydralisk had a horrible, horrible time dealing with chargelots and storm, and with the new damage system where shields don't take full damage from all attacks, it'll be even harder for hydras to handle them. Thing is, Zerg now has banelings, so it should even out the early game.
Protoss will still turtle quite a bit vs bio, but with a new HotS mech in the picture, and Purify / Recall, I don't think PvT games will consistently be "turtle -> 200 -> fight".
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
I totally agree with this opinion. I would be very glad to see both fungals and FF transformed into something more entertaining, or entirely removed as long as the balance is kept thanks to other mechanics / abilities / whatever compensation.
I'm a Z player and I love to use my fungal. But still I agree with this. The fact that it reduces the opponent's ability to micro is a bad thing.
i often wondered why the forcefield does not get popped when placed on a unit/structure/creep. That would at least prevent the abusive potential of cutting an entire army in half. But then again, it does not solve the main problem.
I hate the forcefield, and i hate ZvP because of it. It is just like the OP said, if my opponent does not screw up, i lose. It is like hitting a brick wall, and incredibly frustrating because i can't do nothin about it. And if P moves out with 6+ sentries, good luck baiting some. They shall be granted, and then some more. Many more. FF are just frustrating to play against, and frustrating when you have to place them perfectly.
On November 19 2012 04:49 Scootaloo wrote: [quote]
Ah yes, unless my conclusion is that I agree with the raging zergs I am clearly wrong and didn't read the OP right?
The lengths some people will go to to cry about balance.
OP is a clear attack on the forcefield, mostly based on information that has been known since the beginning of the game and that has been countered numerous time, remember when zergs dropped blings on them? Or when they fungalled them? Guess they forgot how to do that. Why is this information suddenly relevant again after a toss wins a tournament when everyone had practically forgot about the sentry? And before we get into the "I can't get drop tech because I desperately need the 50 gas for producing another stupid upgrade at that time"-logic, adapt your builds, learn from your mistakes and I'm sure zerg will figure something out like they usually have.
Or keep crying that zerg is UP, see if I care.
MorroW is porbably the person with the most experience with baneling drops. I think you should read his post with a little weight.
Why are you even bothering to reply? If you're not going to actually argue but just go "Read the OP and if you don't agree with me you are clearly wrong." you're just wasting your own and my time.
I felt like I made an argument. MorroW has much experience with what you argue. Much more than you or me. And he gives an argument why that is not working anymore. So, maybe you should actually give an argument why MorroW is wrong, and banelingdrops still work.
Have an entire thread dedicated to stopping this push http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=360647 . If you'd like we could discuss all the possible ways of holding it, pointless as it would be. Also, as far as Morrows knowledge on the subject goes, he's not exactly a top tier player anymore, if this was really such a big issue shouldn't we hear some of the top tier zergs being vocal about this? Stephano? DRG? Even Sen?
Simple fact is that Morrow not being able to figure out how to counter the sentry immortal push does not equal forcefield being broken for anymore reasons then where stated 2 years ago, yes, they are bad game design, but tweaks like giving them HP will require an entire redesign of gateway units to hold of certain pushes, which gives the problem that warpgate itself has to be redesigned because otherwise buffing gate units will break warp in pushes.
Not to mention that zerg has by far the most powerful movement restricting spell, this whining about forcefield really feels like the pot calling the kettle OP.
Both spells are a problem. Forcefield is a problem and Fungal Growth is a problem. They both need to be addressed from a design perspective and adjusting them will require numerous other adjustments to their respective races in order to compensate.
I think players on all sides of the argument can agree that both Fungal Growth and Forcefield are badly designed spells and everyone can also agree that both races rely far too heavily on these spells than should be healthy for the game.
The reason this argument is so polarizing amongst Zerg and Protoss players is because Zerg vs Protoss is the match up that's currently most affected by the interaction between these two spells and it's widely considered right now to be the match up most in need of major changes because of how stagnant the metagame has become. It's no coincidence players feel that way.
Agreed, to be honest, Warp in kind of feels like Browders special little baby, people have pointed out how it breaks lategame warp in units and causes annoying as fuck pushes since a couple months after release, yet any meaningful changes have never been attempted (delaying research time is cute but not a redesign and only just slightly delays the problem), if we want to change this entire shitty toss/zerg dynamics, this is really the first thing that needs to be drastically changed. Yet, due to it being one of Browders "Cool" ideas, I fear we will never see warpgate dissapear until Blizzard fires his ass.
It's just kind of frustrating that just when people are trying to shift the focus on the problems with Fungal, Morrows creates this rant about a literally 2 year old problem that Blizzard and quite frankly 99% of the community already know about, bad timing, especially when Zerg has been winning practically everything but WCG recently.
all disguise to either prevent a nerf, or to get a nerf of protoss in compensation of fixing infestors...
My main race is protoss so please dont pull the bias card
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Protoss player needs great micro, zerg needs protoss not to have
"I have to learn actually micro while you a-move" "well at least you can micro"
I gotta agree completely. However I feel like this is an issue that has been in a lot of peoples' minds for a while now. I especially liked these 2 lines. Personally, the forcefield issue frustrates so much, both while playing and watching sc2, it is a big part of why I play the game a lot less than I used to.
It's just no fun. And if it aint fun, I aint playing either. I really wish blizzard did something about this.
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
I've been thinking for a while that both Forcefield and Fungal Growth need removing/changing. I don't know the solution but both of these abilities are making predictable games which feel like ground hog day. As a Protoss player I hate having to rely on FF in every battle, against all races (particular early Terran aggression actually). And during the mid/late game fungal growth is the ultimate disincentive for building air units, which I feel should be a strong part of the Protoss army.
On November 19 2012 07:11 Too_MuchZerg wrote: Make forcefields to use pylon power as their benefit. If you are near pylon then forcefields activate faster (almost instantly) but if you are out of range then there is delay. Delay could be shown by ground circling forcefield and when done it "builds" it and its up (1 second-2 seconds etc can changed).
Very bad idea, since FF are all about the exact moment you use them, and are great when you're outnumbered, if there's a delay, you can be sure that in ealry in early game will get slaughtered in bot PvT and PvZ (and I guess in PvP the aggressive one has the advantage). And you can bait FF extremely easily too.
I still disagree with several points of the OP, like the infestors isn't out before 12min (lately I saw people having infestors out at 10:30-11min, sometimes even earlier), same for the "corruptors aren't out before 16min", which is extremely wrong, because you said that 16min is the broodlords's timing. If you don't have corruptors at 16min, then I guess you've been doing something wrong in your game, especially since most timings pre-broodlords involve colossi. What I said for infestors is the same for broodlords, lately many Z have them at sth like 15min, sometimes 14min (I know Stephano does it alot).
Force field would be be fine if hydras were a reliable counter, at the moment it's spines and counter attacking of some kind or just spamming 4szzzzrrrrr and hoping he doesn't micro well with force fields during the most important engagement I the game
I personally think that the immortal sentry allin is like the PvZ version of the 1-1-1. Anyway thats beside the point.
If we look at the BW PvZ for instance (as reference), you can see that units actually fought. It wasn't the micro limiting abilities like fungals or forcefields that dictated the fight from early to mid game. I think this worked because of the unit relationships between the two race. The basic troops ala zealot/ling/hydra was always used from the start of the game to the end. It was all about battle micro. Can the zealot close the distance to the hydras who are squishy but still very deadly in the hands of a good player? Lurker positioning to army flanks, observer sniping etc.
However I also tend to think that the two AOE damage dealers ala reaver/HT were the things that kept P in BW from just flat out get swarmed like what we see in SC2. Now this is interesting because storms can be dodged (weakness) and reavers/HT can be sniped as they are being paired with a very low hp shuttle(big weakness).This means that the zerg can actually micro his way out of this and win with superior micro by targeting/snipping/dodging these that keep the P standing toe to toe with the zerg army. As Morrow suggests, FF does keep P stand toe to toe with the zerg army but the diference is that its up to the controlling players to make a mistake and not how the opposition will work it out.
I think this is the root cause of the problem in this particular matchup. The early game zerg composition always has roaches. Roaches simply flat out murder everything on ground and take sheer punishment thanks to their high hitpoints for such a low cost unit which in my opinion is downright stupid especially when their weakness (short range) was buffed due to ironically Morrows 5 rax reaper(? - correct me if Im wrong ). The protoss in SC2 simply lacks any high AOE damage dealing options to take these out (You need a critical amount of colossus to do the job and storms are just laughed at). So what do they turn to? FFs. Its what makes SC2 P stand toe to toe with the zerg til the lategame.
I tend to think that a bunch of things could potentially provide some more interesting matchup between PvZ. For instance the roach could go back to being a shorter range unit that justified its high hitpoint usage and return the hydras at T1.5 giving them options against mass FFs (thanks to their range 6). Maybe storm could be buffed but the nature of smart cast makes it so easy to use (and spammable).. all in awhile throwing the PvT balance off the window but Im thinking that PvT requires some SERIOUS makeover. Letting the Protoss have access to decent AOE damage dealing units (like BW) could shift the emphasis away from FFs (Maybe half/half?). I also tend to think that FFs should be like destructible rocks (you have to manually target them - maybe have half the hitpoints or less?) so it gives more options to the opposing player to actually get out or not get contained forever which also seems stupid e.g 3 sentry drop with warp prism on their main.
Also they should really replace the colossus with something else.
edit - Storms being buffed would actually hurt broodlord based deathballs also.. if smart casting were removed from high damage dealing abilities like BW. It would be such a different game if there were no smart casting which would differentiate such high skilled players from the rest (or those that literally focus on their troops to win and forgoing the spell casters all together).
I'm not saying Blizzard will never fix the issue but I think it would be best if we, the community, took it upon ourselves to sort this issue out. I know it's a lot to ask but maps should be made with some of the proposed balance changes and top players should play (and stream) on them to try and reach a balanced point without (or drastically altered) spells/units. Sure some of the most relevant players at the moment probably couldn't be bothered with this but I think it is pretty much agreed upon that if this new balance could be found it would be a huge boon to the game/scene and I think that is worth the sacrifice.
This is by no means a suggestion to split the scene but rather prove to Blizzard that it can be rebalanced in a more interesting manner so that they could officially implement the changes.
I very much agree with issue of "closing the distance"
I had actually briefly touched on this issue when advocating for true Mech Play
Thoughts on Late Game
The very interesting about Mech Play is by late game, Terran's defence in depth is so strong, it would become very difficult for melee units to be of any use. How can a unit that has to run all the way up to hit you in the face be of any use, if you have to run through mine field, dodge past hover bikers with attitudes, chucking grenades, to even reach the tank line?
Blizzard cleverly included some abilities that allowed melee to close the gap. Fast ships with cloaking fields under them and great orange clouds that ranged fire couldn't shoot into, but melee could attack unimpeded. The Arbiter and the Defiler.
It's rather unbelievable, that these abilities work as well as they do. Sure Terran has scans and Science Vessels. But it's sufficient to get the Protoss and Zerg army within striking distance. Not only that, but late game also has tremendous drop play potential. Multiple arbiters can be flying around, recalling on different bases, pulling the Terran death machine in multiple directions. Or carriers can harass it and strike in one place before running away.
Late game, range reaches a critical mass and melee needs ways to close the distance. To some extent zealots have charge. Mothership is kinda meh for this idea. Super slow and only one of it- good for protecting that one deathball army I guess and to slow down the army to the speed of the mothership. But what do Zerg's have? Maybe Blinding Cloud? But that doesn't seem to quite work the same as Dark Swarm. But in WoL? Not much.
Multiple, fast Arbiters opened up safe avenues for the protoss army to move into attacking range. Similarily, Dark Swarms created these relatively safe highways to move lings, lurkers, and ultralisks through to get to their targets. (But hydras and casters were happy to use it as well.) Relatively safe as melee, spells and splash still worked underneath.
Massive numbers of FF's move in the exact opposite direction of allowing melee (or short ranged units) to close the gap. It specifically blocks them out. So the ideal would be if somehow FF's could be kept, but then not be so near so prevalent.
On November 18 2012 21:50 TylerThaCreator wrote: I think using sen's games vs. parting are a bad example, he engaged pretty poorly in games 2 and 3 (and held the attack game 1). With the kind of army he was going for (1-1 lings) he should be wasting forcefields constantly from the protosses nat instead of just letting him march up to your third/nat with full forcefield energy AND your army is at a bad angle. Complaining about forcefields at that point is like complaining about engaging a sieged army from a choke.
This is exactly the OP's point. If the toss screws up the FF and lets the lings get away the toss loses. But if the toss just gets the good FF he wins. (a toss casting FF as he walks across a map is bad play if hes not getting kills with it.
the thing that cringes me the most about forcefield is when they are dropped in the main and you use 1 forcefield to negate an entire army, any spells that gives you absolutely no defence opportunity is wrong.
This doesn't feel any different from all of the other balance whine that passes through TL day and night. Basing your argument on the WCS seems sketchy as the only top Korean zerg there was Curious (Roro is pretty good, but doesn't have the SC2 experience yet), and you focus on Sen losing? I love Sen but I think most people would agree that he's a step below Code S Koreans yes?
The specific build in question has been beaten by many zergs on many different occasions, it's hard yes, but it can be done. Instead of complaining and hoping that ff gets changed by blizz, which of course it probably isn't and is not even on their radar right now, why not try and look for solutions that have already been discovered by others?
Last but not least you must realize that you play Terran/Zerg, and this in itself looks extremely suspicious. I'm not saying that you can't be objective, but let's face it, it's tough when you don't see any pro's making threads in favor of nerfing their own race
I wish they would increase the hp of all units in the game so fights aren't over so quickly, that would make micro more deciding and spells like forcefields less deciding for the outcome. It would require rebalancing the whole game though but they are messing with the whole game with HoTS anyway so they might aswell increase unit hp.
Stuff just dies way too fast in SC2 imo which makes certain spells like forcefield, fungal, EMP and units like colossus, baneling, hellion overpowered in certain situations.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
Those ability force you to micro better. You have to split and pick engagements smarter because of those abilities. "Anti-Micro" abilities create micro/positioning somewhere else.
I like what Morrow is saying and I agree it feels just stupid watching games where it's like oh Protoss missed that force field his army died. Same goes for PvT.
1 spell in the game determines way to much, Protoss would almost never win games without FF and Colossus.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
Those ability force you to micro better. You have to split and pick engagements smarter because of those abilities. "Anti-Micro" abilities create micro/positioning somewhere else.
So anti-micro abilitys produces more micro? Seems a legit statement.
On November 19 2012 08:32 oneill12 wrote: Pretty good point but care and much testing is needed to address this
I think this is the attitude that has made Starcraft 2 feel so lackluster after all this time. We haven't seen a lot of major reworks to units because we're too busy walking on eggshells hoping we don't upset the "balance" of the game before it's figured out. Small steps aren't going to get us very far unless we take a lot of them and that hasn't been the case.
I totally agree with Morrow with regard to the problem, although I actually would advocate removing forcefields entirely (or at the very least trying out the idea of having them be destructible).. I'd also love to see fungal (at least the root part) and even concussive removed too (and also timewarp, although as it's only in beta maybe it won't ever see release anyway).
Now obviously taking all these fundamental features out would mean effectively a total rework of the game which would be a massive undertaking.. but that doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. I can't help thinking that as long as the game revolves around these anti-micro abilities there'll always be a limit on how good the game can become and how awesome the feats of those playing it can really be. Given that it will clearly take a super long time to get over such a huge change and given we have a handy beta going on right now I think it's better to bite the bullet and get it over with as soon as possible (and crucially not add any more anti-micro abilities from here on :| ).
That said, there's obviously huge risks involved in a drastic course of action such as this and some may not have faith in Blizzard to rise to the challenge (honestly I'm not sure I do), but without taking any risks in development SC2 will only ever be a very good game and not a truly great one.
- I hope this post makes sense if anyone reads it.. I'm sooo tired, haven't been to sleep since the start of BWC today :D
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
Getting Blizzard to nerf FF which also means redesigning the entire P race in general would mean admitting that their ideas were fucked up in the first place (particularly WGs). Dustin Browder is too prideful to swallow the fact that his ideas didn't pan out the way he wanted them to (as well as the vast majority of Blizzard employees currently), so it's not gonna happen ever. FF is going to stay the way it is, and the only thing that might happen is some very minor indirect nerfs to FF if it continues to be an issue.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
Those ability force you to micro better. You have to split and pick engagements smarter because of those abilities. "Anti-Micro" abilities create micro/positioning somewhere else.
I like what Morrow is saying and I agree it feels just stupid watching games where it's like oh Protoss missed that force field his army died. Same goes for PvT.
1 spell in the game determines way to much, Protoss would almost never win games without FF and Colossus.
They dont force you to micro better. How do you micro when your rooted or FFed? What your talking about is pre-battle splits and the so called "dancing" to decide the perfect engagement. Those aren't the type of micro that Morrow was pointing out. Its the actual in-battle micro that hes referring to. Like baneling vs marines where your constantly splitting during the engagement while targeting down infestors/banelings with tanks. In PvZ this isn't the case, you fungal/FF and hope for the best.The pre-engagement decides the outcome far too much which is just too frustrating to play against/for or watch as a spectator (just like TvZ when infestors hit the field). They should rather give an advantage but not so lopsided to one party where battle micro can compensate for the slight disadvantage in the engagement if you were the batter mechanical player.
Something that has bothered me a little: We have anti-casters that work to prevent spells (EMP the shit out of casters, snipe them [of questionable use now], feedback, etc.), but we don't have anti-casters that work to counter spells after they're cast (think the medic in BW as an example).
Now that I think of it, there were a lot of anti-caster mechanisms in War3, which also had a lot of micro-minimizing spells. You could dispel, interrupt channeling, deny energy, specifically feedback the casters who cast a spell within a particular range, and more War3 specific mechanisms (staffing, burrowing, morphing, popping things out of ensnares, etc.), but the point really is that there are many ways to counter spells, and SC2 only employs one -- namely energy denial -- and it's really hit-or-miss. More spell interaction is definitely needed and would encourage micro.
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
Getting Blizzard to nerf FF which also means redesigning the entire P race in general would mean admitting that their ideas were fucked up in the first place (particularly WGs). Dustin Browder is too prideful to swallow the fact that his ideas didn't pan out the way he wanted them to (as well as the vast majority of Blizzard employees currently), so it's not gonna happen ever. FF is going to stay the way it is, and the only thing that might happen is some very minor indirect nerfs to FF if it continues to be an issue.
This is kinda the conclusion I've come to...Many people simply dont enjoy FFs or the issues it and warpgates create. Yet blizzard absolutely loves them. When a lot of the suggestions are reverting things back to brood war it probably kills their pride.
On November 19 2012 08:47 PH wrote: They need to get rid of force field and make gateway units not suck balls.
Gateway units dont suck contrary to popular belief. The way protoss functions, you need that key AOE dealing unit/caster (insert FF for SC2) to make these units effective on the field in PvZ. Pure gateway armies dont actually work in BW PvZ either outside some all in (dragoons get raped so much harder than stalkers vs lings/hydras+lurkers melt zealots in droves). But again we see that pattern. HTs and reavers literally kill off half (or less) of that threat compensating for the lack of cost efficient troop choices in this matchup.
On November 19 2012 08:47 PH wrote: They need to get rid of force field and make gateway units not suck balls.
Gateway units dont suck contrary to popular belief. The way protoss functions, you need that key AOE dealing unit/caster (insert FF for SC2) to make these units effective on the field in PvZ. Pure gateway armies dont actually work in BW PvZ either outside some all in (dragoons get raped so much harder than stalkers vs lings/hydras+lurkers melt zealots in droves). But again we see that pattern. HTs and reavers literally kill off half (or less) of that threat compensating for the lack of cost efficient troop choices in this matchup.
But reavers and HTs are more fun and interesting to use than seeing FFs trap an army into a big ball.
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
Getting Blizzard to nerf FF which also means redesigning the entire P race in general would mean admitting that their ideas were fucked up in the first place (particularly WGs). Dustin Browder is too prideful to swallow the fact that his ideas didn't pan out the way he wanted them to (as well as the vast majority of Blizzard employees currently), so it's not gonna happen ever. FF is going to stay the way it is, and the only thing that might happen is some very minor indirect nerfs to FF if it continues to be an issue.
completely agree, i have always felt that this is not our game but it is blizzards and that they have a very specific vision of what they want the game to look like, so solutions that seem smart and realistic to us seem crazy to them, while random arbitrary changes like protoss research cost seems perfectly logical to them
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
Getting Blizzard to nerf FF which also means redesigning the entire P race in general would mean admitting that their ideas were fucked up in the first place (particularly WGs). Dustin Browder is too prideful to swallow the fact that his ideas didn't pan out the way he wanted them to (as well as the vast majority of Blizzard employees currently), so it's not gonna happen ever. FF is going to stay the way it is, and the only thing that might happen is some very minor indirect nerfs to FF if it continues to be an issue.
Not necessarily. Just because the concepts are problematic now doesn't mean they were bad ideas from the beginning, and it's not like you can fault them for not knowing how the game would be played out 2-3 years down the line. The impression I'm getting from recent interviews is actually pretty positive, blizz seems to be looking into redesigning old units and spells like strike cannon, void ray, HSM, etc.
I know it's frustrating to have to wait so long for changes, but I don't think that attacking Dustin Browder's character is the right way to go about fixing things.
Something that had always bothered me is how warp gates work. That is, warp tech decreases the build time of most gateway units by about 10 sec.
Blizzard has claimed in the past that they don't like tech that feels mandatory or compulsory. Complicate this with the fact that traditionally Protoss has struggled with early aggressive play and so blizzard has played with sentry build times and such to make forcefield a viable solution on the defensive.
I would have liked to see that relation between warp gate and build times reversed: 10 sec shorter build times in gateway mode and the full build times in warp gate mode. The would be more of a trade off to the benefits of warp gates and Protoss would be able to get more units in the early game for defense or offense.
As it is, there is no reason to not get warp gate or stay in warp mode at all times. In fact, if you don't, you lose.
OT: I totally agree; there needs to be a redesign of early-mid game for Protoss. ANYTHING that reduces the other player's ability to affect the outcome of the battle should be foregone for the abilities that require control.
On November 19 2012 08:47 PH wrote: They need to get rid of force field and make gateway units not suck balls.
Gateway units dont suck contrary to popular belief. The way protoss functions, you need that key AOE dealing unit/caster (insert FF for SC2) to make these units effective on the field in PvZ. Pure gateway armies dont actually work in BW PvZ either outside some all in (dragoons get raped so much harder than stalkers vs lings/hydras+lurkers melt zealots in droves). But again we see that pattern. HTs and reavers literally kill off half (or less) of that threat compensating for the lack of cost efficient troop choices in this matchup.
The difference in BW was that Z couldn't exponentially create units at a ridiculous rate that would run over a P player. Sure you had some lame ass 3 hatch Hydra play that was hard as fuck to stop, but that was possible to stop without AoE or very minimal amounts of AoE. Without FF, Protoss is literally fucked in SC2 in the early to mid game. Period. In smaller numbers, Zealot/Goon could actually murder the living fuck out of Z units, and could handle Hydras fairly well as long as the Z wasn't making Hydras en masse. This is espec true when Zeals got leg upgrades. It wasn't until Z got his economy really going that he could outproduce and just run you over with Hydra/Lurkers, but at that point your AoE is already on the field in the form of Archons/Reavers/HT.
On November 19 2012 06:11 azoriusherald wrote: People are getting confused about the point of the discussion. The OP is not really about the relative balance of the races. What is baffling to me is how little controversy there is when you ask pro players about it. Both Z and P pros (if they are honest) will say that it is incredibly frustrating that you MUST get infestors or sentries because of how powerful the spells are, and how weak one is without them. Yet, despite the virtual unanimity of opinion, no changes to the spells are forthcoming.
No changes are being made to FF because it would mean a complete redesigning of the P race and tech tree in general.
Maybe we just need to suck up and make the changes for the good of the long term. The thing is, even in HotS, which is a great opportunity to make such big changes, nothing is being done. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away.
Getting Blizzard to nerf FF which also means redesigning the entire P race in general would mean admitting that their ideas were fucked up in the first place (particularly WGs). Dustin Browder is too prideful to swallow the fact that his ideas didn't pan out the way he wanted them to (as well as the vast majority of Blizzard employees currently), so it's not gonna happen ever. FF is going to stay the way it is, and the only thing that might happen is some very minor indirect nerfs to FF if it continues to be an issue.
Not necessarily. Just because the concepts are problematic now doesn't mean they were bad ideas from the beginning, and it's not like you can fault them for not knowing how the game would be played out 2-3 years down the line. The impression I'm getting from recent interviews is actually pretty positive, blizz seems to be looking into redesigning old units and spells like strike cannon, void ray, HSM, etc.
I know it's frustrating to have to wait so long for changes, but I don't think that attacking Dustin Browder's character is the right way to go about fixing things.
Dustin Browder will never, ever, ever, ever, revert WGs or FF. They are in the game, and will never change in any dramatic way. The problem is that if he does in any way shape or form make any major change to these things, it means that he is all but admitting that his ideas were bad, and as such he was wrong despite the fact that we had plenty of pros on this very forum tell him his ideas were atrocious since the beta.
The abilities/units you are talking about are considered useless, and are not related to core design of the game. Having a few useless units/abilities is fine; even in BW a few units/abilities are useless outside a very few specific situations. A total restructuring of the entire Protoss tech tree (because that's the only way you could feasibly do anything to FF/WGs without totally screwing P's early game) is different; it means that the game designer fucked up from essentially day 1. If a FF/WG rework/removal went through, it would be a damn miracle, because Dustin Browder is pretty much dead set on his vision of SC2.
And not fault them for not knowing how the game would play out 2-3 years down the line? Once people figured out how ridiculous WG tech was, there was nothing but literally 4/5 gates every single game because of how fast WG research came out during the beta testing. We all figured out from the beta how idiotic WG research is, because there is 0 downside to it. Everyone knew you HAD to get it, and everyone knew that if P tier 1 got any meaningful buffs at all, that P would run over both Z and T due to WG research overriding defenders advantage. That's why you hardly ever saw any buffs for P tier 1 during the beta, and the only meaningful buff was Stalker damage vs light units, mainly because Stalkers sucked a big fat cock when trying to kill air units back then.
On November 19 2012 09:11 Orcasgt24 wrote: This is just a giant balance whine thread. Albeit a well written one. Why hasn't it been closed?
Because it's a thread written by Morrow. If YOU wrote this op, it'd get closed
It's also more than just a balance whine thread, as a lot of the discussion is about micro-killing game mechanics, which apply to forcefield and fungal growth alike. If it was purely a whine thread, then the only posts in this thread would be Terran tears...
On November 19 2012 09:11 Orcasgt24 wrote: This is just a giant balance whine thread. Albeit a well written one. Why hasn't it been closed?
Because it's a thread written by Morrow. If YOU wrote this op, it'd get closed
Thats kinda the point. Several thread about forcefeild have been made throughout SC2s life, some well written, some pure trash. All closed. Many bans in those threads too
On November 19 2012 09:11 Orcasgt24 wrote: This is just a giant balance whine thread. Albeit a well written one. Why hasn't it been closed?
Because there is a difference between balance whine and critiquing game design that creates unfun gameplay. Or game design that consists of hindering the other players units more than controlling your own units better. Zerg's could be even generally winning against Protoss overall and it can still be a legitimate critique because it's not about OP or imba, but what sort of gameplay does it promote.
Don't hate the units, hate the game. Our best bet is to hope for Blizzard to look over the races and redo them. Force Fields look mad strong in the Immortal All-in build, but removing FF or nerfing it into the ground would do too much damage. Look at all the games in PvX where FF plays a huge role. Whether it be good or bad, its the deciding factor in a lot of wins of losses for Protoss. And it shouldn't be like that. There was at least 2 games this weekend that I saw from Rain where he missed a FF in PvP and it cost him the game. It shouldn't be like that.
And even fungal in ZvX. Its a must have to be able to live long enough to get out whatever you are trying to get out. One unit shouldn't have all this power in an RTS that can decide the game in a win or a loss.
On November 19 2012 09:11 Orcasgt24 wrote: This is just a giant balance whine thread. Albeit a well written one. Why hasn't it been closed?
Because there is a difference between balance whine and critiquing game design that creates unfun gameplay. Or game design that consists of hindering the other players units more than controlling your own units better. Zerg's could be even generally winning against Protoss overall and it can still be a legitimate critique because it's not about OP or imba, but what sort of gameplay does it promote.
I'll be honest, whenever I have to deal with FFs as Zerg (I switch between Z and P regularly nowadays), I just don't have fun because I feel like I'm at the will of the other player. I either get into his army before he FFs, he FFs poorly and I kill him, he FFs well and all my stuff dies, or I just run away. As P it feels too stressful and unfair for me to have to FF well and have that be what decides the game. It's an incredible amount of importance placed on just one ability so early in the game, it feels completely imbalanced from a designed perspective. Terrain manipulating spells just feel wrong when you have to balance maps and create positional play with room for creativity and micro. It isn't there nearly as much with FF and blizzard won't admit it. They'll just say something about internal testing they did and shoo us off while making another odd change like what they did to detection to make the widow mine work. It all feels forced, like they wanted to shoehorn ideas in because they thought they were cool and don't want to admit they aren't working right.
Yeah, we all know how much heavy reliance on forcefield hurts Protoss design, but the real question is; Is Blizzard willing to completely redesign protoss early game?
They've already acknowledged that Protoss balance and design heavily revolves around ff, and they seemed satisfied. Is the community able to convince blizzard otherwise? We're going to need alot more support for this, it would be a massive design redirection.
Dustin Browder will never, ever, ever, ever, revert WGs or FF. They are in the game, and will never change in any dramatic way. The problem is that if he does in any way shape or form make any major change to these things, it means that he is all but admitting that his ideas were bad, and as such he was wrong despite the fact that we had plenty of pros on this very forum tell him his ideas were atrocious since the beta.
People put too much weight and negative criticism on Dustin. It isn't just him, its a whole team. Yeah, he leads the whole thing, but it doesn't mean that he has majority influence. If this beta has proved anything, its proved that he and his team are open to criticism and are actually (starting) to make decent design changes.
On November 19 2012 09:32 MasterCynical wrote: LOL @ the first 3 responses.
Anyway...
Yeah, we all know how much heavy reliance on forcefield hurts Protoss design, but the real question is; Is Blizzard willing to completely redesign protoss early game?
They've already acknowledged that Protoss balance and design heavily revolves around ff, and they seemed satisfied. Is the community able to convince blizzard otherwise? We're going to need alot more support for this, it would be a massive design redirection.
Dustin Browder will never, ever, ever, ever, revert WGs or FF. They are in the game, and will never change in any dramatic way. The problem is that if he does in any way shape or form make any major change to these things, it means that he is all but admitting that his ideas were bad, and as such he was wrong despite the fact that we had plenty of pros on this very forum tell him his ideas were atrocious since the beta.
People put too much weight and negative criticism on Dustin. It isn't just him, its a whole team. Yeah, he leads the whole thing, but it doesn't mean that he has majority influence. If this beta has proved anything, its proved that he and his team are open to criticism and are actually (starting) to make decent design changes.
On November 19 2012 08:47 PH wrote: They need to get rid of force field and make gateway units not suck balls.
Gateway units dont suck contrary to popular belief. The way protoss functions, you need that key AOE dealing unit/caster (insert FF for SC2) to make these units effective on the field in PvZ. Pure gateway armies dont actually work in BW PvZ either outside some all in (dragoons get raped so much harder than stalkers vs lings/hydras+lurkers melt zealots in droves). But again we see that pattern. HTs and reavers literally kill off half (or less) of that threat compensating for the lack of cost efficient troop choices in this matchup.
The difference in BW was that Z couldn't exponentially create units at a ridiculous rate that would run over a P player. Sure you had some lame ass 3 hatch Hydra play that was hard as fuck to stop, but that was possible to stop without AoE or very minimal amounts of AoE. Without FF, Protoss is literally fucked in SC2 in the early to mid game. Period. In smaller numbers, Zealot/Goon could actually murder the living fuck out of Z units, and could handle Hydras fairly well as long as the Z wasn't making Hydras en masse. This is espec true when Zeals got leg upgrades. It wasn't until Z got his economy really going that he could outproduce and just run you over with Hydra/Lurkers, but at that point your AoE is already on the field in the form of Archons/Reavers/HT.
[
I completely agree with what your saying.
But you have exactly said the same thing I have! Because of the zerg macro mechanic in SC2 (larvae inject), you get huge influx of zerg troops ready at your disposal. Because in BW there was a hard cap and no larvae inject, Ps had an easier time in getting their tech and what not. In SC2, its quite the opposite. Because of such mechanic, alot more zerg units are out at times of the game which didn't happen in BW (which limits that small number vs small number example alot in game). Plus the AOE damage dealing units in the P arsenal is severely lacking against for instance 200/200 roach spams in comparison to their BW counterparts.
That is why the game now revolves around FFs in SC2 because of the lack of damage that the P army has against such a high hitpoint low cost roach based compositions which are plentiful in the early/mid game before winfestors hit the field. Its what keep SC2 Protoss on an even footing with zerg where as BW Protoss would be AOE/magicks/high tech units. Fighting large numbers with high tech AOE units mixed in with your gateway army.
Hell, as a Protoss player this was apparent to me very early on in the game, but for different reasons. The Protoss early and mid game is just hyper dependent on this. I can't tell you how many games I won or lost when I was in the lower leagues learning the game basically entirely on hitting or flubbing forcefields in the early game (even on simple things like force fielding my ramp, which I couldn't even do consistently when I first started). Take the forcefield out, and Protoss needs to be redesigned in a major way. Redesign the ability, and Protoss still needs some redesign (imagine, for example, how useless forcefields become against those medivac timing pushes which Terran do with the relatively high DPS of the terran bio army.)
So, I agree, but I have no idea how Blizzard could realistically address this issue without changing pretty much the entire game at this point, since we know how small changes can ripple through the entire meta game.
does anyone else feel like warpgates are impossible to balance? if you nerf the Wg units to make them used by the warpgate then they need the sentry to survive, if they removed the sentry and made zealot/stalker better not only would warpgate all ins be completely ridiculous, but blink timings would be even worse... that timing doens't rely on sentry (vs Terran) and would be hugely impacted by any changes. i dont think it's realistic to change forcefield, something just has to be done about the rate of production from zerg/warpgates before anything large in changes can be considered.
-make forcefields 75 energy, possibly with a pathogen glands style upgrade from the twilight council
-reduce immortal shields, or possibly make hardened shields an upgrade (both options might make PvP more interesting as well)
-raise base HP on stalkers to help compensate
Then nerf brood lord range by 1, roll burrow movement for roaches into the burrow upgrade and give them a researchable burrowed movement speed upgrade.
1. Forcefields are invincible. This is just stupid, and I'm utterly amazed that it has not changed. Forcefields should be neutral destructibles. The amount of HP they have can be up to balance, but I was thinking around 400-600 HP or something. A person should not be able to deny an entire army from doing anything just by expending 50 energy; It's absolutely absurd, and removes all sorts of skill from the game. Giving forcefields 400 HP won't really change anything except the situations where there's a large (and mostly ranged) army going against just a handful of units
2. This is more of a biased expression sympathizing with zerg, and not too related to the subject at hand, but something I still think is relevant: Zergs have a major lack in versatility and/or late-game power. The words I chose in the last sentence may not entirely be correct, but it's hard to word it properly. What I mean is that zerg has only 2 fighter units that can attack both air and ground (When not considering mutalisk or queen to be fighter units, rather as defense/harass units, but maybe it's a bit unreasonable to say that for the mutalisk): the Hydralisk which is terrible and no one uses [for very good reasons], and the infestor. This makes the infestor innately important for zerg, since it's pretty much the only [zerg] thing used in a fight that can hit air and ground without dying super fast. Infestor, corruptor, and Brood Lord are the only [good] units (hydralisk does not quality) that have reasonable range (more than 4) so that's another unsurprising reason to see them being used.
For comparison, Protoss has void ray, carrier, phoenix (somewhat), tempest, and stalker (didn't bother to include mothership or high templar), which all have generally good range as well. Terran have marine, thor, battlecruiser, raven, and viking.
Sure zerg is supposed to be swarmy and stuff, which worked in Brood War, but the current rendition of "swarmy" doesn't work well for SC2 I'd say. In brood war zerg was quite swarmy, but due to the mechanics of the game, there were less units on the field at once generally, and units wouldn't clump up as much, making swarmy units quite good. Hydralisks were also more powerful and useful, and even if it did come to death ball situations, there were strong counter-measures (plague, dark swarm)
HotS seems to address these issues at least reasonably well though (from what I can tell, have not really played it much), but I still have issue with the force fields.
How about if the active effect of FF was lessened in duration, but it started out as dormant 'trap' that lasts longer. Tone down the anti-micro but also maybe give it some early AoE, albeit fairly weak, which seems to be one of the things people always say protoss needs to survive. I give you:
The Force Prison
- 50 energy, same casting range as forcefield - Cast on the ground, the sentry places a ward of energy that waits for units to walk over it. When sprung the trap shortly envelopes a few nearby units with a shield of energy, immobilizing and disabling them, but protecting them from further harm (think stasis). - The casting animation and the activated effect are visible, but the trap itself can only be seen with a detector in range. - Has a one second "warm up" after being cast where it cannot activate, a 20 second "dormant" phase while it waits to activate, and a 5 second "active" duration. - The trap takes a split second to trigger after being stepped on, possibly letting a player pull their units away from the trap, but also letting more than one hapless unit walk into the area of effect. - If triggered, there's an additional effect to the spell once the field ends: the stasis field shatters, doing light AoE damage to enemy units standing outside of the effect, but leaving the originally trapped prey unharmed. This helps dissuade from people spam clicking to get past the force field as it's ending.
I dunno, what do you think. Probably great against zealots and zerglings, maybe not so effective versus terran bio and roaches. Slightly levels the playing field between skill levels for the protoss, as there's more need and opportunity to place traps thoughtfully, early, and less ability to spam out really beautiful FF or die trying to.
Figure it out in HOTS. That's my recommendation to Blizzard. More midgame options for zerg to cope with it while not depriving protoss of its ability to survive early game with these present. More midgame options for zerg to cope with it while giving protoss new or changed methods to controlling a mass of zerg units in early and midgame. Browder was in that audience, and I'm sure David Kim was there or watching elsewhere. From the opposite point of view, if I had to say that the ability would work just fine with minor modifications (massive was one) for roughly the span of a 2-year game, I'd say put the damn thing in every time.
Get a new beta-test-build out for Parting and the other top-micro Protosses and pay them by the hour to ram WoL tactics into the zerg army against top-skilled zergs. It'll help see what kind of solutions develop after that. It's really very hard to see through at this point. What change can help zerg see a tech path (scouting path) and micro options to defeat a well-played immortal sentry allin? What change simultaneously leaves protoss in the same position to defeat masses of attacking units or ranged, fast units (or both) with micro and skill? It's pretty clear with the "oh balance this and balance that too" comments that there isn't an easy, workable solution around yet.
On November 18 2012 21:45 randoomguy wrote: welcome to tvz for a terran player
actually: no, this isnt the same. tvz its atleast splitting/target fireing vs hitting fungals and getting good surrounds/baneling connections. If both players just amove into each other the battle is never as onesided as a pvz battle where the protoss player is lacking forcefields in the situation the op is describing.
What world do you live in?
The battle is just as completely one sided as the pvz battle. The terran player has to spread out their units sufficiently so that the battle will last long enough for medivacs and/or seige tanks to start making a difference in the battle.
The only advantage that terran and protoss have (before infestors) is that the zerg player will pay a price if they engage before they are willing to commit completely (stim, seiged tanks, forcefields).
Forcefield is a necessity in both PvT (before T3) and PvZ (everything) or a protoss player would just die. Zergs have ways to deal with sentry based pushes... why do you think mutalisks became popular in PvZ in the first place.
Sentries are GOOD for the game. They promote decision making by both players and make getting units that rely on maneverability and positional play more viable (Medivac, Mutalisk)
I think that basing this all off of the immortal sentry all in being potent is a little early. If you guys don't remember, the Stephano-style roach ling max was wiping the ground with protoss for about 2 months straight before protoss players started to get a hang of how to hold it. I think the OP is somewhat correct in that before zerg has infestors out, there isn't much micro to do for the zerg player. But, once infestors are out, there is a plethora of ways for zerg to micro (infestors and sentries are two of the most difficult spell-casters to micro). I don't see this as much of an issue.
Also, with regards to the 15 minute pre BL push from protoss, I think zerg just needs to adapt. Either find a new way to hold it or perhaps don't play so greedily and go for super late game tech so early without having a standing army to protect you? I know it sounds kind of harsh but I feel like a lot of the zerg complaining is very premature. We hear this same stuff over and over again every time a sick new timing comes onto the scene. I'd say we still need more time.
On November 19 2012 10:14 negativedge wrote: possible solutions:
-make forcefields smaller
-make forcefields 75 energy, possibly with a pathogen glands style upgrade from the twilight council
-reduce immortal shields, or possibly make hardened shields an upgrade (both options might make PvP more interesting as well)
-raise base HP on stalkers to help compensate
Then nerf brood lord range by 1, roll burrow movement for roaches into the burrow upgrade and give them a researchable burrowed movement speed upgrade.
On November 19 2012 10:59 skyyan wrote: I think that basing this all off of the immortal sentry all in being potent is a little early. If you guys don't remember, the Stephano-style roach ling max was wiping the ground with protoss for about 2 months straight before protoss players started to get a hang of how to hold it. I think the OP is somewhat correct in that before zerg has infestors out, there isn't much micro to do for the zerg player. But, once infestors are out, there is a plethora of ways for zerg to micro (infestors and sentries are two of the most difficult spell-casters to micro). I don't see this as much of an issue.
Also, with regards to the 15 minute pre BL push from protoss, I think zerg just needs to adapt. Either find a new way to hold it or perhaps don't play so greedily and go for super late game tech so early without having a standing army to protect you? I know it sounds kind of harsh but I feel like a lot of the zerg complaining is very premature. We hear this same stuff over and over again every time a sick new timing comes onto the scene. I'd say we still need more time.
People simply are up in arm over BWC results.
Reality is this:
"I get it, BWC finals, everyone going to jump on the bandwagon and circlejerk (see bottom as this is what sparked morrow to make his post in the first place).
I don't give a fuck, 4 world class protoss playing vs mediocre zergs in quarterfinals (stephano, nerchio and moonglade did not make it out of their zerg heavy groups (also vibe) AND curious gets knocked out in a zvz vs Sen. Nor trying to take anything away from the players at the event but this is the truth.
I am fine with FF being the target of criticism but ALL antimicro shit must go then. Goodbye to vortex, and fuck you fungal growth. We all know rooting everything is complete bullshit. Also free units is complete bullshit.
So sick of all the bias, you want to knock something fine but acknowledge the big picture...
morrow on TL:
"im sure we all just saw the amazing tournament that just happened (wcs world) after i saw parting win against sen with immortal sentry allin 3 games in a row and afterwards seeing sen get destroyed by rain 3 games in a row with timing attacks before broodlord tipped me over the edge to finally go ahead and get this off my chest."
On November 19 2012 10:14 negativedge wrote: possible solutions:
-make forcefields smaller
-make forcefields 75 energy, possibly with a pathogen glands style upgrade from the twilight council
-reduce immortal shields, or possibly make hardened shields an upgrade (both options might make PvP more interesting as well)
-raise base HP on stalkers to help compensate
Then nerf brood lord range by 1, roll burrow movement for roaches into the burrow upgrade and give them a researchable burrowed movement speed upgrade.
have fun with blink allins.
yeah, that's a problem that would need to be addressed. maybe increase the CD on blink? increase the research time?
charge might also have to be cheaper to help offset FF nerfs in PvT
On November 19 2012 10:25 Resistentialism wrote: How about if the active effect of FF was lessened in duration, but it started out as dormant 'trap' that lasts longer. Tone down the anti-micro but also maybe give it some early AoE, albeit fairly weak, which seems to be one of the things people always say protoss needs to survive. I give you:
The Force Prison
- 50 energy, same casting range as forcefield - Cast on the ground, the sentry places a ward of energy that waits for units to walk over it. When sprung the trap shortly envelopes a few nearby units with a shield of energy, immobilizing and disabling them, but protecting them from further harm (think stasis). - The casting animation and the activated effect are visible, but the trap itself can only be seen with a detector in range. - Has a one second "warm up" after being cast where it cannot activate, a 20 second "dormant" phase while it waits to activate, and a 5 second "active" duration. - The trap takes a split second to trigger after being stepped on, possibly letting a player pull their units away from the trap, but also letting more than one hapless unit walk into the area of effect. - If triggered, there's an additional effect to the spell once the field ends: the stasis field shatters, doing light AoE damage to enemy units standing outside of the effect, but leaving the originally trapped prey unharmed. This helps dissuade from people spam clicking to get past the force field as it's ending.
I dunno, what do you think. Probably great against zealots and zerglings, maybe not so effective versus terran bio and roaches. Slightly levels the playing field between skill levels for the protoss, as there's more need and opportunity to place traps thoughtfully, early, and less ability to spam out really beautiful FF or die trying to.
This would perhaps work for PvZ and PvT but it will bring back 4gates in PvP because sentries will be unable to keep remaking forcefields at the ramp with a 5 sec duration forcefield. Balancing against 4gates is one of the reason it is so difficult to make changes to the forcefield.
Any changes that will allow the opponent to get through forcefield through micro or otherwise(i.e slow/destructible forcefields) means that a 4gating player can just waltz up the ramp and start warping in stuff on the high ground.
Warpgate is also another one of those design issues that needs to be fixed. Personally, I would rather both FF and Warpgate be removed and have Gateway unit stats tweaked to balance it out.
I can't think of any ways blizz can balance forcefields in WoL and not affect PvP early game drastically. HotS might allow for such changes though with pylons not powering the high ground anymore. Might work once that happens.
On November 19 2012 10:14 negativedge wrote: possible solutions:
-make forcefields smaller
-make forcefields 75 energy, possibly with a pathogen glands style upgrade from the twilight council
-reduce immortal shields, or possibly make hardened shields an upgrade (both options might make PvP more interesting as well)
-raise base HP on stalkers to help compensate
Then nerf brood lord range by 1, roll burrow movement for roaches into the burrow upgrade and give them a researchable burrowed movement speed upgrade.
have fun with blink allins.
yeah, that's a problem that would need to be addressed. maybe increase the CD on blink? increase the research time?
Any tweak to FF requires gateway units buff which in turns makes warpgate better. Remember the first year of the game? Almost nothing but 4, 5, 6 gateway timings in every MU.
There are fundamental problems with the game (mules, Wg & FF, zerg free units, fungal root). You can't change FF without changing the entire game...
On November 19 2012 11:24 yrt123 wrote:I can't think of any ways blizz can balance forcefields in WoL and not affect PvP early game drastically. HotS might allow for such changes though with pylons not powering the high ground anymore. Might work once that happens.
How about something along the lines of (use these numbers as examples, don't get too caught up in them):
Reduce FF duration from 15 seconds to 10 seconds. Increase the sentry shield and hp by 5 or 10 each, increase their dmg output by 1. Perhaps even reduce their attack speed from 1.0 to 0.9.
FF duration gets cut by 33%, and they become slightly strong in combat. Again, don't talk shit about these numbers, talk shit (if you must) about this concept.
edit:
Or even this:
Remove slowtime (whatever it's called) from the Oracle, give it something else, but give slowtime to the sentry, as a straight replacement for the forcefield. But then buff it's combat stats a little bit to compensate.
On November 18 2012 22:06 Psychobabas wrote: Great article.
I kind of feel like its the same for TvP lol
it can feel like it against collosus all in's, but those are holdable, just gota pull more scvs than you think you need to and hav ton of bunkers. Real problem with TvP is late game*. 20 warpgates vs. 20 barracks don't even compare. 15 zealot warp-in's into main production. 15 templar spread around the map to prohibit terran from capitalizing on a good engagement. Archon production vs. ghost/emp production, etc.
Forcefields should definatly stay, i have to agree with morrow here lol. They not that much different from fungal growth, only fungal also deals damage and makes a perfect donut around every unit (completely prevents it from moving) without anny additional micro.It lasts a bit shorter though.
Lack of micro opportunitys for zerg: This is difficult, all races have the kiting, focus fire and pull back hurt units micro that you can do with anny unit,and all races also have drop micro. Then there a few specific micro mechanics for each race: stim, forcefield,fungal,emp,storm Forcefield prevents the standard micro with units,fungal does basicly the same though comes at a much later stage and in smaller numbers, i kinda do like the idea behind it. A solution for forcefield is maybe give zerg a decent massable range unit wich has the same range as stalkers. Your units can still be trapped but they cant be killed of without a fight from 6 range annymore. Collusus still does damage but for that you need corruptors annyway. Forcefield then becomes a way to buy time and stall battles, instead of a mechanic to trap units and then kill them without retaliation. 6 range roaches would probably be heavy unbalanced in other areas but i do think a major problem with the forcefield for zerg comes from a lack of range against stalkers,and maybe a solution can come from giving zerg better range. Other idea wich already was mentioned is to give forcefields hitpoints,if blizzard will do annything with forcefields i think it will be this, seeing they experimented with hp and entomb (wich is quiet similar to forcefields)
Why not give Forcefields Health Points like Entomb? This seems like a good solution to me, protoss players have to reput up the forcefields that are about to die and zerg can focus down certain forcefields.
Sorry, I didn't read the 19 pages of comments, if this has already been suggested.
"Its amazing that we have different champions in a game where fungal growths exist" - author unknown :D
Getting back on topic, I agree somewhat with the concept of removing FFs entirely, but at the same time I wouldn't mind seeing them adding to the Oracle in exchange for Time Warp.
Promotes mirco earlier in the game but still adds a harassment spell for the Oracle in the form of FFs. Instead of slowing down mining literally, you stop it outright like Entomb but in a different method that still allows for the spell to be used in other ways. This could also greatly increase the viability of storm drops as you could trap workers then storm them and they would be unable to run away.
Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
Why?
They didn't shut down Tal Darim Altar or tournaments playing with maps with no close spawns and with neutral depots at the bottom of ramps. I don't know about the US, but should they try to stop an European organizer doing such a thing they would get into trouble with the legal authorities as behavior like that is generally frowned upon over here.
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
Why?
They didn't shut down Tal Darim Altar or tournaments playing with maps with no close spawns and with neutral depots at the bottom of ramps. I don't know about the US, but should they try to stop an European organizer doing such a thing they would get into trouble with the legal authorities as behavior like that is generally frowned upon over here.
This is Blizzard we are talking about. They have the rights to everything. They would shut you down and not give any tournament organization the licensing to run said tournament.
I agree with everything your saying, i'm not trying to sound rude but it is what it is. Name one balance change that was a direct result from community feedback? Blizzard always has to do something to make it their own, they say they are not afraid to admit when they are wrong, but have you ever seen it?
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
Why?
They didn't shut down Tal Darim Altar or tournaments playing with maps with no close spawns and with neutral depots at the bottom of ramps. I don't know about the US, but should they try to stop an European organizer doing such a thing they would get into trouble with the legal authorities as behavior like that is generally frowned upon over here.
This is Blizzard we are talking about. They have the rights to everything. They would shut you down and not give any tournament organization the licensing to run said tournament.
I agree with everything your saying, i'm not trying to sound rude but it is what it is. Name one balance change that was a direct result from community feedback? Blizzard always has to do something to make it their own, they say they are not afraid to admit when they are wrong, but have you ever seen it?
Only once and that was realID. But the response was so overwhelming that it legitimately scared blizzard into thinking they might lose customers over it, so they caved. Really though, if you don't threaten their bank accounts they won't care. You're essentially correct.
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
Why?
They didn't shut down Tal Darim Altar or tournaments playing with maps with no close spawns and with neutral depots at the bottom of ramps. I don't know about the US, but should they try to stop an European organizer doing such a thing they would get into trouble with the legal authorities as behavior like that is generally frowned upon over here.
This is Blizzard we are talking about. They have the rights to everything. They would shut you down and not give any tournament organization the licensing to run said tournament.
I agree with everything your saying, i'm not trying to sound rude but it is what it is. Name one balance change that was a direct result from community feedback? Blizzard always has to do something to make it their own, they say they are not afraid to admit when they are wrong, but have you ever seen it?
No, and that is the _actual_ fundamental problem. The community lacks faith in the design and balance teams and a lot of people start to feel that Hots will be a failure because of it.
But first things first. Prove that the concept of a mod works and then worry about the issues you brought up. If I would announce a showmatch in footman wars I could. Only tournaments making money off sc2 has that problem.
If a mod would actually provide better games then it would ultimately be bad business to shut it down, right?
Either make something better yourself or attack the problem at its roots and demand that Blizzard replaces key figures in the design and balance departments.
On November 19 2012 13:38 one-one-one wrote: Another thread by a prominent figure on the scene addressing the same perceived fundamental problems with the game. I said it in the #SaveHots thread and I say it here again:
The very same issues are brought up time and time again. The fix is in your hands. What do tournament makers do when the map pool has gone stale? In the beginning there were mostly bad Blizzard maps with close positions enabled. A big thing was the moment when GSL introduced Tal Darim Altar.
The editor doesn't limit you to pure map design. You can actually change parameters of other stuff to. Since there is a large majority in the community that wants to change stuff that Blizzard is never gonna change you should make new maps where you make design modifications to fungal, forcefields, neural parasite, siege tanks and what have you. The motivation is to create a game where consistent skill acquired through careful practice is allowed to prevail.
If leading figures in the community is behind such a mod and tournaments start to pick it up then Blizzard has to implement changes into their official SC2 balance system. Gretorp started the other thread i mentioned.
What about some major casters go together with pros like MorroW to design a better game. You have to deal with all the problems that might arise. There has to be a neutral balance group capable of making the right calls. You have to arrange showmatches proving that the changes leads to a better game.
CS and Dota are mods. Why can't you actually create something better yourself instead of writing kilometers of texts in forums about changes Blizzard should make but never will.
I can't do it, I'm a nobody and no one would play my mod and I wouldn't be an authority when it comes to judging balance. Neither do I organize any tournaments.
Problem with this though is Blizzard would shut you down if you made their game better
Why?
They didn't shut down Tal Darim Altar or tournaments playing with maps with no close spawns and with neutral depots at the bottom of ramps. I don't know about the US, but should they try to stop an European organizer doing such a thing they would get into trouble with the legal authorities as behavior like that is generally frowned upon over here.
This is Blizzard we are talking about. They have the rights to everything. They would shut you down and not give any tournament organization the licensing to run said tournament.
I agree with everything your saying, i'm not trying to sound rude but it is what it is. Name one balance change that was a direct result from community feedback? Blizzard always has to do something to make it their own, they say they are not afraid to admit when they are wrong, but have you ever seen it?
Why would blizzard be so hostile towards a mod made in their own game? Tournaments are allowed to pick their own map pools, so deciding to play on a modded map isn't too big of a stretch. The only real problem is that the ladder system would be very messy and something like iccup would be against the ToS. So in order for a mod to work without getting Blizzard mad people would need to survive with no instant matchmaking for the time being.
Whats with the outcry suddenly when some not so top Zergs lost to some of the best Protosses from Korea? If those zergs were Life, Leenock, then something is wrong.
On November 19 2012 14:14 covetousrat wrote: Whats with the outcry suddenly when some not so top Zergs lost to some of the best Protosses from Korea? If those zergs were Life, Leenock, then something is wrong.
Morrow isn't even complaining about it being OP or not. He is complaining that it results in only the protoss who has to make the micro mistakes. He is saying in pvz (and this is true) zerg doesn't control micro at all because they can't.
Once there are FF's it's all up to tosses. If they fuck up they lose their army, if they don't zerg loses their army. It's not very fun because as a zerg you can't control your army and micro it becuase you have to hope toss misses his force fields (for example, doing a 3 pronged attack 1 to the natural, 1 to the third, and 1 more to the natural through a different choke). The zerg is pretty much praying toss doesn't notice and doesn't force field which isn't very fun at all.
I do hope people read the OP and not take it as balance whine, it just is boring and I imagine frusterating not only to tosses who accidently mis click, but to zergs who have to rely on the toss fucking up whenever zerg wants to engage the protoss army.
The best solution, one that would be harder but better for the game overall would be to remove forcefield and buff toss units so they don't have to rely on it. Of course again this would be really hard to balance correctly thanks to warpgates, so I don't' think this will ever happen.
Concept: 1. Bring Back Shield Battery, in any form, building or spell from nexus,(http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Shield_battery), this will give defenders advantage to protoss.
2. Buff Zealot Speed. maybe be inmune to concusive too.
On November 19 2012 14:14 covetousrat wrote: Whats with the outcry suddenly when some not so top Zergs lost to some of the best Protosses from Korea? If those zergs were Life, Leenock, then something is wrong.
Morrow isn't even complaining about it being OP or not. He is complaining that it results in only the protoss who has to make the micro mistakes. He is saying in pvz (and this is true) zerg doesn't control micro at all because they can't.
Once there are FF's it's all up to tosses. If they fuck up they lose their army, if they don't zerg loses their army. It's not very fun because as a zerg you can't control your army and micro it becuase you have to hope toss misses his force fields (for example, doing a 3 pronged attack 1 to the natural, 1 to the third, and 1 more to the natural through a different choke). The zerg is pretty much praying toss doesn't notice and doesn't force field which isn't very fun at all.
I do hope people read the OP and not take it as balance whine, it just is boring and I imagine frusterating not only to tosses who accidently mis click, but to zergs who have to rely on the toss fucking up whenever zerg wants to engage the protoss army.
The best solution, one that would be harder but better for the game overall would be to remove forcefield and buff toss units so they don't have to rely on it. Of course again this would be really hard to balance correctly thanks to warpgates, so I don't' think this will ever happen.
I remember Jaedong's quote saying he couldn't micro or be aggressive like he used to be and it made me so sad and upset at the same time....when you see good FFs all you can do is die or retreat as zerg. It kills any momentum you have and forces complete passivity while toss does their thing. Then as toss you either push early and kill the zerg with good FFs before they get too many infestors. Maybe get a vortex on their endgame army. It feels like the game is getting more and more "figured out" with the state of BL/infestor and then the immortal/sentry all ins/pushes. PvZ is just a bit too predicable if both players really know the matchup. Even then, if things change FFs and Infestor/BL will always shape the outcome of every game. Even if it doesn't play out in cookie cutter fashion in most games that aren't super all in cheeses before 10 minutes.
On November 19 2012 14:14 covetousrat wrote: Whats with the outcry suddenly when some not so top Zergs lost to some of the best Protosses from Korea? If those zergs were Life, Leenock, then something is wrong.
Morrow isn't even complaining about it being OP or not. He is complaining that it results in only the protoss who has to make the micro mistakes. He is saying in pvz (and this is true) zerg doesn't control micro at all because they can't.
Once there are FF's it's all up to tosses. If they fuck up they lose their army, if they don't zerg loses their army. It's not very fun because as a zerg you can't control your army and micro it becuase you have to hope toss misses his force fields (for example, doing a 3 pronged attack 1 to the natural, 1 to the third, and 1 more to the natural through a different choke). The zerg is pretty much praying toss doesn't notice and doesn't force field which isn't very fun at all.
I do hope people read the OP and not take it as balance whine, it just is boring and I imagine frusterating not only to tosses who accidently mis click, but to zergs who have to rely on the toss fucking up whenever zerg wants to engage the protoss army.
The best solution, one that would be harder but better for the game overall would be to remove forcefield and buff toss units so they don't have to rely on it. Of course again this would be really hard to balance correctly thanks to warpgates, so I don't' think this will ever happen.
Thanks. It seems that Morrow posted this in HOTS forum. If it's aimed at HOTS, so far the hots games are looking really good in my opinion with more unit choices, ways to survive early game and most importantly larger maps.
Changing it in WOL with 4 months left is way too game breaking. Even if there's 2 years left, removing FF will be a ballsy move.
My 2 cent opinion. Blizzard will leave everything like what it is and focus heavily in balancing hots.
I think a big fundamental change to forcefield is just one of the many steps SC2 needs right now to improve itself going into Heart of the Swarm, but it's a complaint almost as old as the game is, so I doubt it'll be addressed. I was hoping for something from Blizzard indicating that the current state of gameplay isn't where they'd like it and that a lot of changes were coming to attempt to improve things.
Thus far, they seem relatively content with how the game is played and that's part of the reason I'm not that excited for HotS. Blizzard is playing things way too safe.
In the first game, I should have won, but my corruptors which were morphing didn't come out in time. In the second game, I wasn't able to detect his intentions, and in the third game, I scouted his triple immortal, but my roaches were too slow, and I wasn't able to hold it. It was quite a pity, but that's how tournaments are.
Splitting your units and setting up your flanks is micro too. The Zergs who don't play positional games, loose to good execution. 'Crossing your fingers and hoping for bad forcefields' isn't lack of micro opportunity, its already loosing the initiative.
But to be fair, it is mainly a map issue. The extended corridors on Daybreak make IS timings sick good (while the dead space and cliffs inbetween them make broodlords sick good, but this is another topic!). Ohana is small, with obstructions in front of the 3rd which basically mean that there are only 3 possible flanks at best, and they are stoppable by 4 forcefields each. Stephano set up a sick 3-4 way flank, that ended up completely surrounding - at least 300 degrees - but this was on Antiga. d.Killer goes lings to delay, then floods with roaches. All abuse the fact that toss has to push out with 3 immortals and a load of sentries.
Forcefields are here to stay, they are too integral to all P matchups. Short of completely redesigning warpgate units (and their synergies with robo/SG, and their early game balance vs T and Z), there is nothing to be done.
Besides, HotS units are part of the fix, and IS All-ins will become irrelevant. You can't FF out a stream of locusts forever. And an obs will delay the push by almost a full Zerg inject cycle.
On November 19 2012 02:24 WhatsInAName wrote: 1.) Once the build is scouted, different action must be taken. Players can't do the same thing every time and expect to win. I see zergs doing the same thing every time and lose. With the infestor/bl late game pvz, protoss players keep doing the same thing and losing. It is mind-numbing to see little creativity. Must players always whine balance?
Take the last game of Sen v. Parting for example. He scouts it and his reaction is very poor.
- He continues to build drones on 3 bases (while his opponent is on 2). - He waits for his opponent to move out and get in to the perfect position. - Does absolutely nothing to bait force fields or slow the push down. Nothing to snipe the probe or pylon or a few sentries. - Doesn't even make an attempt for a surround
All of these things are inexcusable. It's simply mind-numbing as a spectator to see the same pathetic reaction over and over. Stephano is the only one that comes close to handling any of these situations properly. He loses against them from time to time for being stubbornly greedy.
Last week: "Zerg so easy to play and is OP."
This week: "Protoss so easy to play and is OP."
What race do you play? Either of them? Have you experienced the build done to you (properly, not some terrible diamond player doing it)? I hope so, you should realize that Sen can't attack. He doesn't have enough to warrant suiciding his army. Throwing 30 lings at the small army while it moves out doesn't kill anything. He HAS to wait for Parting to move across so that he can build a bigger army, let his creep get a bit further out, maybe build a few spines, wait for roach speed or +1, etc. It's not NEARLY as easy as you say it is.
If you have experienced it and won, and Morrow said, it's because the protoss fucked up, not because you magically found the solution.
Watch how Stephano deals with Protoss. Baiting, sniping, surrounding. It's not always perfect, but after watching him, you come to realize that it is not a balance problem, all the other zergs are just simply bad.
Yeah, that's why Stephano couldn't even get out of his group at WCS.
Are you talking about the Stephano who lost to Mana's Sentry Immortal all ins at ESWC? The same guy who got stomped, absolutely stomped by Seed in a 3 base Immortal push recently at IPTL. Is that who you're talking about?
Oh but he won a weak tournament like Lonestar, beat a couple of Code B and one Code A player barely 3-2, so he's the best Zerg in the world for sure and we should all look up to him for guidance.
What the fuck? The guy lost one zvz, and went 3-2 (yes winning record) against Hero last weekend, you pluck out some random matches, and suddenly he's not a great player anymore?
Hot tip bud, even the best players don't win every match. Doesn't mean he is shit.
On November 19 2012 14:55 Jintoss wrote: Splitting your units and setting up your flanks is micro too. The Zergs who don't play positional games, loose to good execution. 'Crossing your fingers and hoping for bad forcefields' isn't lack of micro opportunity, its already loosing the initiative.
But to be fair, it is mainly a map issue. The extended corridors on Daybreak make IS timings sick good (while the dead space and cliffs inbetween them make broodlords sick good, but this is another topic!). Ohana is small, with obstructions in front of the 3rd which basically mean that there are only 3 possible flanks at best, and they are stoppable by 4 forcefields each. Stephano set up a sick 3-4 way flank, that ended up completely surrounding - at least 300 degrees - but this was on Antiga. d.Killer goes lings to delay, then floods with roaches. All abuse the fact that toss has to push out with 3 immortals and a load of sentries.
Forcefields are here to stay, they are too integral to all P matchups. Short of completely redesigning warpgate units (and their synergies with robo/SG, and their early game balance vs T and Z), there is nothing to be done.
Besides, HotS units are part of the fix, and IS All-ins will become irrelevant. You can't FF out a stream of locusts forever. And an obs will delay the push by almost a full Zerg inject cycle.
Flanks dont matter if someone has FFs, they can cut you off and make you trade incredibly inefficiently with them. And maps will ALWAYS be a problem, because FFs alter terrain. You can't make maps just for FFs, it shows they have too much power over the game.
anyone ealse find a zerg complaining quite funny? I mean i agree FF is not the optimal way to make a game but with all the flaws in the game at the moment i think this is one of the least worrying.Its mandatory to keep in the game at the moment.If they took it out completely sc2 would become a completely differant game entirely for PVX. Thinking about nerfing FF i cant see any nerf in anyway that would work. I mean your complaining about FF before broodlord attack but why not go ultras which break forcefields and are quicker hive tech.Or why not just mass mutas so FF isnt a problem there are many ways to deal with it maybe not that viable but still. I think its op yes but so many things in this game are op and people find solutions ( not to infestors yet). I mean the zerg is useless in microing but when fungel hits you cant even move i think to make the game in which you describe would mean so many other units need buffs or nerfs i mean i guess you could decrease the size of FF but keep in mind it should ALWAYS block the ramp for mains and that doesnt solve the problem because they could just make more sentrys and making it non instant would just not ever work. imo i think that you need to look at the games overall bigger design to solve this problem
I think MorroW's public posts about balance have been excellent thus far - well reasoned, thought out and carefully considered. I especially liked his post about mech TvP even though it failed to produce any potential changes (especially re: vikings). This is certainly no exception - there's no alternative proposed, but MorroW does effectively highlight and breakdown why FF is problematic in PvZ, especially with how both players approach the situation. Much like QXC and his recent videos, I feel MorroW has an excellent understanding of the game and genuinely wants to see it improve, for both the players and viewers. Hopefully MorroW's post on the b.net forums will enlighten a designer or two!
On November 19 2012 15:08 Serpico wrote: And maps will ALWAYS be a problem, because FFs alter terrain. You can't make maps just for FFs, it shows they have too much power over the game.
This is why I'm particularly concerned about OSL's maps that are being transferred from BW. I think it was Bisu that said if he had FF in BW he'd never lose - Araknoid (iirc that's what it's called) seems especially susceptible to cutting up opposing armies.
Protoss overreliance on the Sentry is definitely hurting them in other areas. Less able to fight guerilla warfare, can get torn apart more easily by Medivac or Roach/Ling splits. Probably holding back Zealots base speed so you never see them BW stutter step.
I'm torn though, because I like the Forcefield mechanic, I just think it needs to be less prevalent. It should be Arbiter level tech, or like many have suggested, make them destructible.Then tweak the basics, and any subsequent spillover into Blink OPedness just needs a direct nerf to Blink, can't be avoided. Tired of Blink throttling any of the basic composition changes Protoss needs.
If you watch Sniper vs Parting about a week or so back, he beats a Parting all-in by attacking from 3 different points at once. I really feel like that all in can be held if the Zerg initiates a perfect attack, which is actually really hard, otherwise all Zergs would be doing it. Also, you must attack when the protoss is in its most awkward position.
Attacking from 3 different fronts is actually really hard to execute, since as a zerg you want all of your units to hit at the exact same time.
I really hate how people say Zerg requires no micro, I've played Terran/Protoss and I about a high diamond level, while my Zerg is mid masters (I main Zerg though), and I find that Terran/Protoss might have a bit more micro scenarios, but all of it is situational, and isn't actually that hard. With Zerg I find I have to flank, and if you are off by half a second it can often prove fatal.
I won't disagree that infestors are strong, and their micro is kind of easy, but it's not that much easier than High Templar/Ghosts.
On November 19 2012 15:29 blug wrote: I don''t agree with the OP all that much...
If you watch Sniper vs Parting about a week or so back, he beats a Parting all-in by attacking from 3 different points at once. I really feel like that all in can be held if the Zerg initiates a perfect attack, which is actually really hard, otherwise all Zergs would be doing it. Also, you must attack when the protoss is in its most awkward position.
Attacking from 3 different fronts is actually really hard to execute, since as a zerg you want all of your units to hit at the exact same time.
I really hate how people say Zerg requires no micro, I've played Terran/Protoss and I about a high diamond level, while my Zerg is mid masters (I main Zerg though), and I find that Terran/Protoss might have a bit more micro scenarios, but all of it is situational, and isn't actually that hard. With Zerg I find I have to flank, and if you are off by half a second it can often prove fatal.
I won't disagree that infestors are strong, and their micro is kind of easy, but it's not that much easier than High Templar/Ghosts.
Let's all quote the most extreme example of Zerg mastery to prove our point? And you don't even contradict the OP, you agree with him that the only thing zerg can do is position themselves well, because micro during the fight is useless.
Just reading @rumodbrotheraturface post or any anyone else who defends FF mechanics along with fungal freezing just further validates the points that Morrow brought up.
for a race to either crumble or fall on one single spell caster to such a degree alone shows that's something just wrong. How about just removing the forcefield ability and make fungal without any slowing effects at all and just bite the bad apple and endure while balancing the game all over again.
I think microing with an army just doesnt't suit to the zerg. All the races were designed the way to be as difference as possible. Zerg players would have enough to do if the zerg wasn't so good. Zerg would gotta attack terran from different directions, burrow banelings, harass with muta, use nydus, which actually gives good opportunities for harass in late etc. In ZvP zergs used to be agressive, and some of them were successful with it in the past. And it required skill, because there were players like DRG and Stephano who were much more successful than others. Now there are plenty of zergs who can beat the best protosses of the world, because now zerg doesn't require a great skill, broodfestors solve all problems. Very many zergs can beat players like HerO now. And also I can't agree that forcefields require a great micro. It's pretty easy to use, so I don't think that it makes the game. I just don't remember when I lost because of bad FFs. Or won because of excellent FFs. Seriously, I bet it has never happened, since I got in ML. It's always pretty decent, I had no serious problems with it even when I was a begginer. TvP is way more spell-dependent than PvZ I think. I mean that FFs usually just decent, while storms can be very bad or very good even in high level games. Oh, sorry, I mean, except vortex. Just I rarely see when protoss wins zerg even with a good vortex, so I forgot about it. And I don't agree that zerg can't micro in ZvP at all. Zerg players can force protoss to make wasteful FFs, running around his army, like Stephano used to. Zerg players can attack protoss from different directions. Very few of you do it. It's a little, but zergs don't do even this. And it's absolutely enough to hold against immortal push. Do you really want to micro with units (why you don't always do micro which is available now then?) which weren't designed for accurate micro (and this is very obvious) or you just want another opportunity to hold against immortal push? Why this thread appears right after parting's beaten Sen 3-0 with immortal push every game? I don't think you are honest with us, Morrow and this more likely to be a well-hidden complaining. Beacuse I can't believe in your arguments. Yeah, at last I want to add one more argument that proves you are wrong. There are zergs who are almost immune to immortal push, like Curious. No matter who's his opponent, he can hold againt it. So how you can say that everything depends on protoss's FFs? Curious' opponents always cast bad FFs?
On November 19 2012 15:29 blug wrote: I don''t agree with the OP all that much...
If you watch Sniper vs Parting about a week or so back, he beats a Parting all-in by attacking from 3 different points at once. I really feel like that all in can be held if the Zerg initiates a perfect attack, which is actually really hard, otherwise all Zergs would be doing it. Also, you must attack when the protoss is in its most awkward position.
Attacking from 3 different fronts is actually really hard to execute, since as a zerg you want all of your units to hit at the exact same time.
I really hate how people say Zerg requires no micro, I've played Terran/Protoss and I about a high diamond level, while my Zerg is mid masters (I main Zerg though), and I find that Terran/Protoss might have a bit more micro scenarios, but all of it is situational, and isn't actually that hard. With Zerg I find I have to flank, and if you are off by half a second it can often prove fatal.
I won't disagree that infestors are strong, and their micro is kind of easy, but it's not that much easier than High Templar/Ghosts.
Let's all quote the most extreme example of Zerg mastery to prove our point? And you don't even contradict the OP, you agree with him that the only thing zerg can do is position themselves well, because micro during the fight is useless.
Yeah but he talks about the fact that Protoss are the ones that need to make the mistakes. When Zerg can beat Protoss by using that improved positioning. I don't agree with him saying that it's up to the Protoss deciding who wins.
already pretty obvious to most people, why forcefield is such a dumb design, and its true that when a protoss plays perfect they are unbeatable. but thats usually not within human capabilities (1 phoenix could kill 100+ muta's if micro'd perfect, but you dont see it happen).
On November 19 2012 14:27 insanet wrote: Concept: 1. Bring Back Shield Battery, in any form, building or spell from nexus,(http://starcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Shield_battery), this will give defenders advantage to protoss.
2. Buff Zealot Speed. maybe be inmune to concusive too.
3.Give Time warp to sentry. remove Forcefield.
Hm while I don't think that would be enough of a buff to protoss if you removed FF, time warp would be interesting if it was on the sentry. I kind of like that idea, but I still think toss would need a couple more buffs on gateway units or something to compensate for loss of FF which would be imo the best thing to do.
I liked your ideas though, mainly 2/3 though, 1 I'm not sure if it would have that big of an impact or not.
Isn't the supposed counter to forcefields a tactic? The proper counter to forcefields is to engage/bait in open area so that Protoss player won't have forcefields when the real "engagement" start.
On November 19 2012 17:56 nimdil wrote: Isn't the supposed counter to forcefields a tactic? The proper counter to forcefields is to engage/bait in open area so that Protoss player won't have forcefields when the real "engagement" start.
That tactic Its getting old already, Sen was trying this against Koreans, most of them didnt get tricked.
What if you could actually targetfire and destroy forcefields? It would force some more micro on the zerg and would make it easier to balance (by changing the health/armor etc of forcefields). Now, it's of course possible that this wouldn't help at all, but it's something I think could be tested. The big problem with this solution, IMO, is that it will become much harder for protoss to hold their ramp against early agression, especially from terran... the toss tactic is to forcefield the ramp, only letting a few units up... but if the marines at the bottom of the ramp can freely shoot down the forcefield, this tactic won't be effective anymore. Maybe, just maybe, the mothership core fixes this issue, but it's hard to say.
FFs and Fungals are both terrible design. They completely deny the opponents micro, instead of making it hard. I think Idra's suggestion of making FFs attackable without attack priority (so you have to attack each of them individually) and giving fungal growth a slow down, but not a complete immobility would be an interesting thing to test in the beta.
On November 19 2012 19:30 mathemagician1986 wrote: FFs and Fungals are both terrible design. They completely deny the opponents micro, instead of making it hard. I think Idra's suggestion of making FFs attackable without attack priority (so you have to attack each of them individually) and giving fungal growth a slow down, but not a complete immobility would be an interesting thing to test in the beta.
I agree, to be honest, the only reason Protoss stay closeish to a 50% win ratio against Zerg is because they have a really good all in. If they were to nerf fungal, I really think the all in will need a bit of a nerf otherwise I think it will jump from Zerg being a bit to strong into Zerg being a little bit to weak against protoss.
Watching the pro scene and even with me in ladder, I've noticed I've got something close to a 35% win rate against protoss who use the all in, but I have around a 70%ish win rate if I get to late game against protoss. I feel if infestors are nerfed I think that I will start having a 50% win ratio late game against protoss while I'll still be stuck with my 35% win rate against protoss Immortal/Sentry all ins (You don't usually have infestors by the time it hits).
i think FFs make the game quite interesting but the problem is that it comes too early such that zerg has no conceivable way of offsetting its strength in a timing attack. such a powerful spell should only be available mid-game, and only be able to be spammed late game.
Guys I hate repeating myself but some of you really need to read. You cannot possibly remove/nerf/tweak FF in any major way without touching Gateway units and WG tech in general. That would mean a total redesign of the early tier 1 of P, which would force a restructuring/tweaking of P's late game which is already strong as it is (it is fairly strong up until it encounters Blord/Infestor).
Getting Dustin Browder and Blizzard to do that would be essentially impossible. It would mean a total redesign of the entire P race. Colossus for example would have to be removed or tweaked along with FF/WGs, because P tier 1 would have to be stronger to compensate for the fact that they cannot produce units as rapidly or aggressively anymore. This means that P could be more aggressive with tier 1 openings, while also taking expansions faster, leading to more economic leads for them.
You cannot simply just change such a core and fundamental skill that is basically the crux of a race's entire early to mid game and then decide to leave it at that. Choosing to nerf FF / rework WGs without touching the upper end of P's tech tree would result in complete mayhem (for example, Templars under a no WG tree without a rework of KA would be utterly bad, since you'd have to wait for them build, then to charge up their energy, and then walk them all the way out to the battlefield). You're not thinking of the entire picture, and I don't think Morrow is either. He just is simply seeing that FF is a badly designed spell, and it is unfun. I agree; it is. But the entire race was designed around the presence of FF/WGs in general. You cannot possibly tweak those two without massive overhauls to the entire P race, and we all pretty much know it's not going to happen.
On November 19 2012 21:08 superstartran wrote: You cannot possibly tweak those two without massive overhauls to the entire P race, and we all pretty much know it's not going to happen.
Not to make irrelevant the rest of your post, but this is the main issue. These issues are built into the protoss race and you can't band-aid one thing without revamping everything else. If we need to "overhaul" the protoss race as you say and we know Blizzard is dead-set on their vision of Starcraft 2, then these issues are out of our hands and we can only discuss how to deal with them in-game. /I agree with your post
On November 19 2012 16:40 QzYSc2 wrote: when a protoss plays perfect they are unbeatable. but thats usually not within human capabilities (1 phoenix could kill 100+ muta's if micro'd perfect, but you dont see it happen).
This isn't true. The person with the mutas could split them up and certainly defeat the phoenix. Even if the phoenix was perfectly microed and could anticipate the mutas changing direction perfectly.
On November 19 2012 16:40 QzYSc2 wrote: already pretty obvious to most people, why forcefield is such a dumb design, and its true that when a protoss plays perfect they are unbeatable. but thats usually not within human capabilities (1 phoenix could kill 100+ muta's if micro'd perfect, but you dont see it happen).
Nothing said here makes any sense at all. The same could be said for ANY race, not just protoss. You appear to be quite biased with your tone.
Frankly I'm not sure why Code S Koreans taking down foreigners is any sort of convincing indication that Forcefield is a problem. It's an uninspired, boring mechanic, but it's far less of a problem than Fungal or BL/Infestor is.
On November 19 2012 21:08 superstartran wrote: Guys I hate repeating myself but some of you really need to read. You cannot possibly remove/nerf/tweak FF in any major way without touching Gateway units and WG tech in general. That would mean a total redesign of the early tier 1 of P, which would force a restructuring/tweaking of P's late game which is already strong as it is (it is fairly strong up until it encounters Blord/Infestor).
Getting Dustin Browder and Blizzard to do that would be essentially impossible. It would mean a total redesign of the entire P race. Colossus for example would have to be removed or tweaked along with FF/WGs, because P tier 1 would have to be stronger to compensate for the fact that they cannot produce units as rapidly or aggressively anymore. This means that P could be more aggressive with tier 1 openings, while also taking expansions faster, leading to more economic leads for them.
You cannot simply just change such a core and fundamental skill that is basically the crux of a race's entire early to mid game and then decide to leave it at that. Choosing to nerf FF / rework WGs without touching the upper end of P's tech tree would result in complete mayhem (for example, Templars under a no WG tree without a rework of KA would be utterly bad, since you'd have to wait for them build, then to charge up their energy, and then walk them all the way out to the battlefield). You're not thinking of the entire picture, and I don't think Morrow is either. He just is simply seeing that FF is a badly designed spell, and it is unfun. I agree; it is. But the entire race was designed around the presence of FF/WGs in general. You cannot possibly tweak those two without massive overhauls to the entire P race, and we all pretty much know it's not going to happen.
This guy hit it on the nose. This isn't a new problem. It's something that should have been addressed literally years ago (FF never should have made it out of beta tbh). FF and WG, the two dumbest abilities in the game, are inextricably bound together and a revamp of those would require rebalancing pretty much every unit in the Protoss arsenal.
It should happen but it probably won't.
edit: This will end up being 'balanced' by map refinements. Finding exactly the right amount of open space in the natural/3rd areas so that more FF is required to accomplish the same thing is the easiest way to break this strategy. It's also why even parting is far from invincible other than perhaps on Ohana. Of course this leads to its own problem, that already exists, which is that what can be done with maps without making them incredibly biased towards a certain race will become increasingly limited.
Trying to nerf FF means buffing gateway units. Buffing gateway units means, removing warp gates.
The solution isn't an easy one. FF are strong within a very special timing that has been figured out by protoss. And this timing needs exact micro to efficiently own at the highest level.
Despite how difficult it might be for zergs to deal with, it doesn't change the fact that touching FF negatively impacts the entire protoss race.
If you give any care about the game. You would realize that the problem lies with warp gates.
These are day 1 problems that anybody with a decent BW background foresaw. We addressed these things day one...but we had a lot of people who thought that we were simply against change and being elitist.
The problem is Warpgates...any protoss would tell you that.
I have had a problem with PvZ for a long time due to the importance of forcefields. Zerg can just afford too much stuff and it crushes the toss army if it can all fight at once. I don't like how the match up works, you can do so much right and get far ahead and then just lose because you leave one gap in your forcefield wall or don't do 1 forcefield quickly enough. The toss player just has so much micro to do in a short time, the forcefield mean everything while the stalker micro etc is next to useless.
At the same time I would like more micro potential when I am zerg, it seems all you have to do is move as close to the toss as possible and then a move(with the odd bit of focus firing).
I preferred it when roaches had less range and you could micro stalkers against them + when zerg players actually made hydras. It was more fun back then. Playing against roach/ling spam into infestor spam into broodlord spam is just boring.
since the problem is warpgate (which prevents gateway units from being stronger, which was the reason for FF to be introduced) but blizzard wont touch it (at least not in HOTS) there has to be another solution to mass FF preventing all micro.
how about giving the MsC FFs and giving sentrys timewarp? MsC (purify + autoattack) itself already made P a lot safer early game, timewarp on sentrys would make P even more safe. so P could be safe vs early game all ins + have recall to be able to pressure the opponent without any risk while not being able to go mass FF spam allins.
if MsC FF would be abused by FF the ramp from main to natural offensively, just make the MsC be attached to the nexus again.
this change would also fix the issue that protoss gets an additional deathball spell (no timewarp + FF bullshit: deathball already rapes everything on the ground so T and Z have to go air).
I agree completely with the OP. Protoss balance depends so much on forcefields that makes it really boring to watch. It removes innovation from maps. I think forcefields should be much higher tech for example requiring an upgrade from high council or robo. Also making hallucination better maybe a good idea for example if hallucation cost 25 energy and lasts longer then it would be interesting to see what the protoss hallucinates yes protoss tier 1,1.5 units will be much weaker but with hallucation they would have a 'tank' to be able to double their numbers(thats interesting because then a good zerg player should focus on real units and a good protoss player should put hallucinated units in the front line). Also another suggestion would be delaying wrapgate upgrade(IMO it should be a tech choice in midgame) to be able to buff protoss units
What if gateways produced faster than warp gates? Then they could still reinforce and warp prism harass but there would be a cost in the ability to macro and it would make scouting the switch over to warp gate very important to prepare for an attack. It might even make WG a bit of a mid or late game tech with stronger gateway units to make up for it.
Then maybe gateway units could be buffed and FF nerfed a bit.
I'm not going to try and figure out numbers but it's something else to think about.
On November 20 2012 01:04 Zyxds wrote: What if gateways produced faster than warp gates? Then they could still reinforce and warp prism harass but there would be a cost in the ability to macro and it would make scouting the switch over to warp gate very important to prepare for an attack. It might even make WG a bit of a mid or late game tech with stronger gateway units to make up for it.
Then maybe gateway units could be buffed and FF nerfed a bit.
I'm not going to try and figure out numbers but it's something else to think about.
This is how the Starbow mod does it.
It makes regular army production gateway.
Warp gates are actually exciting because it means someone snuck a proxy pylon or a warp prism.
Terrain ignoring abilities should be limited in their use. We can't warp on the high ground but we can still blink on it with a protoss main army unit?
Tbh I'd rather watch almost anything else aside from just slows and stops to movement. Even negative armor field would be more interesting. Also summons with just base attack are boring, hope they'd be more interesting like Changelings or PDD.
I'm pretty sure they won't touch the current high ground advantage system nor give more units interesting moving shots (Phoenix is silly automation, marines have good animation but shoot too fast for it to be as interesting, Stalkers are decent for it, maybe I just miss Vultures.) but at least tweaking/changing the annoying abilities would do a lot. Compressing unit roles and softening some counters a bit would be pretty nice but probably too much to be asked.
The game is poorly designed. I've been saying this for years and a lot of professional gamers have been trying to politely allude to it for years but nothing has changed. The philosophy of the design team was wrong. They saw the professional Brood War scene, where micro and macro are both important, and said "how can we mess with these two things, from a design point of view?" The result was gold minerals, mules, forcefields, fungal, and all kinds of other awful ideas that made the game based much less on skill than it should have been.
They should increase the energy cost of forcefield (and give sentries more starting energy to compensate, so they still can cast it upon warp-in).
That'd make sure to keep the defensive utilities of forcefield while limiting it's offensive capabilities. I don't think blizzard wanted Toss to be making 6+ sentries.
The exact numbers can be tweaked but maybe 66-100 energy to cast, starting energy 66-100.
I agree with the OP. I really like simple answers to fix this issue, so one does not break the game.
I think we can do two things.
Queen: Make them massive. So they can break FF for protoss all ins. Because they are slow off creep. The queen would not be viable to abuse the FF crushing tactic. This make make FF a more defensive spell, with a more supporting role. This would force protoss to snipe queens and deny creep spread as a main tactic, like zvt. This will allow banelings to be viable with out Overlord drops, like in zvt.
Furthermore, Creep spreading would actually occur in zvp, forcing protoss to deny creep or be behind. This meta game shift would require micro during the early to mid game build phase, separating good players from great place because of the increase amount of multitasking required.
Infester: Fungle only freeze light units. All other units are slowed. This would allow vikings and Stalkers to more easily snipe BL. Furthermore it would still prevent gasless 3/3 marines winning the game by them selves. The slow would increase micro situations..
Also. The fungle change would make zvz a more positional match up. One can actually kill a player now who is behind, and can not abuse the fungle until they are maxed.
The big problem with massive queens is that it has the added effect of making phoenix even easier to shut down as an opening.
I don't get how you think creep spreading isn't important in ZvP, it's one of the things you can do to slow down this exact kind of push since it gives you more effective ability to bait forcefields in the middle of the map, and a secondary warning scout in case you miss the original push out. Parting's 10:30 version goes triple immortal before observer, doesn't it?
God, I wish we could stop talking about force fields and warpgate. It is like very month or so we need to have this discussion again and nothing ever changes.
Wow, as a protoss player i really like massive queens, but as someone stated before, phoenix would feel it too much. Maybe the special ability for queens, like hardened shield for immortal, to break the ff.
On November 20 2012 03:06 astor wrote: Wow, as a protoss player i really like massive queens, but as someone stated before, phoenix would feel it too much. Maybe the special ability for queens, like hardened shield for immortal, to break the ff.
On November 20 2012 03:29 Ksyper wrote: Just give us the BW hydras and ZvP will be awesome, hydras can still be light so collossi are good vs them. Lower hydra dps, increase health, give speed upgrade and make them tier 1.5. FF won't matter as much if zerg has a nice long range unit. Maybe make them 1 food? If hydras still cost 100 minerals and 50 gas they won't be overpowered midgame. I know what Im saying is dumb, but I still think that the answer is changing the hydra in some way.
Just give us the BW hydras and ZvP will be awesome, hydras can still be light so collossi are good vs them. Lower hydra dps, increase health, give speed upgrade and make them tier 1.5. FF won't matter as much if zerg has a nice long range unit. Maybe make them 1 food? If hydras still cost 100 minerals and 50 gas they won't be overpowered midgame. I know what Im saying is dumb, but I still think that the answer is changing the hydra in some way.
I agree with the obvious problems forcefield brings mentioned in the OP, but I don't really see anything being able to be done. Protoss balance hinges on the FF, and it's so crucial in virtually every matchup for PvX.
One thing I could think of is to switch forcefield to a twilight council upgrade and charge to a cybercore upgrade. That might be potentially too powerful but early game chargelots that are without upgrades or tons of additional unit support seem like they wouldn't be too difficult to deal with. This would buff zealots enough to make some TvP pressures a bit easier to hold and would make PvP a bit easier for defensive purposes as zealots wouldn't be useless against early stalkers in PvP, which might help alleviate some of the necessity of FF in the early game.
Ultimately suggestions like this are kind of irrelevant, since I can't see there being any circumstance where the design team reworks an entire race to get rid of a spell they don't even have a problem with.
I also think giving forcefield some sort of health duration would be nice. It would allow players to focus fire down the FF to open up their attack routes. Their units wouldn't be attacking for a while, but I can't imagine many Z and T players thinking that's not worth it to get rid of the unavoidable no-more-micro effect of the FF. Just a thought. Ugh I hate theorycrafting like this.
edit; giving the queen massive status makes no sense. Look at the HotS units Protoss are getting and what the design team has said. They obviously want stargate openers to become more relevant in PvX, making the queen massive would essentially eliminate any use for phoenix openings.
i cannot believe people are seriously in favor of giving massive status to queens. it blows my mind that people would even consider adding another insanely useful ability to this 150 mineral unit
What about either replacing forecefield or putting it further up the tech tree and give the Sentry the following?:
Protection Bubble: temporarily makes any non-massive unit invunerable to any damage.
the radius of the bubble would be slightly larger then the unit and would be fairly low energy to cast. (though it doesn't last long either). When in the bubble the unit cannot attack (not sure about that). The abilty would also be able to be casted on enemy units like banelings as suddenly they cannot blow up anymore, on the other side, you can't kill the baneling until the bubble wears off.
I always thought this was a problem as well, but i think it can/could be solved by adding more specific traits to more units, that only affect small/single portions of the game.
(Here comes the crap, but its just to get the idea of what i mean):
Why not make banelings kills forcefields with 2-3 hits, means the prottoss player has to focus banes if he wants to be effective/zerg has to micro/target forcefields with fragile units
give certain units (maybe zergling/baneling) an upgrade to actually traverse forcefields(aka zerg jump in hots campaign)
maybe a medivac can use castable spell that free's a small portion of bio from fungal (tough micro in the short span of fungal)
make FF a slow aura/give Zealots slow aura/stalkers slowing missile/ect
Overlord goo dropping makes FF's traversable (hard to do, hard to stop)
Sacrificing Z units with a spell near a forcefield corrupts the FF killing it (late game spell)
give ultra's stampede upgrade so they dont collide with lings (bringing them quicker to the front smashing fields)
ultra charge is already somewhat interesting
make FF a chain-ligthning sorta spell that puts random units (in a chain) frozen/invul/impassable - and they unfreeze later (sorta like a FF/minivortex combo)
give zerg a unit that can lob acid, that explodes after some time, if the toss it completely surrounded by FF's he will take terrible terrible damage, otherwise he just moves away from it minimal losses.
remove fungal, and instead give lings an upgrade where if they make contact with a enemy unit that unit is affected by a fungal type effect (run lings past enemies, give terran time to spread out ie not instant, still deadly)
make tanks smash FF's - render tanks useless with a FF directly on top
and so on and so on. I think instead of always thinking about the game in terms of balance, it might be healthy to look at the game in terms of mechanics, and balance the game by removing/adding instead of always tweaking stuff that is clearly close to unfixable.
has anyone actually played a custom map or a case where forcefield / sentry is just flat removed?
What happens, what specifically? someone should create a custom map to test some shit out. We all imagine it would be impossible for toss to win but would it really? sentry's cost 100 gas, imagine what else you could do given no other choice. Forced change makes strong adaptions. I would be totally interested in seeing how it played out, especially at the pro level.
@malaan Well, thinking back to the first Beta when Protoss weren't very good at FF's, I'd imagine stim timings would become quite powerful. Zealot and Stalker would probably have to be compensated somehow- without in turn making Warp-Gate timings too powerful.
Actually, I enjoy FF because they introduce a great dynamic to the game where it depends on where and when you fight, similar to stopping a terran siege push. It also punishes "blobbing" and not spreading units. And it requires fast thinking and reflexes by protoss. THis way the game doesn't come down to just BO, macro ability, and timing. Reducing the time FF is active is the only plausible answer to your issue, and I think it would be a great change for the better. As a top 8 masters Zerg 3 seasons now, What holds me back from GM is protoss FF based all ins. but its not that i think FF is broken, I understand that pros can deal with it and its only my own shortcomings that limit me.
However. FF is extremely strong. With the ability to warp in, its possible to perpetually block a ramp with a single FF. FF can completely negate zerg units from attacking or running away, really its the equivalent of a (much) harder to execute fungal spell, that can also deny the ability to attack, along with move. So, regardless of how difficult it is to execute, it is executable. Toss has no problem getting up ample sentries for ample FF. The issue at hand is that they get such a powerful spell so early on. I think that sentries were originally designed for early and late game; respectively, for holding ramps vs rushes and used in mass late game to carve up wide open battle spaces. With the advent of FFE and mid game pushes, toss gets that "late game" mass of sentries well before zerg gets mid game tech. So the problem here is that the duration of the FF spell, designed to hold a ramp for another warp in, or to endure the length of a large late game battle, is introduced to the mid game. As a zerg I feel like FF simply lasts too long. Toss is (and should be) able to cut off and neutralize parts of my army with FF, or box in his own army to defend vs lings. But the amount of FF energy available due to FFE means that Toss can "Spam" FF to trap large chunks of my army into tiny spaces where they cant even move around, and then just sit there and pick off all of them, utilizing just one round of FF. Enter the FF duration nerf. with a duration nerf, toss still has the ability to section off troops, putting FF behind and infront of and to the sides of troops, as well as use them defensively. BUT, now toss most likely has to spend a little bit more FF energy as the initial FF wears off to either ensure complete losses on my part, or no losses on his part. Now battles will not be so one sided based solely on a toss player's micro ability. Or rather one or two battles still can be, but because of the chance for extra FF needed, the continuous battles will not be as one sided. Meaning that Zerg is not only rewarded more for engaging the toss push much like a siege push, distracting, threatening along the way across the map, etc, but is also less liable to get screwed over completely if toss manages to trap and kill a bunch of units for "free", and still has plenty of FF energy for other battles.
In overview, Energy for FF is not increased, so toss can still throw up critical FF on warp in, or with very low energy. FF size is not changed, which for obv reasons is pretty necessary to maintain balance. (pretty much ramps, but other things too) FF cast range is not reduced, which would make inf even more of a hard coutner to FF and introduce many issues. FF time duration is reduced so that IF the toss deems it valuable, he must spend additional FF to abuse trapping techniques, extended ramp holds, etc. but in a pinch, Toss can still execute any and all of the same actions as he would be able to before the nerf with the same amount of energy.
The alternative to this is channeling the spell, which would be terrible because sometimes FF is used to retreat.
I also have no idea how much the duration should be changed by, I only just came up with this on the spot.
On November 20 2012 04:02 MinimalistSC2 wrote: The bold is my suggestion for FF change.
Actually, I enjoy FF because they introduce a great dynamic to the game where it depends on where and when you fight, similar to stopping a terran siege push. It also punishes "blobbing" and not spreading units. And it requires fast thinking and reflexes by protoss. THis way the game doesn't come down to just BO, macro ability, and timing. Reducing the time FF is active is the only plausible answer to your issue, and I think it would be a great change for the better. As a top 8 masters Zerg 3 seasons now, What holds me back from GM is protoss FF based all ins. but its not that i think FF is broken, I understand that pros can deal with it and its only my own shortcomings that limit me.
However. FF is extremely strong. With the ability to warp in, its possible to perpetually block a ramp with a single FF. FF can completely negate zerg units from attacking or running away, really its the equivalent of a (much) harder to execute fungal spell, that can also deny the ability to attack, along with move. So, regardless of how difficult it is to execute, it is executable. Toss has no problem getting up ample sentries for ample FF. The issue at hand is that they get such a powerful spell so early on. I think that sentries were originally designed for early and late game; respectively, for holding ramps vs rushes and used in mass late game to carve up wide open battle spaces. With the advent of FFE and mid game pushes, toss gets that "late game" mass of sentries well before zerg gets mid game tech. So the problem here is that the duration of the FF spell, designed to hold a ramp for another warp in, or to endure the length of a large late game battle, is introduced to the mid game. As a zerg I feel like FF simply lasts too long. Toss is (and should be) able to cut off and neutralize parts of my army with FF, or box in his own army to defend vs lings. But the amount of FF energy available due to FFE means that Toss can "Spam" FF to trap large chunks of my army into tiny spaces where they cant even move around, and then just sit there and pick off all of them, utilizing just one round of FF. Enter the FF duration nerf. with a duration nerf, toss still has the ability to section off troops, putting FF behind and infront of and to the sides of troops, as well as use them defensively. BUT, now toss most likely has to spend a little bit more FF energy as the initial FF wears off to either ensure complete losses on my part, or no losses on his part. Now battles will not be so one sided based solely on a toss player's micro ability. Or rather one or two battles still can be, but because of the chance for extra FF needed, the continuous battles will not be as one sided. Meaning that Zerg is not only rewarded more for engaging the toss push much like a siege push, distracting, threatening along the way across the map, etc, but is also less liable to get screwed over completely if toss manages to trap and kill a bunch of units for "free", and still has plenty of FF energy for other battles.
In overview, Energy for FF is not increased, so toss can still throw up critical FF on warp in, or with very low energy. FF size is not changed, which for obv reasons is pretty necessary to maintain balance. (pretty much ramps, but other things too) FF cast range is not reduced, which would make inf even more of a hard coutner to FF and introduce many issues. FF time duration is reduced so that IF the toss deems it valuable, he must spend additional FF to abuse trapping techniques, extended ramp holds, etc. but in a pinch, Toss can still execute any and all of the same actions as he would be able to before the nerf with the same amount of energy.
The alternative to this is channeling the spell, which would be terrible because sometimes FF is used to retreat.
I also have no idea how much the duration should be changed by, I only just came up with this on the spot.
Hopefully this post is considered, thank you.
Take it to the blizzard forums and hots beta forums bro. No one is gonna read that wall of text after 200+ pages of other people doing the same.
We'll see how the viper does in hots. could make for interesting scenarios where zerg relies more on long range units (hydras, etc) and not on closing the distance and getting in, which could alleviate some of that frustration. Alternatively, the viper could spawn the same frustrations (can't do anything against abduct, similar to FF).
I agree that forcefields needs to be fixed, but I am having some trouble seeing how it should be done. --> Buffing other gw units (eg. zealot / stalker) causes problems for terran and revives blinkstalker allin vs zerg. --> Making forcefield work only defensive (however possible) causes zerg supermacro mode, because they no longer have to defend against a potential timing. --> Outright removing forcefields causes various reactionary early and midgame timings to just kill the protoss if he wanted a third base.
I could be wrong about the flaws of various solutions, but overall I think we should wait for Hots and see how it works when zergs have a stronger midgame army.
If we don't want to wait for Hots I think buffing hydras could be a solution, they'd give stronger attacking power, they have a longer range (not sure it's long enough to truly shoot over forcefields, but meh), anti-air (warp prism can die), and they're not armored! Examples of stuff that could be buffed about it: - Range buff (remove range upgrade, make this range the new standard). - Slight HP increase (without looking at numbers, something that would make them survive 1 more hit from stalkers/zealots), since they would largely replace roaches in the midgame. - Something else.
I can't help but feel like the roach should have been lair tech. 2 supply, cost more gas and with more hp and a bigger model size. That would have made it a very interesting unit. Now it's just the staple tier 1 massable unit and the hydra would have been much better for that ( susceptible to aoe, bigger range, able to shoot air units). The roach and hydra's roles should be reversed, with the hydra being the staple tier 1 ranged unit that is susceptible to aoe damage and the roach a tier 2 heavy hitter with some special abilities ( burrow move/regeneration ) that isn't massable because of its model size/range.
Force field is pretty ok but it's too strong against tier-1 zerg because of zerg's low range/melee units. Units with a longer range aren't as weak against force fields. I would like to see force fields last a little bit shorter and perhaps be smaller in one direction but I don't have any fundamental problems with it. I think they need a slight nerf so they don't determine the outcome of battles the way they do now.
For TvP, reducing the casting range of forcefields and decreasing it's size in one direction would help dramatically. By that I mean making it more of a wall instead of a field. This would help because a wall is narrow and units from behind the wall can still shoot over it. Also, there is more room to micro. Instead of being squeezed together the units are just being cut off. Reducing the casting range would make sentries snipeable by, for example a quick stim of a few marines. This would make toss earlygame a bit weaker but that can be compensated by tweaking a few stats slightly ( such as sentry damage ). This really won't make gateway rushes too strong I think, especially when you do what's sane and make warpin time increase with distance from nexus or cybercore.
As for zerg, switching the roach and the hydra is the best thing you can do. The inreased range would work wonders against force fields and a tier 2 roach with a lot of hp and a big model size would be a lot more interesting than the tier 1 "mass me im cheap" roach. The hydra would give way to swarm hosts with roaches to cover their movement across the map once big aoe hits the field.
As for infestors, the problem is simple. Root and aoe should not be combined in spell. And a root spell should be limited to ground units. I don't care about the stats of fungal, whether it's balanced or not. It's the principle of root and aoe being one spell. Maelstrom + storm was the most exiting thing in the game we all loved. It was rare, a big investment and it was avoidable by good muta micro and being on the ball with your mutas. Fungal is just shit and boring. I don't care if they nerf it to balance it. Root and AOE shouldn't be one spell. End of of discussion.
The infestor should get a spell to slow down movement+ attack speed of ground units which covers TERRAIN and does not stick to units. Then another unit must get an AOE spell. Or the AOE spell has to be researched on the infestor. Personally, I'd prefer another spellcaster. The reduced attack speed + slow will definitely affect stalker balls that hit before hive enough to replace fungal as it stands now. Zerg still has a zoning unit that can buy time and set traps, which is in my opinion what an infestor should be. Chain fungals are over. Roaches can enter the field during lair tech and they will protect vital units soak the first rounds of damage while the infestors and swarm hosts set up. Banelings are a threat again. Zerg relies on infestors because it's other midgame units are too crap. That's the problem. Zerg's other midgame units don't make much sense.
Zerg right now is a race that tries to survive the early and midgame with as few larvae as possible in order to buy time until infestors are out. Only at tier 3 zerg units become interesting ( and too strong, too turtly, too boring in combat. Not imba, boring ). The economic fundamentals of zerg only stimulate zerg to take that path. Zerg right now is all about defending with as few larvae as possible ( stupid queens ) and nothing happens until late lair tech with 3 saturated bases vs 2 for the other race. Zerg's economy is already geared toward the late game, so are the units. Only when the infestor hits the field things become interesting.
Oh, and the colossus should be slow and should stop before it shoots and charge the shot so it can be dodged. Range = 8 or 7 no range increase research. Cliff walk is researchable.
Siege tank get more damage please but slower siege time and it should scale better with upgrades.
Immortal please increase shield recharge time by a factor of 2. And reduce it's damage output. It's ridiculous. It's an immortal that means it doesn't die, it doesnt mean it rapes everything armored.
Mules can't oversaturate a base anymore. And please give terran a lategame instead of +3+3 MMM + support. That means buffing the raven and changing the thor. I like the idea of a unit with a weak AOE air attack and a strong ground attack but the thor is just kiddo game design. It's cool when you first see it and then it's just big and generic and dull. A 3/4 supply unit with some kind of useful special ability would be nice. Like being able to carry 2 scv's with him, but it would have a relatively small amount of hitpoints.
Mothership core please shield battery. Please. And warpgate warp time increases with distance from cybercore.
[QUOTE]On November 20 2012 00:13 Shiori wrote: Frankly I'm not sure why Code S Koreans taking down foreigners is any sort of convincing indication that Forcefield is a problem. It's an uninspired, boring mechanic, but it's far less of a problem than Fungal or BL/Infestor is. [/QUOTE/]
I agree with this completely. Why is it that the better players winning (Koreans) beating inferior players (foriegners) a sign that PvZ is in favor of protoss. Yes, its silly and frustrating for Zerg but I dont think anyone can say that Suppy, Sen and co. are better than the likes of Rain or Parting.
On November 20 2012 00:13 Shiori wrote: Frankly I'm not sure why Code S Koreans taking down foreigners is any sort of convincing indication that Forcefield is a problem. It's an uninspired, boring mechanic, but it's far less of a problem than Fungal or BL/Infestor is. [/QUOTE/]
I agree with this completely. Why is it that the better players winning (Koreans) beating inferior players (foriegners) a sign that PvZ is in favor of protoss. Yes, its silly and frustrating for Zerg but I dont think anyone can say that Suppy, Sen and co. are better than the likes of Rain or Parting.
Agreed. Parting and Rain are two of the best protoss in the world. The fact that Parting created an extremely refined, sharp and deadly all-in that to punish the greed of zerg is nothing to complain about. The fact that he was able to do it three times in a row is the fault of his opponent. While other whine about balance and game design, Partings and Rain refine builds down to a razors edge and win OSL and BWC.
I still think making the FF like destructive rocks (enough hitpoints to not get one shotted by a whole bunch of units) is one of the ways to go in conjunction with a high AOE damage dealing unit that replaces the colossus.
If we take TvP out of the picture (I really think this matchup needs a big makeover) and have the reaver in its place, protoss dont suddenly need to rely on mass FFs anymore because the reavers can dent big holes into the roach compositions that murder protoss ground units. Obviously things like FF duration (+ on top of having hitpoints) and the ability to warp in a gazillion units from the warp prism needs to be nerfed incase you go for a reaver harass playstyle w/ sentries.
And the immortal sentry all in needs to be nerfed (or zerg buffed here somehow e.g. hydra) along with the BL/infestor composition. Its exactly like the 1-1-1 in the sense that a player can do it over and over and still win. Unlike 1-1-1 the immortal sentry all in is up to the protoss to make the mistake, i.e. its his game to lose which is what Morrow is getting at due to the nature of FFs.
Thanks for a well thought out post, Morrow. As someone who doesn't actually play the game anymore, I can only give the spectator's view: I think force fields in ZvP are terrible for entertainment value, exactly because of the things you outlined.
Two things can happen in any given fight:
a.) The protoss messes up the force fields and loses, in which case I think: "Well, that sucked. He only lost because he messed up his FF". b.) The protoss places perfect force fields and wins, in which case I think: "Well, that wasn't very fair. The zerg couldn't do much."
On November 20 2012 06:46 aZealot wrote: Not sure what to make of the OP, although I have yet to read all of it - will do so a little later. (I'm at work, atm.)
It seems yet another Protoss qq - although well veiled. Parting and Rain are streaks ahead of Sen - no disrespect to Sen.
(I'm also not surprised to see WG being brought out of the ground in the thread either. We'll never be rid of that one...)
Every time protoss wins and there is some sentry based aggression, this thread will return. Or its sister thread, the fundamental problem with warpgate.
forcefields (actually, why not, lets say all sentry spells) should be attached to the oracle in HOTS and the sentry and current oracle spells should be removed. It would be really fun to see a couple fast, flying support units darting around putting down forcefields in the late-midgame (hard to do early attacks with stargate) from the sky and be able to retreat when they are out of energy. This would make forcefields unable to be massed as they would come from a non-attacking, fairly expensive unit, and would get rid of a lot of the early protoss immortal sentry timings as every unit would come from a different tech path (every tried a 2-base phoenix collosus all-in? or an immortal + storm rush? i didn't think so). Also, being a fast flying unit, they would be much better and more exciting lategame and would help deal with infestor broodlord greatly.
I really feel the way people complain about toss, how easy it is to play, how low apm you can have and be very successful, it's just because of warp gates. Zerg has to inject non stop and that's what makes the apm, toss chrono while fighting can slip off, then warp in units and still slip off because they aren't penalize as other races would be.
People can argue and say well, toss upgrades are important and that's where if you slip off you lose. That's wrong, I've seen many many pros with nexus full energy cuz they slipped off but race allow them to. Catch up the macro by adding 5 more gates and wap more units, just as if it was really difficult to play like other races are.
Solution : Buff gateways, nerf warp gate.
I'd really love to see units like thor, colo, broodlords, units that are game changer when you have too much of them and just a-move your opponent. That's silly, I think everyrace should have a t1 and t2 new unit and that would make the whole game very dynamic, new cheses, new meta games, new strategy. I don't know why blizz wants Z to have more t3 units when it doesn't matter because we already had what was needed to win games as T3 but nothing to win as T2 ( ZvP)
I just had an idea; make it so you cant shoot ranged attacks across forcefields, besides maybe spells such as storm or fungals... Youll still be able to kill the trapped units in the front, but you cant kill units that you forcefield trap with like 10 forcefields.
It probably wont fix the issues at all, but its a start and protoss will still have their forcefields for defensive purposes.
On November 20 2012 08:48 Snake.69 wrote: I just had an idea; make it so you cant shoot ranged attacks across forcefields, besides maybe spells such as storm or fungals... Youll still be able to kill the trapped units in the front, but you cant kill units that you forcefield trap with like 10 forcefields.
It probably wont fix the issues at all, but its a start and protoss will still have their forcefields for defensive purposes.
Or give forcefield to the oracle instead of time warp and then give time warp to the sentry. (terrible idea probably)
On November 20 2012 00:13 Shiori wrote: Frankly I'm not sure why Code S Koreans taking down foreigners is any sort of convincing indication that Forcefield is a problem. It's an uninspired, boring mechanic, but it's far less of a problem than Fungal or BL/Infestor is. [/QUOTE/]
I agree with this completely. Why is it that the better players winning (Koreans) beating inferior players (foriegners) a sign that PvZ is in favor of protoss. Yes, its silly and frustrating for Zerg but I dont think anyone can say that Suppy, Sen and co. are better than the likes of Rain or Parting.
Agreed. Parting and Rain are two of the best protoss in the world. The fact that Parting created an extremely refined, sharp and deadly all-in that to punish the greed of zerg is nothing to complain about. The fact that he was able to do it three times in a row is the fault of his opponent. While other whine about balance and game design, Partings and Rain refine builds down to a razors edge and win OSL and BWC.
The problem is that you can have a strong suspicion it's coming, scout it early, do everything correctly from that point on to try and deal with it, and still get crushed if the protoss micros correctly. It's not a lot of fun to play a game where the outcome is overwhelmingly in the hands of your opponent. This was all made pretty clear in the OP.
If you come back saying that this is how the lategame feels for protoss then fine, I can accept that, but everyone is screaming for a change to the late game.
On November 18 2012 22:02 Deckkie wrote: This is my idea, but I could be totally wrong.
Tier 1 Protoss cant be made stronger because of the warp in mechanic. They dont have a attackers disadvantage in the early game, because of this their units cannot roughly equal the strength of Terran or Zerg early game. If they were the same strength, Terran and maybe Zerg, wouldnt be able to ever tech-up because of the possible 4-gate all-in.
Instead, Protoss has the force field, it becomes effective a little later in the game, and gives Protoss a roughly equally strong Tier1 army.
The proposition is now: If you want to change Protoss Tier1, you first have to change the warp in mechanic.
Really good post I feel.
I know the balance team really don't want to get close to this one but Protoss tier 1 needs a good looking at - as does the warpgate mechanic. It's either mind-bogglingly strong or just piss weak and dies to anything.
I still believe this game would be better without force field.
I'm sure this has already been suggested but decreasing the maximum energy of the sentry would be a simple fix to the immortal sentry build without decreasing the early game defensive necessity of forcefields.
1. Gateway units are relatively expensive 2. Gateway abilties (Blink, Charge) are farther up the tech tree 3. Protoss needs Hallucination (ability and the energy) or T2 for vision (observer, phoenix)
These 3 reasons make controlling the map, harassing, and defending more significant investments for Protoss.
So going back to my earlier post, if you want to remove FF without nerfing T or Z in some ways
1. Give Sentries a "sensor tower" like passive ability; then you will know when to hallucinate, warp in, or pull back units. 2. Give Zealots the Charge movement speed off the bat (not the ability, just movement speed) so they can react. 3. Put Charge and Blink on the Cyber Core, stick air upgrades on the Forge or Twilight.
If you do these 3 things, at the very least it will be harder to execute cannon rushes and proxies; but I think the overall early/mid/late games will improve as well.
honestly zvp is one of the main reasons I quit playing sc2. That and blizzard never updating the actual game, just few minor balance patches every few months and calling it good.
My issue with forcefields is that zerg always has to be on the lookout. I have to prepare well in advance to stop the immortal/sentry all in. It is one of the hardest things to stop at the Grandmaster level. Even in the widest part of the map, and trying to flank, I have to rely on the protoss messing up. Generally what P does when he sees me flank, is throw done a wall of FF on one side, and then tries to kill my flanking army by itself. Due to bad map layouts, it is extremely easy for the protoss to do that. If zerg loses 8+ roaches for free, the immortal/sentry all in is near impossible to stop at the top level, granted the P advances the attack immediately.
Thats not even the bad part though, because there is no reason that the protoss has to attack. I have scouted immortals and mass sentry, so P knows zerg is preparing. If the all in is hard to stop, imagine trying to deny the P from a 3rd base is incredibly harder. They take a 3rd base, and just attack a few minutes later, usually wiping me out without any chance at all.
So i either play very greedy and don't prepare for the initial attack, or I over-prepare and die to the 3rd base timing. All while protoss has the observer that zerg has big trouble stopping. I feel like a good protoss can easily beat a zerg with the correct scouting ( some korean P have 80% wr vs korean zergs ) zergs have to rely on unusual tactics, and trying to trick their opponent.. which hey, isn't that bad I guess? But not all of us are koreans with 300apm, I myself only have 170 and often die to lesser players, even when I know what they are doing.
The game is meh, dota 2 is much better competitively anyways.
Not speaking balance wise (because FFs are balanced since gateway units are not cost efficient and lots of sentries are very gas intensive.. using a lot of sentries is almost an all-in because it slows down teching so much), but I totally agree with Morrow that it is a frustrating mechanic for both players.. protoss hates the fact that they're the only ones having to really micro, while Zerg hates the fact that their engagement win depends on the toss screwing up or not.
I'd be in favor of removing it and making Gateway units stronger (with no warpgate, of course) but I believe this will not happen so maybe sentries should have 100 maximium energy.. not more. The 3 immortals-sentry all-in is pretty good because lots of those sentries are already full in energy (or almost)... reduce that maximum and you have let sitting in base and waiting for 200 energy.
This is just like the 1/1/1 stuff terran was doing last year with Protoss. What blizz did to stop it was just buff immortals and all that jazz. To be fair protoss are doing this strat beause BL infestor is way to powerful in all matchups. Something needs to be done with that. FF is just a silly mechanic that just should've never worked in the first place but was forced to work. I think FF and fungal are two dumb spell casts that need rework.
On November 20 2012 10:52 ke_ivan wrote: This will sound naive from a terran player, but wouldn't the simple answer be baneling drops or mutalisk harrass?
It's impossible to get that tech out in time unless you rush it to the extent that you die to a range of other 2 base allins.
I'm going to sa it yet again since only one guy offered a direct response (which made no sense to me on account of the GSL proving it wrong): Parting, Rain, and Creator beating the likes of Vortix, Sen, and Suppy is not anything out of the ordinary. I have no idea why people are making balance claims on such a basis, especially someone so esteemed as Morrow.
On November 20 2012 12:27 Shiori wrote: I'm going to sa it yet again since only one guy offered a direct response (which made no sense to me on account of the GSL proving it wrong): Parting, Rain, and Creator beating the likes of Vortix, Sen, and Suppy is not anything out of the ordinary. I have no idea why people are making balance claims on such a basis, especially someone so esteemed as Morrow.
Maybe this quotation from the original post will help explain why people don't care to respond to your (discussion stifling) non sequitur:
"i want a zerg with great micro control to find ways to deal with the forcefield and i would love if the protoss army wouldnt completely get rolled without relying on forcefield. it is very uninteresting at times in these top level pvz games perfect forcefields keep the protoss army invournable and as soon as they run out - the toss dies."
On November 20 2012 12:27 Shiori wrote: I'm going to sa it yet again since only one guy offered a direct response (which made no sense to me on account of the GSL proving it wrong): Parting, Rain, and Creator beating the likes of Vortix, Sen, and Suppy is not anything out of the ordinary. I have no idea why people are making balance claims on such a basis, especially someone so esteemed as Morrow.
this has nothing to do with balance and everything to do with game design. it really doesn't matter what players you want to bring up.
forcefield is bad because it's such a huge crutch for protoss. try playing without it. you can't.
Blizzard really took the 1a swarm thing a bit far. In my opinion its not Protoss that is broken but zerg, zerg needs units that are cost effective based on skill like the other races but as is its 1a and if ur macro is good enough win, if nor or opponent micro 2 good lose.
I've always been of the opinion that FF duration needs to be significantly cut. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking about a 10 second duration as a maximum. 15 seconds is just way too long of a time. Even if you try to set up flanks and such, it's pretty common to get 2 or 3 good FF barrages out, which, as long as they weren't completely trashy FFs, gives you more than enough time to kill everything safely. It doesn't even feel worth it to me to spend time trying to bait pre-fight FFs because people just have so many that, even with that energy loss, they still have more than enough time to do what they need to do.
On November 20 2012 12:27 Shiori wrote: I'm going to sa it yet again since only one guy offered a direct response (which made no sense to me on account of the GSL proving it wrong): Parting, Rain, and Creator beating the likes of Vortix, Sen, and Suppy is not anything out of the ordinary. I have no idea why people are making balance claims on such a basis, especially someone so esteemed as Morrow.
The GSL didn't prove anything wrong, PartinG tried the build once, executed it badly, and lost. You're not really listening, people aren't saying anything about balance, and they're not basing anything on this weekend. They're saying anytime the outcome is totally in the hands of one player that's a bad situation. That's not saying that every time someone does this build they'll win, it's saying that if they execute it well enough it doesn't matter what the zerg does, they'll still lose.
On November 20 2012 11:00 Ossan wrote: FF is T1 primarily because
1. Gateway units are relatively expensive 2. Gateway abilties (Blink, Charge) are farther up the tech tree 3. Protoss needs Hallucination (ability and the energy) or T2 for vision (observer, phoenix)
These 3 reasons make controlling the map, harassing, and defending more significant investments for Protoss.
So going back to my earlier post, if you want to remove FF without nerfing T or Z in some ways
1. Give Sentries a "sensor tower" like passive ability; then you will know when to hallucinate, warp in, or pull back units. 2. Give Zealots the Charge movement speed off the bat (not the ability, just movement speed) so they can react. 3. Put Charge and Blink on the Cyber Core, stick air upgrades on the Forge or Twilight.
If you do these 3 things, at the very least it will be harder to execute cannon rushes and proxies; but I think the overall early/mid/late games will improve as well.
I forgot two pretty important reasons for having T1 FF and FF in general
4. Terran can raise supply depots and other structures, and Zerg can move Spine and Spore crawlers for wall-ins
Protoss would need something like phasable/warpable photon cannons to prevent harass; hellions, lings, especially banelings would be "gg"
5. So many banelings....
You would definitely need Blink Stalkers ASAP or Sentries with enough Hallucinations to absorb damage. Or you would need enough warp prisms for your units and amazing micro.
On November 20 2012 12:27 Shiori wrote: I'm going to sa it yet again since only one guy offered a direct response (which made no sense to me on account of the GSL proving it wrong): Parting, Rain, and Creator beating the likes of Vortix, Sen, and Suppy is not anything out of the ordinary. I have no idea why people are making balance claims on such a basis, especially someone so esteemed as Morrow.
this has nothing to do with balance and everything to do with game design. it really doesn't matter what players you want to bring up.
forcefield is bad because it's such a huge crutch for protoss. try playing without it. you can't.
Hmm, don't know that I agree. When the OP prefaces these games and refers to them as the reason he is posting, it pays to look at the games in question. It seems to me that this is yet another thread (well disguised this time) on Protoss balance/design/qq etc (comparable to all the threads gone before with many similar "solutions" offered). Morrow may believe that his shit does not stink when it comes to these sorts of discussions. Unfortunately, just like everybody else, it does.
Every protoss knows the problem is with the warp gate mechanic.
Warp gates are a late game mechanic anyway. Move that tech to late game, making it require a new tech structure. Remove FF. Remove Immortals. Buff stalkers and Zealots.
Okay, just want to start by saying I'm by no means a good SC2 player, but I do watch some pro games. From my perspective, I don't really see what Morrow's concern is. If the zerg has good map presence, they should almost always be able to find a point where they could engage the protoss army on reasonably open ground. If they do, it should be impossible to forcefield the whole area, at least not without significantly weakening the push.
Seems ok to me, but if lings need to be more effective as a deterrent to this kind of push, maybe you could just change FF so it can't be cast on top of your own units. That would mean that surrounding your army with FFs without letting a significant number of lings in would be more difficult.
On November 20 2012 15:13 KnowNothing wrote: Okay, just want to start by saying I'm by no means a good SC2 player, but I do watch some pro games. From my perspective, I don't really see what Morrow's concern is. If the zerg has good map presence, they should almost always be able to find a point where they could engage the protoss army on reasonably open ground. If they do, it should be impossible to forcefield the whole area, at least not without significantly weakening the push.
Seems ok to me, but if lings need to be more effective as a deterrent to this kind of push, maybe you could just change FF so it can't be cast on top of your own units. That would mean that surrounding your army with FFs without letting a significant number of lings in would be more difficult.
You've got only viewer's perspective. MorroW plays the game 24/7 on PRO level. Your nickname couldn't be more accurate in this situation. No offense
On November 20 2012 08:48 Snake.69 wrote: I just had an idea; make it so you cant shoot ranged attacks across forcefields, besides maybe spells such as storm or fungals... Youll still be able to kill the trapped units in the front, but you cant kill units that you forcefield trap with like 10 forcefields.
It probably wont fix the issues at all, but its a start and protoss will still have their forcefields for defensive purposes.
Or give forcefield to the oracle instead of time warp and then give time warp to the sentry. (terrible idea probably)
I like this idea. Obs ff can still be really powerful if used properly, and plus having ff on flying might make some cool things possible (ff mineral line to prevent mining if they don't have static defence or units properly positioned to kill the fragile oracle).
Ignoring the whole FF issue, since from the content of this thread it's apparently impossible to fix without a serious overhaul of everything, I want to focus on Fungal for a moment.
I miss plague Also, GGLords' ability to hold units still with Broodlings is... ridiculous. They make me miss Guardians. I miss micro. Fuck it, gonna go play some BW.
On November 18 2012 21:52 Fenrax wrote: Fungal and Forcefield are both bad for the game because they reduce the ability to Micro. Frustrating to watch, frustating to play against.
That is probably the main reason why all matchups with T are the most fun to watch. Their units actually just fight.
You found the right words. Exactly what i think is the problem.
I think the most obvious solution to this problem is the way you engage. Morrow's speech is quite tricky because he puts aside the way battle goes to focus on the battle actually happening;
Truth is the real weapon of zerg relies in position and perfect surround, notions that Stephano applies among zergs. If you engage at a moment when protoss moves on the map from every angle, or slow down enough the protoss, you force him to spend FF, to delay his push. If you succeed in engaging him from all directions (i've seen some crazy stuff from Stephano), FF micro will be harder for toss, and the zerg will get a higher chance to win the battle.
And don't forget this also depends on metagame. Stracraft is mostly a play of minds. Why not burrowed banes to make those sentries explode on their path to your base ? (Yeah i know, observers, but observer delays the push for 30 sec).
What I miss in the discussion is the role of massive units against FF. FF can be shattered by massive units. That's why you don't see them in PvP, because any competent player shatteres them with Archons or Collossi making them useless in the late game.
Using this mechanic also adds a lot of the missing micro as a zerg has to move his massive units around to destroy critical FF.
So where are zergs massive units? Where is the use of the ultralisk. Are ultralisks too late game to be used for this purpose? Maybe make queens massive for easier base defending against early sentry heavy pushes? (You have great mobility on creep to walk on FF, but off creep queens are too slow to be effective)
On November 20 2012 03:59 KawaiiRice wrote: Even sun Tzu couldn't account for constantly changing terrain
Lol, exactly. I always thought the map was like the one sacred piece of an rts that should not be trifled with. Imagine a real-life wizard that could create choke points wherever he wanted. No one could ever beat his army... without missiles.
On November 20 2012 03:59 KawaiiRice wrote: Even sun Tzu couldn't account for constantly changing terrain
Lol, exactly. I always thought the map was like the one sacred piece of an rts that should not be trifled with. Imagine a real-life wizard that could create choke points wherever he wanted. No one could ever beat his army... without missiles.
I know right? Nobody in real world warfare ever does anything to change territory in a fight to make it in their favour. Like fortifying a position thats narrow by throwing down some sand bags and setting up there. Or blowing up bridges to cut off routes. Or destroying train lines and roads. Or using explosives to make impassable obstacles either by blowing trenches or collapsing things in the way. Nobody has ever had to deal with anything as silly as a changing battlefield.
Oh wait...
Whilst your point may or may not be invalid as far as SC2 maps are concerned, please think before making RL comparisons. Battlefields CAN and DO change in the real world over time, even very rapidly.
On November 20 2012 23:10 Toffa wrote: What I miss in the discussion is the role of massive units against FF. FF can be shattered by massive units. That's why you don't see them in PvP, because any competent player shatteres them with Archons or Collossi making them useless in the late game.
Using this mechanic also adds a lot of the missing micro as a zerg has to move his massive units around to destroy critical FF.
So where are zergs massive units? Where is the use of the ultralisk. Are ultralisks too late game to be used for this purpose? Maybe make queens massive for easier base defending against early sentry heavy pushes? (You have great mobility on creep to walk on FF, but off creep queens are too slow to be effective)
I believe the usual argument against the Ultra is it comes out late...really late. Its a similar tech level to the Broodlord. And given a choice between Broodlords and Ultras vs a Protoss army you're ALWAYS going to want to take the Broodlords (because of the power of Infestor/Broodlord).
Also a massive queen would result in "LOLVOIDRAYALLIN" every game until Zerg is forced to start making really early hydras or a LOT of early spores. And hydras just get roasted by Colossi. So you could probably afford to Stargate > get couple of Void Rays > do almost guaranteed damage > get colossi > win.
On reflection I'm not sure why I'm arguing against this idea. I play Protoss, sounds awesome. ;P
Maybe decrease the gas cost or research time of overlord drops? It would make banerain or roach/ling drop more viable as a standard playstyle against midgame timings which introduces more multitasking for the zerg player in PvZ. It also reduces the weight given to the protoss player's micro, which was morrow's original point.
Also I like this post about decreasing forcefield duration time, although it would be worth considering that you would probably need more than 3 sentries to forcefield a ramp if you changed the duration. How would that affect PvP or PvT?
On November 21 2012 00:51 jliu wrote: Maybe decrease the gas cost or research time of overlord drops? It would make banerain or roach/ling drop more viable as a standard playstyle against midgame timings which introduces more multitasking for the zerg player in PvZ. It also reduces the weight given to the protoss player's micro, which was morrow's original point.
Also I like this post about decreasing forcefield duration time, although it would be worth considering that you would probably need more than 3 sentries to forcefield a ramp if you changed the duration. How would that affect PvP or PvT?
I agree overlord drops are underused. Although I fear that if we encourage Zerg to start using it more it'll prove to be absurdly overpowered (ton of overlords full of absurdly hard to kill roaches incoming all over your Colossi). >_>
I've seen the suggestion to reduce forcefield duration before. The discussion in the past has usually boiled down to the fact that reducing forcefield time would make it a lot harder to hold a lot of early game pressures and all-ins on just a few sentries. A fact which is critical in many cases to Protoss' ability to survive or expand. So long as units like Roaches and Marauders are as strong as they are Protoss would just die to a lot of stuff. Although I HAVE seen a suggestion to half both duration and the energy cost to balance it. But for high-level players this just means more APM spent and puts the matchup on even more of a knife edge with forcefields.
On November 20 2012 03:59 KawaiiRice wrote: Even sun Tzu couldn't account for constantly changing terrain
Lol, exactly. I always thought the map was like the one sacred piece of an rts that should not be trifled with. Imagine a real-life wizard that could create choke points wherever he wanted. No one could ever beat his army... without missiles.
I know right? Nobody in real world warfare ever does anything to change territory in a fight to make it in their favour. Like fortifying a position thats narrow by throwing down some sand bags and setting up there. Or blowing up bridges to cut off routes. Or destroying train lines and roads. Or using explosives to make impassable obstacles either by blowing trenches or collapsing things in the way. Nobody has ever had to deal with anything as silly as a changing battlefield.
Oh wait...
The thing is, all the things you listed take time and preparation to do and carry out. Key word: preparation. The most similar thing in SC would be if a terran fortifies his position with bunkers, turrets, etc. Or zerg massing spines, toss pylon blocking ramps, etc.
They take time, and tend to stay for a time until it's not needed anymore. This isn't so with FF: FF is instantaneous, and being able to instantly change the terrain however you want in a strategy game is going to be downright bullshit unless you create MASSIVE workarounds for everything else.
On November 20 2012 03:59 KawaiiRice wrote: Even sun Tzu couldn't account for constantly changing terrain
Lol, exactly. I always thought the map was like the one sacred piece of an rts that should not be trifled with. Imagine a real-life wizard that could create choke points wherever he wanted. No one could ever beat his army... without missiles.
I know right? Nobody in real world warfare ever does anything to change territory in a fight to make it in their favour. Like fortifying a position thats narrow by throwing down some sand bags and setting up there. Or blowing up bridges to cut off routes. Or destroying train lines and roads. Or using explosives to make impassable obstacles either by blowing trenches or collapsing things in the way. Nobody has ever had to deal with anything as silly as a changing battlefield.
Oh wait...
The thing is, all the things you listed take time and preparation to do and carry out. Key word: preparation. The most similar thing in SC would be if a terran fortifies his position with bunkers, turrets, etc. Or zerg massing spines, toss pylon blocking ramps, etc.
They take time, and tend to stay for a time until it's not needed anymore. This isn't so with FF: FF is instantaneous, and being able to instantly change the terrain however you want in a strategy game is going to be downright bullshit unless you create MASSIVE workarounds for everything else.
It's why I think the sentry should get defense matrix instead of FF but hey I'm not a pro
Clearly firing a missile at a building to collapse it to make a barricade takes time. Or at a bridge similarly.
Sorry but all I'm hearing is excuses on that one. Again: whilst the argument may or may not hold true for SC2 maps the fact remains trying to pretend in the real world it isn't as simple as that. So making "lol in IRL its not like this" is invalid. Not to mention how fundamentally silly that is as an argument for a computer game that doesn't pretend to be all about realism.
I'll admit that I don't really love playing with forcefields after playing brood war so much, but I also don't understand MorroW's complaint. As others have said in this thread, with good map presence, most zergs are able to delay or deny this all-in via backstabs or threatening the protoss army to bait forcefields. The only reason this all-in even seems to work is because high level zerg players (and most pros in general) right now seem to be playing as greedy as possible. I naturally started playing this 2-base all-in style myself on ladder when infestors became so wildly popular (although I tended to rely more on zealots/stalkers than immortal/sentries).
I can see if he's just fed up with the same old stuff happening over and over again. What I don't get is that outside of the couple sets he called out, we have seen in high level tournaments ways to get around forcefields (mutas, banelings drops, mass overlord drops, nydus, roaches w/ burrowed movement, etc). Yea, I know some of those require surviving past the 12 min mark that he mentioned, but I also believe a strong part of that is not playing so greedy all the time. Anyone else remember when zergs used to crush greedy FFE with roach all-ins? I'm not saying that's the answer, but you can't expect protoss players to watch most zerg players build only 2 to 4 lings with maybe up to 4 queens for an army and sit on that until they get 3 bases operational. That's just plain stupid.
BW was balanced because each race had a bunch of OP units. In this spirit I propose that we leave FF as is and instead buff zergs abilities which can help counter FF. force field is an original, cool, and awesome ability which has defined Protoss as a race. Lets not water the differences between Toss and Zerg down by simply balancing it so unmicroed armies fight to a draw. Instead let's buff overlord drops or burrow. Maybe let Zerg get burrow earlier, or make drop upgrades cheaper/ increase upgraded overlord movement speed (perhaps make drops come with a minor spew boost which compounds with overlord speed.) this way, Protoss can still micro against Zerg drops and burrow in the way morrow describes, but this allows Zerg to have a chance to use their own micro to counter (for example dropping from multiple angles, etc.) we shouldn't punish spells which bring out awesome micro, we should promote spells which aren't capable of being microbes effectively.
On November 20 2012 08:48 Snake.69 wrote: I just had an idea; make it so you cant shoot ranged attacks across forcefields, besides maybe spells such as storm or fungals... Youll still be able to kill the trapped units in the front, but you cant kill units that you forcefield trap with like 10 forcefields.
It probably wont fix the issues at all, but its a start and protoss will still have their forcefields for defensive purposes.
Or give forcefield to the oracle instead of time warp and then give time warp to the sentry. (terrible idea probably)
I like this idea. Obs ff can still be really powerful if used properly, and plus having ff on flying might make some cool things possible (ff mineral line to prevent mining if they don't have static defence or units properly positioned to kill the fragile oracle).
Strange that I've also been thinking about this idea a lot, to have Time Warp with the cost and duration of FF and a similar radius on Sentries. Here's how(I think) this addresses the issues OP pointed out:
Protoss player needs great micro, zerg needs protoss not to have
Instead of a-moving and hope that protoss misses a FF, time warp will punish an a-move army. Zerg has to micro the units away from charging into the temporal fields, and have a better chance to pull out since Sentries no longer cutout and render Zerg units completely useless. Yet every Time Warp casted will unlikely be a complete dud. Casting on top of the Zerg units will slow the advance/retreat, and as long as it is on the map Zerg can't be careless to have units move or rally across it. It rewards good player with good micro and positional awareness, and decreases the binary relationship that FF introduced. In other words, it's more forgivable, but not OP if your micro is really good.
Unlike FF, Time Warp doesn't prevent engagements completely. FF zones out lings and roaches and Zerg DPS gets reduced drastically, to the point of uselessness. As OP pointed out, absolute top players abuses this ability. Replacing FF with TW I feel makes it difficult for Protoss to pull off timings that straight out win games, as TW is more about positioning to slow down reinforcing defenders, do as much damage as possible and then run away. And here lies another cool thing about TW vs FF. It addresses the issue of Protoss units retreating, something I think Blizzard talked about before and FF cannot do unless maps are built with narrow chokes everywhere. It was the same reason why MsC has Mass Recall. One of the reason Protoss relies heavily in timing to win games is because early game Protoss can't harass, leaving Zergs to get to the ultimate composition untouched. Units sent across the map doesn't come back alive (unless they are blink Stalkers). Imagine a Protoss army retreating across the map after a timing and only have 4 FFs left. Now imagine it with 4 TWs. One of these does not simply die to a-move Zergs when Protoss hits their AoE concussive shells.
It's all about the time warps? If this means perfect TW in a battle will reduce any Zerg player to the same skill level then no. TW in place of FF gives Zerg player more options which can be exploited if the Zerg is skillful. You could either bait, micro around, spread, retreat or even brute forced your way across with overwhelming numbers. Likewise being more forgiving in nature, TW will likely always be useful during defense. Protoss does not need to rely on instant reflex perfect FF to stop run-bys. Good placements of TWs will slow down Zerg units and create temporary chokes. Keep in mind that MsC is also around in HoTs to fend off mass roach attack. I have a feeling Void Rays will be changed to become a better defensive unit too( I would love to see it charged while stationary).
FF on the Oracle can be the new Entombed. FF actually has all the qualities that Entombed was supposed to have. It also conveniently does not have the qualities(don't know if this is the right word) that everyone hated about Entombed. Entombed was designed to harass mineral lines in a unique way, impeding income rate without destroying workers, but was a boring 1-clicked spell, and doesn't have any other use at all. Players with good reaction will always find the damage negligible, which is why it was then given Void Siphon so it can be perceived as a bigger threat. We all know how well that went.
FF on the other hand, rewards your good placement by guaranteeing the effects of disrupting income, mineral as well as gas, and doesn't kill anything. FF are still the good old incredible Force Fields. Protoss will definitely find ways to use it in other areas. Though a flying Sentry does sound like a nightmare to Zergs, but note that Oracle requires Stargate tech, is more expensive, and takes up 3 supplies. Any WoL timings will not be practical at all. And regarding making Oracle threatening to opposing players, I don't think you can get any scarier than late game Immortal drop Warp In into your main while a zippy Oracle force fields the main ramp. This makes Oracle a high priority target that it was supposed to be, even without an attack.
Additional reasons for TW and FF to be switched is to preserve the continuity of FF familiarity and micro in HoTS. TW on Sentries is similar enough that the skills obtained by Protoss players can be transfered. Hopefully with this changes in place, and some number tweaking, Zergs can now win battles without hoping for Protoss to screw up.
Feel free to discuss about the idea. I hope pro-players of both races would provide their insights too on what they see in this.
On November 21 2012 02:30 YumYumGranola wrote: BW was balanced because each race had a bunch of OP units. In this spirit I propose that we leave FF as is and instead buff zergs abilities which can help counter FF. force field is an original, cool, and awesome ability which has defined Protoss as a race. Lets not water the differences between Toss and Zerg down by simply balancing it so unmicroed armies fight to a draw. Instead let's buff overlord drops or burrow. Maybe let Zerg get burrow earlier, or make drop upgrades cheaper/ increase upgraded overlord movement speed (perhaps make drops come with a minor spew boost which compounds with overlord speed.) this way, Protoss can still micro against Zerg drops and burrow in the way morrow describes, but this allows Zerg to have a chance to use their own micro to counter (for example dropping from multiple angles, etc.) we shouldn't punish spells which bring out awesome micro, we should promote spells which aren't capable of being microbes effectively.
People say this. But the OP-ness of units wasn't in the ability to lock down entire armies with a couple spells- whether Fungals or FF's. The reason the spells could be so OP is that they were HARD to cast many, many spells in a row. If lockdown in BW had smart-casting, we would have similar frustrations and we wouldn't be so much in awe of the handful of times that someone like Boxer actually did lockdown a fleet of carriers. When these sorts of spells are in every game...
The OP-ness of units had more to do with their quick handling, coming on and off the attack rather than the ability to prevent the other side from moving. Yes there was stasis, but it was very late game, huge energy cost, could be EMP'd by Vessels and were pretty expensive. And spreading units was easier in BW so stasis wouldn't necessarily hit that many units unless you didn't bother to spread your tanks.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Great idea, would never think of it. Could you please provide a gm lvl replay of you smashing that all in with 20 lings ?
That's exactly how you deal with the all in, you take control of the map then surround is army as it moves out, constantly bating forcefields.
On November 21 2012 02:30 YumYumGranola wrote: BW was balanced because each race had a bunch of OP units. In this spirit I propose that we leave FF as is and instead buff zergs abilities which can help counter FF. force field is an original, cool, and awesome ability which has defined Protoss as a race. Lets not water the differences between Toss and Zerg down by simply balancing it so unmicroed armies fight to a draw. Instead let's buff overlord drops or burrow. Maybe let Zerg get burrow earlier, or make drop upgrades cheaper/ increase upgraded overlord movement speed (perhaps make drops come with a minor spew boost which compounds with overlord speed.) this way, Protoss can still micro against Zerg drops and burrow in the way morrow describes, but this allows Zerg to have a chance to use their own micro to counter (for example dropping from multiple angles, etc.) we shouldn't punish spells which bring out awesome micro, we should promote spells which aren't capable of being microbes effectively.
People say this. But the OP-ness of units wasn't in the ability to lock down entire armies with a couple spells- whether Fungals or FF's. The reason the spells could be so OP is that they were HARD to cast many, many spells in a row. If lockdown in BW had smart-casting, we would have similar frustrations and we wouldn't be so much in awe of the handful of times that someone like Boxer actually did lockdown a fleet of carriers. When these sorts of spells are in every game...
The OP-ness of units had more to do with their quick handling, coming on and off the attack rather than the ability to prevent the other side from moving. Yes there was stasis, but it was very late game, huge energy cost, could be EMP'd by Vessels and were pretty expensive. And spreading units was easier in BW so stasis wouldn't necessarily hit that many units unless you didn't bother to spread your tanks.
Agreed, all the most OP spells in BW were on effectively T3 units making it difficult to get a bunch of them. In SC2 you have OP spells on T1.5-2 units.
As to FF, I had a change in mind inspired by the Oracle. Change FF to an energy based attack like Pulsar Beam. When , FF is enabled, the Sentry's normal attack is replaced by a new one where the Sentry projects a continuous wall of force outward in a cone shape out to range 9, which gets wider the farther it travels. All enemy units caught in the projection are carried along with the energy projection. Units can still move though and can be commanded to move out of the field. Units rendered immobile due to an ability (Siege Mode, Burrow, Fungal) are unaffected by the FF, but the second the ability is cancelled they will be treated as normal. Massive units are completely unaffected by the field and enemy players can use them as shields to allow their non-Massive units to close the distance to the Protoss army by having non-Massive units follow exactly behind the Massive units. With this change, Protoss can no longer reshape the battle field as to their whims, but FF remains very strong defensively. However, I can certainly see this version of FF having stupid amounts of synergy with Colossi.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Great idea, would never think of it. Could you please provide a gm lvl replay of you smashing that all in with 20 lings ?
That's exactly how you deal with the all in, you take control of the map then surround is army as it moves out, constantly bating forcefields.
Do you know he was being sarcastic ? 20 lings is a piece of cake. You'd be dreaming if you think it's more than enough to take forceields off. :/ hell I wouldn't even throw a single one if i had a few zealots with +1 attack. Works like a charm.
On November 21 2012 02:30 YumYumGranola wrote: BW was balanced because each race had a bunch of OP units. In this spirit I propose that we leave FF as is and instead buff zergs abilities which can help counter FF. force field is an original, cool, and awesome ability which has defined Protoss as a race. Lets not water the differences between Toss and Zerg down by simply balancing it so unmicroed armies fight to a draw. Instead let's buff overlord drops or burrow. Maybe let Zerg get burrow earlier, or make drop upgrades cheaper/ increase upgraded overlord movement speed (perhaps make drops come with a minor spew boost which compounds with overlord speed.) this way, Protoss can still micro against Zerg drops and burrow in the way morrow describes, but this allows Zerg to have a chance to use their own micro to counter (for example dropping from multiple angles, etc.) we shouldn't punish spells which bring out awesome micro, we should promote spells which aren't capable of being microbes effectively.
People say this. But the OP-ness of units wasn't in the ability to lock down entire armies with a couple spells- whether Fungals or FF's. The reason the spells could be so OP is that they were HARD to cast many, many spells in a row. If lockdown in BW had smart-casting, we would have similar frustrations and we wouldn't be so much in awe of the handful of times that someone like Boxer actually did lockdown a fleet of carriers. When these sorts of spells are in every game...
The OP-ness of units had more to do with their quick handling, coming on and off the attack rather than the ability to prevent the other side from moving. Yes there was stasis, but it was very late game, huge energy cost, could be EMP'd by Vessels and were pretty expensive. And spreading units was easier in BW so stasis wouldn't necessarily hit that many units unless you didn't bother to spread your tanks.
Agreed, all the most OP spells in BW were on effectively T3 units making it difficult to get a bunch of them. In SC2 you have OP spells on T1.5-2 units.
As to FF, I had a change in mind inspired by the Oracle. Change FF to an energy based attack like Pulsar Beam. When , FF is enabled, the Sentry's normal attack is replaced by a new one where the Sentry projects a continuous wall of force outward in a cone shape out to range 9, which gets wider the farther it travels. All enemy units caught in the projection are carried along with the energy projection. Units can still move though and can be commanded to move out of the field. Units rendered immobile due to an ability (Siege Mode, Burrow, Fungal) are unaffected by the FF, but the second the ability is cancelled they will be treated as normal. Massive units are completely unaffected by the field and enemy players can use them as shields to allow their non-Massive units to close the distance to the Protoss army by having non-Massive units follow exactly behind the Massive units. With this change, Protoss can no longer reshape the battle field as to their whims, but FF remains very strong defensively. However, I can certainly see this version of FF having stupid amounts of synergy with Colossi.
I wasn't specifically discussing FF's comparison to BW spells, Stop thinking about spells, this is much more general than that. What I was talking about was a general idea that each race had very different units and required specific types of micros to beat each other. Whether or not an a-moved army A can beat a-moved army B is totally irrelevant, since at any meaningful level of play neither player will be a-moving. FF offers an awesome way to make battles more than just an army value v. army value clash. As Morrow pointed out, when Zerg players experimented with drops & burrowed movement, initially they had great success vs. FF. Now that it appears the situation has stabilized and Toss again has the upper hand, I think instead of nerfing FF what we should do is buff those spells that allowed Zerg to fight against FF well. Make it a (how well you FF vs. how well I drop/burrow micro) challenge and that will be much more fun and interesting than a brawl to a draw unit AI battle. This has nothing to do with auto-casting or even spells. I just think that as a general rule that instead of nerfing things we should be buffing it's counters. Otherwise the differences between the races will become much less pronounced, and a lot of that appeal will leave the game.
true dat zerg doesnt really hav micro units. even mutas... its not lik e bw.i wish storm could deal more damagee to armored instead of light. it will help pvt in hots as well... after warhounds hopefully come back......... o srry so the point is that zerg should learnto split lik marines... idk lol ithink this bad idea
I would like to remind everyone that many of the suggested changes (destructible FF, shorten duration of FF, giving sentries timewarp instead of FF, etc) would require protoss to spend more gas on sentries to FF ramp(in case of shorter duration FF) to defend against 4gate which means its harder to build tech buildings to get ahead of the 4gating player in terms of tech, OR have no way to stop that 4gate (timewarp/destructible){unless it has the hp and armor of destructible rocks (2000hp 3armor) but I doubt it would help much in the original problem of sentry/immortal all in}(roaches have 6.5dps(+0) or 7.5dps(+1) in the rare cases at this point, assuming you are hitting a FF with 20 roaches(situational, not gonna try to get an exact number) due to space constraints and the roach range it will take close to 14 seconds to shoot down a FF which is pretty much the effective duration of FF)
That said, before crunching out the math I was thinking no way destructible FFs would help in anyway especially how it might bring us back to the age of 4gate PvP. I think perhaps destructible FFs with the hp and armor tweaked to account for the dps a 4gate player will have at the time of attack it could be a good way of stopping the immortal/sentry all in.
900 HP 6 Armor(arbitrary number, you can come up with a better one if you're not satisfied) and not armored type (psionic mayb?) would allow 20 +0 roaches to kill a ff in 10 seconds(still not good enough imo) and not allow a 4gate player with these compositions(1z2s 1z6s 3z8s 5z10s etc) to kill a FF in less than 15 seconds. The main idea behind the health and armor of the FF is to allow roaches and pretty much only roaches to be the only t1 units that can kill FFs fast enough.
Not sure if stargate openers can defend 4gate with a limit to the Forcefield's usefulness though.
Anyways its up to Blizzard and so far DB(? or someone else) said they're not gonna try to change the sentry immortal all in and are gonna leave it as is. So yea unless Parting has just too much soul and keep pwning zergs left and right with the wonwonwon we probably won't see Blizz pay much attention to it.
Still think the main problem lies with the WG mechanic and thats where they should try to start balancing/changing the design.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Great idea, would never think of it. Could you please provide a gm lvl replay of you smashing that all in with 20 lings ?
That's exactly how you deal with the all in, you take control of the map then surround is army as it moves out, constantly bating forcefields.
Do you know he was being sarcastic ? 20 lings is a piece of cake. You'd be dreaming if you think it's more than enough to take forceields off. :/ hell I wouldn't even throw a single one if i had a few zealots with +1 attack. Works like a charm.
It's completely obvious he's being sarcastic, but the best way to deal with the all in is to force him to burn forcefields away from your natural, 20 lings obviously isn't going to do it, that's an exaggeration by the first guy.
Great post Morrow. U seem to be hitting on a basic issue with SC2, where the attack-move is many times the best option. I don't think we need to make a BW comparison because the mechanics of SC2 are much different. But, many fight and macro design issues should be fixed; Larva is almost too plentiful, auto-casting makes fungal and FF way too easy to use over other energy functions like storm and EMP, and also the recent discovery regarding mining efficiency variation across all maps.
We need more well laid out arguments for changes like Morrows, QXC's ghost nerf post, etc.
On November 18 2012 22:20 ohampatu wrote: Just feels more of your qq to me. Which is all ive seen from you in regards to the game/beta recently.
Zerg isn't playing vs sentries right. This happened at the release of the game as well, 'omg protoss and FF are soo op'. You know how zerg learned to beat it then? They got better at scouting, got more aggressive, made protoss burn the FF's at his base when he went to move out.
That is what needs to be done now. Sac 1 or 2 overlords at the given time, then take a look at the protoss. If you scout the sentry/immortal all-in, making about 20 speelings and park them outside his base.
Im getting so tired of people calling this build OP, when it all it takes is a zerg being able to recognize the build and react properly. Dont fucking wait untill he is at the watchtower outside your base before you respond. Take control of the game.
Great idea, would never think of it. Could you please provide a gm lvl replay of you smashing that all in with 20 lings ?
That's exactly how you deal with the all in, you take control of the map then surround is army as it moves out, constantly bating forcefields.
Do you know he was being sarcastic ? 20 lings is a piece of cake. You'd be dreaming if you think it's more than enough to take forceields off. :/ hell I wouldn't even throw a single one if i had a few zealots with +1 attack. Works like a charm.
It's completely obvious he's being sarcastic, but the best way to deal with the all in is to force him to burn forcefields away from your natural, 20 lings obviously isn't going to do it, that's an exaggeration by the first guy.
What do you suggest then ? Cauz 20 lings is already 10 drones down the drain. I'm not sure what we're taking the 3rd base for... Since we're hardly having more than 10 drones on the 3rd by the 8th min mark, i don't see any point in taking it since you'll need like 40 lings to make them waste all their sentries' energy. You may have 40 lings by the 10-11 min mark, but that'd mean you guessed the strat correctly. Which means wasting 100-200 minerals for suiciding 1/2 overlords and 2 larvaes. And we're still not sure to have scouted the base entirely. See ? It's really a pain in the ass to play a ZvP from the Z's perspective as well.
On November 21 2012 15:38 bokeevboke wrote: I wrote it before and say it again: make FF uncastable on top of the units. Thats the best solution. Period.
Reasoning. FF will become more of a strategic element, highly depending on positioning aspect, rather than being stun-like spell.
No. Simply no. That would make the sentries useless. It's already hard for the protoss to pay attention to the army when we're not watching them. Zerglings are fast, one surround and you can pretty much say gg already. Sorry but that's definitely not the best solution. Far from it even.
force field used to dominate all aspects of PvZ. Then broodlords especially started making sentries obsolete in the late game. Now what allowed zergs to make broods? The infestor. The infestor is also a good counter to mid-game sentries. Because of this, Force field now has its place in the early and some mid game pushes, and for defensive purposes against zerg. A much better fit than the previous domination, imo. But, if we nerf the infestor, FF once again becomes a dominating force. Take out the strong infestor and zergs never get to broods. Sentries will dominate without broods and infestors. E.g make psionic units immune to fungal and all force field hell breaks loose once again.
For now, I feel they work ZvP, or are much more toned down than they used to. But with infestor nerf there's a real risk they will once again dominate from early to late game.
On November 21 2012 15:38 bokeevboke wrote: I wrote it before and say it again: make FF uncastable on top of the units. Thats the best solution. Period.
Reasoning. FF will become more of a strategic element, highly depending on positioning aspect, rather than being stun-like spell.
No. Simply no. That would make the sentries useless. It's already hard for the protoss to pay attention to the army when we're not watching them. Zerglings are fast, one surround and you can pretty much say gg already. Sorry but that's definitely not the best solution. Far from it even.
Just want to add that it'd also put Protoss on EVEN MORE of a knife edge with regard to holding any kind of early attack. As it stands if the Protoss is a fraction of a second late they can still save themselves and only let a couple of marines/roaches/zerglings/whatever get into their base. If you can't cast FF on top of units then Protoss instantly becomes the race where if you don't play absolutely perfectly in the early game you die to any kind of pressure because there will be no way to delay the attack once it has started. At all.
I feel like casters in general are too strong in sc2, but the fact that sentries and infestors are being dealt with right now is good!
MorroW is right, this is exactly the way I and so many others feel when we play ZvP, every unit except for corruptor infestor is useless and makes me lose.
Im so glad a professional player is talking about this.
MorroW is right, this is exactly the way I and so many others feel when we play ZvP, every unit except for corruptor infestor is useless and makes me lose.
Seems easy enough to balance. They just need to tweak energy costs, ff's aren't game breaking if you don't have unlimited uses. Something as simple as making FF cost 75 and having sentries start with 75/200 energy along with a small damage buff for sentries could go a long way to breathing new life into the currently stagnant early game.
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.
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.
One problem with just removing forcefields is: The gateway units are a LOT weaker. It is just insanely difficult to hold a Stephano style Roach max or a 3+ rax allin. At the moment it's just an important piece of the Protoss army to defend early.
But if you look at the use of forcefields, it can negate any micro in offensive situations which is a big problem. That's one of the reasons why I don't like PvP or 2vs2 games with Protoss. They just forcefield you like crazy in offensive situations and seperate your army.
It would be great to limit the sentrys only to a defensive purpose but it isn't possible.
I really like this post, it manages to explain why Forcefield is frustrating for both sides while acknowledging that it is actually a cool spell. Before I was always skeptical, as most posts like this always seems so one sided, but Morrow has done a really good job at staying unbiased and I agree with everything in his post, yet I can't think of a solution either.
I think the best option I have heard would be to give forcefields health. But this don't really fix the fact that Protoss armies would then be steamrolled once the forcefields are destroyed (in both PvZ and PvT). Meaning we would probably need to buff gateway units, which then makes warpgate timings too strong... it just doesn't seem like it works out in the end.
Another option I have seen that seems reasonable is giving sentries a cooldown on forcefield, this should retain Sentries defensive utility while dampening their aggressive all-in potential (forcefields would be less spammable and you would need more sentries for the current effect). But this doesn't account for Protoss problems with lategame Zerg, so if that was solved I think this would be a perfect solution.
It would mean something like a 20s cooldown, which means you bait the forcefields, then you have a 5 seconds window to kill the protoss. The actual problem is that without forcefields Protoss are just gonna die to everything early game/any zerg composition. Blizzard designed protoss to rely extremely heavily on it, without ff it would just be hard like hell to win.
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.
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!
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.
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
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.
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 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 11:12 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 11:12 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.
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.
I think the only plausible way to solve this "problem" (if it is indeed a problem) would be to simply replace FF with another ability that serves a similar purpose. The problem with doing that is that it would set the game back very far in progress of balance. We would probably have to see at least 3-4 patches on top of this change. However, I think when HotS releases it would bring a great opportunity to change the sentry.
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.
Yes forcefild and BroodW/Fungel combo is extreamly boring from a viwer perspectiv. But late game Z are at the moment stronger then P so I understand all this all ins from a P.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
[QUOTE]On November 25 2012 14:03 ShatterZer0 wrote: [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.
First, to comment on the discussion itself: 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.
-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.
-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.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...
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?
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.
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.
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.
Why not make it massive, then? Massive units could simply be the answer to fungals. Why psionic units? Archons were given a massive designation so that they could break FF, not be lifted and I think they ignore concussive? Why not make that the weakness of fungal like it's the weakness of FF? The fact of the matter is if you can't target psionic units with fungal you can't use it to decloak ghosts and you can't punish clumped HT; watch some maniac comes up with an anti-fungal mass queen build that Blizzard would have never considered and ZvZ just turns retarded.
it is easy for protoss to turtle until they have full energy sentries. what solution is there for that?
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.
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.
My post does make "sense" even if it isn't in relation to the OP, but to someone else who posted in this thread. I never stated anything about how boring they were, but I do agree that they are indeed boring, but without them the protoss early game army is weaksauce.
On the topic of FF, I've always felt that they are a lot like siege tanks in a weird way. They can turn any favorable terrain into a defensive position and can really mess with rallied unit movements, but like tanks they suddenly impact your mobility once "deployed" and are weak to flanks or being caught "undeployed". Forcefields really are an issue of map-maker balance at this point. They're as important to Protoss as tanks to terran.
On November 26 2012 05:26 dUTtrOACh wrote: On the topic of FF, I've always felt that they are a lot like siege tanks in a weird way. They can turn any favorable terrain into a defensive position and can really mess with rallied unit movements, but like tanks they suddenly impact your mobility once "deployed" and are weak to flanks or being caught "undeployed". Forcefields really are an issue of map-maker balance at this point. They're as important to Protoss as tanks to terran.
I cannot understand how blizzard is blind to the negative effects that forcefield have on the game. Just for the sake of mapmaking they should remove it.
On November 26 2012 05:26 dUTtrOACh wrote: On the topic of FF, I've always felt that they are a lot like siege tanks in a weird way. They can turn any favorable terrain into a defensive position and can really mess with rallied unit movements, but like tanks they suddenly impact your mobility once "deployed" and are weak to flanks or being caught "undeployed". Forcefields really are an issue of map-maker balance at this point. They're as important to Protoss as tanks to terran.
Would a slightly longer CD timer, then the length of the spell work? As that way you could still cut them off, but there would still be punishment after the fact, this could also stop the sentry immortal thing where they just block off the main and zerg for the most part just sits there. (counter attack being useless because again forcefield). I feel in this case however zerglings would be really strong
Forcefields are not a problem in PvT nor PvP , i can play those 2 mu without sticking around with FF. So, the problem is on the Zerg side, not the forcefield per se.
So, I too agree that something needs to be done about forcefields and I suggest a slight change that might be good. I have not done any of the math or any experiments so take it for What it is:
Since you cannot build oracles with the same speed and you need another building for it, it will severly limit the number of Forcefields that are available early on, and massing oracles will mean that your DPS shrinks significantly.
And Time Warp will can do mostly the same thing FF does, only worse, making it useful for running away or delaying a battle. But you cannot stop a battle, as you can with FF.
And it would further encourage Protoss Stargate builds, which I really like.
On November 26 2012 21:26 Angeleon wrote: So, I too agree that something needs to be done about forcefields and I suggest a slight change that might be good. I have not done any of the math or any experiments so take it for What it is:
Since you cannot build oracles with the same speed and you need another building for it, it will severly limit the number of Forcefields that are available early on, and massing oracles will mean that your DPS shrinks significantly.
And Time Warp will can do mostly the same thing FF does, only worse, making it useful for running away or delaying a battle. But you cannot stop a battle, as you can with FF.
And it would further encourage Protoss Stargate builds, which I really like.
On November 26 2012 21:26 Angeleon wrote: So, I too agree that something needs to be done about forcefields and I suggest a slight change that might be good. I have not done any of the math or any experiments so take it for What it is:
Since you cannot build oracles with the same speed and you need another building for it, it will severly limit the number of Forcefields that are available early on, and massing oracles will mean that your DPS shrinks significantly.
And Time Warp will can do mostly the same thing FF does, only worse, making it useful for running away or delaying a battle. But you cannot stop a battle, as you can with FF.
And it would further encourage Protoss Stargate builds, which I really like.
3 Food + 150 Gas + Stargate tech
No... :\
That is the whole point. Forcefield will not be as plentiful as it is today, but you can still get it quite quickly and even more important you'll have a far more mobile unit for it. One not even limited by forcefield itself, which in my opinion is two great advantages for Protoss. And even so, the slow that'll be on the sentry will still be useful, and alot more helpful against air, for instance.
I guess mutas are going to have a hard time with this, and I'm not so sure that is good.
You're going to have to give me a better reason than 'No...' =)
On November 26 2012 19:45 InVerno wrote: Forcefields are not a problem in PvT nor PvP , i can play those 2 mu without sticking around with FF. So, the problem is on the Zerg side, not the forcefield per se.
I am curious to how you play PvT as a Protoss without using forcefields and survive long enough to get Colossos or Storm.
Anyway, I do think that the most important part of the OP was:
Nothing dies, then suddenly everything dies when protoss gets enough sentries for forcefield, zergs army becomes kind of useless. the second forcefields run out for protoss, the protoss army gets easily run over and killed without a chance
In other words, the protoss units aren't good enough without forcefields to have a stand-up fight against zerg. If it isn't forcefields, it's the Colossos crutch. In other words: gateway units (except for the forcefield and the T3 templar) are too weak against Zerg, and Terran to a degree.
I think the solution is going to lie somewhere in HOTS. Honestly the whole concept of controling space in a game like starcraft is that there is a draw back or a cost for doing so. I think all 3 races could benefit from an early game unit that could be used to "bait" out forcefields more effectivly. What that unit is? not sure.. Thats something that someone smarter than me will need to figure out.
Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
On November 26 2012 17:07 Redox wrote: I am disappointed that Morrow's post does not contain the slightest idea what the solution could be, it only lists the perceived problems.
I don't think there is a solution aside from a complete returning of the race's mechanics. Forcefield defines protoss as designed. I'm not sure if a major change can be validated (it would undoubtedly change the way protoss is played and require re-learning and re-balancing of the match ups) unless it comes with a beta, so we may have to wait for LotV until forcefield is seriously addressed.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
On November 27 2012 01:20 NostalgiaTag wrote: I think the solution is going to lie somewhere in HOTS. Honestly the whole concept of controling space in a game like starcraft is that there is a draw back or a cost for doing so. I think all 3 races could benefit from an early game unit that could be used to "bait" out forcefields more effectivly. What that unit is? not sure.. Thats something that someone smarter than me will need to figure out.
How about something that is cheap, small, fast, builds quickly, in large numbers and can do a lot of damage if they're left to freely attack, forcing the Protoss to either block them out, get more units to defend or lose sentries to them? That'd really mess up the Immortal/Sentry all-in because you could harrass them as they make their way across the map and they'd be forced to use forcefields to save themselves or lose sentries. It'd even be good against immortals since immortals are high single-target fire but don't deal with lots of smaller, weaker units doing damage very well. Sounds pretty solid as a concept to me, maybe they could try something like that for one of the races.
On November 25 2012 14:03 ShatterZer0 wrote: 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.
Although I'm more hesitant than you are to say "ZERG MUST DO THIS" I agree theres a fundamental mindset problem with a lot of zerg. And its "expand at all costs". Expanding so fast is trading off safety for economy, so its going to be punishable. And pro-level Protoss players have found one of the best ways to punish it is the immortal-sentry all in. As you said: stronger than traditional early all-ins but faster hitting than later timings.
A while back I was running a build I picked up from someone who had studied Tails' play. It was a delayed 4-gate off the back of an expansion which if I remember right was designed to hit very shortly after the zerg third finished (assuming the instant "build 3rd as soon as Protoss starts natural" response). In essence it was a 1-gate by nexus expand into a three-gateway complete wall-off at the natural with a 4-gateway attack in conjunction with either getting a Twilight Council (for a follow up, DTs were really good because if you'd done damage but not killed they often just weren't able to handle them; didn't have the money or tech for detection due to panic response to your earlier attack) or a Forge (in case of counterattack response).
I had a LOT of people raging about 4-gate cheeses and a few asking how to beat it. I told them they just needed a bit of tech, roaches perhaps, and they'd hold. That the build was DESIGNED to punish a greedy third and that if they held off just a little to get some defensive units I'd be unable to do anything. The general response? "You started building a natural, if I don't expand right then I die!" And this is from Gold and Plat level players. I mean seriously...you're not going to lose the game by getting a Roach warren up before your third.
lol if you take a super late third, theyre just going to take standard 3rd with robo, and then do a strong colosus immortal sentry sstalker push on 3rd/4th that u cant stop
what if FF had two steps to be casted. At first FF splits units like its now, but units can move in it for like 0.5 sek (time is a thing to balance) after that 0.5 sek FF splits units again (based on new position) and become solid. This short time would allow zergs with good reaction time to move at least some of units to the right side of it and not be trapped and allow some FF baiting, FF would be a little more commital and would requier some more movment prediciot from toss (also in PvT matchup).
Although I'm more hesitant than you are to say "ZERG MUST DO THIS" I agree theres a fundamental mindset problem with a lot of zerg. And its "expand at all costs". Expanding so fast is trading off safety for economy, so its going to be punishable. And pro-level Protoss players have found one of the best ways to punish it is the immortal-sentry all in. As you said: stronger than traditional early all-ins but faster hitting than later timings.
Throughout WoL the argument not to expand so fast to not die to timings has popped up again and again. Whether it was Zerg vs 2rax, 3 CC vs roach/baneling, or Protoss vs Terran's 1/1/1, people were always yelling to not expand so fast to better defend. It's been proven again and again that you can get away with these early expansions after some time and experience with them. I really doubt the immortal/sentry all-in will break that mold. Maybe it will come down to Zergs getting earlier speed and cutting back on a few drones, but people will figure out more and more how to better defeat it while still keeping that early third.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
The problem with that is Zerg at the very highest level are frustrated they can't do anything micro wise to kill toss who are performing with relatively perfect micro, and Protoss below the very highest level are frustrated that they have to micro so much while zerg can a-move.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
That's not what I am saying. I'm saying both races should be able to micro, not zerg CAN'T micro, and toss MUST micro. Reading, try it some time.
Simple. No FF on creep (that is creep directly expanding from a hatchery, not tumor related creep).
This way P keeps all the options at home for defends and also for say mid-map encounters. Z is free from cheesy ramp blocks at main and natural and may have more of a chance vs the immortal-sentry all-in.
Remove FF, Remove Warp Gate, Rebalance protoss units/production along with the other precariously balanced units like the Infestor.
I believe this would allow zergs to have much more ability to micro and be efficient against a mid/late game protoss army (including cutting off reinforcements because of no warp gate), and as well protoss would no longer need to have aggressive and defensive timings with FF's in order to be successfull. This would include rebalancing the units of other races to create a new more stable balance than currently exists along with more diverse options for play style.
In order to do this (without protoss players drinking the cool-aid), blizzard should come up with some story line hooey in LotV like Aiur gets attacked or something, and the warp gate/ ff technology gets damaged/destroyed and the protoss then have to re-work their military.
On November 28 2012 03:04 Hetz wrote: Simple. No FF on creep (that is creep directly expanding from a hatchery, not tumor related creep).
This way P keeps all the options at home for defends and also for say mid-map encounters. Z is free from cheesy ramp blocks at main and natural and may have more of a chance vs the immortal-sentry all-in.
That doesn't change the fundamental problem of FFs being necessary and, in large numbers, impossible to micro against.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
That's not what I am saying. I'm saying both races should be able to micro, not zerg CAN'T micro, and toss MUST micro. Reading, try it some time.
lol are u serious? "The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way" come on dude, take your own advice.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
That's not what I am saying. I'm saying both races should be able to micro, not zerg CAN'T micro, and toss MUST micro. Reading, try it some time.
lol are u serious? "The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way" come on dude, take your own advice.
And I'm saying the 3 races SHOULDN'T BE DIFFERENT IN THAT WAY. How hard is that to understand? how many times do I have to say it?
" protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point." It IS a valid point.
"not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this." Except it should be this way. Not terran has to hit a mid game timing or lose. Not that protoss has to micro perfectly or lose. And most definitely not that zerg has to HOPE protoss doesn't micro perfectly or lose.
I read as much as I can, but didn't see this suggestion. What if force fields could be targeted and have like a few hundred shield points. Would still be useful but might spark some new creative meta ideas especially in HotS.
On November 28 2012 15:50 Bobthetart wrote: I read as much as I can, but didn't see this suggestion. What if force fields could be targeted and have like a few hundred shield points. Would still be useful but might spark some new creative meta ideas especially in HotS.
I think the only new meta it would spark is that terran just mass marines early and attacks every single game. If you can't hold a ramp against marines then they will win every game.
i dont know...maybe make forcefields able to destroy? like psionic shield barrier with x hp. at start almost no change in metagame, mid game roach/terran bio able to destroy them, lategame micro positional thing. however it will scale with protoss shields upg. i know its hard to manage how many hp forcefields will have/buff sentry dps or so cuz when forcefields will be destroyed ...well u know, hard time for toss.
Interesting post, and interesting preposition, if the force field changes, the entire game will change too... maybe if the ff requires more energy to be used, idk... it's difficult to find an aswer.
On November 28 2012 03:29 FlilFlam wrote: I know how to fix this!
Remove FF, Remove Warp Gate, Rebalance protoss units/production along with the other precariously balanced units like the Infestor.
I believe this would allow zergs to have much more ability to micro and be efficient against a mid/late game protoss army (including cutting off reinforcements because of no warp gate), and as well protoss would no longer need to have aggressive and defensive timings with FF's in order to be successfull. This would include rebalancing the units of other races to create a new more stable balance than currently exists along with more diverse options for play style.
In order to do this (without protoss players drinking the cool-aid), blizzard should come up with some story line hooey in LotV like Aiur gets attacked or something, and the warp gate/ ff technology gets damaged/destroyed and the protoss then have to re-work their military.
Removing Warp Gate is bad. You sometimes just need warp ins against drops for example. BUT I think you could buff gateway production and nerf warpgate production, you could create a certain balance between those two. So as a perfect solution you start off by using gateways, later on you get some warpgates in addition but still keep some gateways, switching how you need them. This would also make PvP more stable and nerf allins.
Rebalancing protoss units for a game without ff will be really hard i feel.
Do you guys remember that plague took 250hp, and hit protoss armor instead of shields., and queen had ensnare which slowed units to 50% speed? you could stick a protoss army , sap their health, then wait, then hit.
What has changed from there that these spells are giving problems? My guess would be the clumping, smartfire, and smartcast.
On November 29 2012 18:19 Arighttomorals wrote: Do you guys remember that plague took 250hp, and hit protoss armor instead of shields., and queen had ensnare which slowed units to 50% speed? you could stick a protoss army , sap their health, then wait, then hit.
What has changed from there that these spells are giving problems? My guess would be the clumping, smartfire, and smartcast.
Ok but did a player ever mass 15+ defilers just to plague every game? No, did someone mass 15+ queens every game just to ensnare? No.
Every game zergs get mass infestor and protoss gets sentries so they can force field. There is a huge difference between the bw related spells and the sc2 ones, the sc2 ones are used 99.999% of the games and are massed, there aren't just a few but normally 6-7+ minimum.
On November 29 2012 18:19 Arighttomorals wrote: Do you guys remember that plague took 250hp, and hit protoss armor instead of shields., and queen had ensnare which slowed units to 50% speed? you could stick a protoss army , sap their health, then wait, then hit.
What has changed from there that these spells are giving problems? My guess would be the clumping, smartfire, and smartcast.
Ok but did a player ever mass 15+ defilers just to plague every game? No, did someone mass 15+ queens every game just to ensnare? No.
Every game zergs get mass infestor and protoss gets sentries so they can force field. There is a huge difference between the bw related spells and the sc2 ones, the sc2 ones are used 99.999% of the games and are massed, there aren't just a few but normally 6-7+ minimum.
defilers could consume any zerg unit for emnergy, basically meaning zerglings = infinite energy, so you only need 1 or 2 defilers.
As far as tjhe massing goes, I think it's stupid too. You know what prevented massing in SC1 was the relational value of minerals and gas, and how hard it was to get. One geyser per base was standard. money maps gave 2 geyers per base. Why they picked up a nonstandard map design to base SC2 around, I will never know.
On November 28 2012 15:50 Bobthetart wrote: I read as much as I can, but didn't see this suggestion. What if force fields could be targeted and have like a few hundred shield points. Would still be useful but might spark some new creative meta ideas especially in HotS.
I think the only new meta it would spark is that terran just mass marines early and attacks every single game. If you can't hold a ramp against marines then they will win every game.
Give them a bit or armour? That way they can be broken, but only by marauders and roaches, and not by marines. If that fails, nerf marines - everyone happy
On November 29 2012 18:19 Arighttomorals wrote: Do you guys remember that plague took 250hp, and hit protoss armor instead of shields., and queen had ensnare which slowed units to 50% speed? you could stick a protoss army , sap their health, then wait, then hit.
What has changed from there that these spells are giving problems? My guess would be the clumping, smartfire, and smartcast.
So,
1. The abilities you mentioned required control of 2 different units instead of 1. 2. Ensnare was a slow. Not a stun. 3. Neither of those brood war units could just drop an army where ever you choose while being burrowed.
On November 29 2012 18:19 Arighttomorals wrote: Do you guys remember that plague took 250hp, and hit protoss armor instead of shields., and queen had ensnare which slowed units to 50% speed? you could stick a protoss army , sap their health, then wait, then hit.
What has changed from there that these spells are giving problems? My guess would be the clumping, smartfire, and smartcast.
It was 300 hp, not 250. Plague can't kill. 2 units instead of 1. Slow instead of stick in place. Defiler can't make an army. Queen can't make an army.
There's nothing alike between 2 different spells on 2 different units with MUCH different affects and... fungal.
On November 28 2012 15:50 Bobthetart wrote: I read as much as I can, but didn't see this suggestion. What if force fields could be targeted and have like a few hundred shield points. Would still be useful but might spark some new creative meta ideas especially in HotS.
I think the only new meta it would spark is that terran just mass marines early and attacks every single game. If you can't hold a ramp against marines then they will win every game.
Give them a bit or armour? That way they can be broken, but only by marauders and roaches, and not by marines. If that fails, nerf marines - everyone happy
...you do realise how strong roaches can be when you're not rushing Immortals for an all-in? And that its only possible to hold certain roach-backed pressures and all-ins (especially against FFE) by liberal use of extra cannons and forcefields?
Not to mention how painful concussive Marauders are early game vs Protoss already.
If they're not armoured, Terran wins every game with a Marine-based all-in. If they ARE armoured then Zerg and Terran win every game with Roach and Marauder all-ins. Marines aren't the only problem here, and Protoss is hugely reliant on forcefields in the earlygame.
old news. people that actually have a brain already know this. they will never touch forcefield. That will trigger the ultimate shit-domino effect. they'd have to redesign almost the entire game.
On November 27 2012 10:56 Rassy wrote: Protoss has to micro, zerg has to macro and a-move and terran,well i dunno they a bit in the middle. That the races are different, and that protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point. It seems to be the way the game is set up, with clear differences between all 3 races, not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this.
It's the fact toss HAS to micro (if that's what you call it) and zerg CANNOT micro. There should be a balance, not A race plays like THIS, B race plays like THAT and that's the end of the story. Zerg should be able to micro to win battles not rely on protoss mis-microing forcefield. Did you even read the fucking op?
um, he just said exactly what you said.... The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way. Basically if you want to micro you play protoss.
That's not what I am saying. I'm saying both races should be able to micro, not zerg CAN'T micro, and toss MUST micro. Reading, try it some time.
lol are u serious? "The only difference is he said that he likes that the 3 races are different in that way" come on dude, take your own advice.
And I'm saying the 3 races SHOULDN'T BE DIFFERENT IN THAT WAY. How hard is that to understand? how many times do I have to say it?
" protoss can micro more then zerg i dont realy find a valid point." It IS a valid point.
"not just 3 basicly the same races with only different units. i kinda like this." Except it should be this way. Not terran has to hit a mid game timing or lose. Not that protoss has to micro perfectly or lose. And most definitely not that zerg has to HOPE protoss doesn't micro perfectly or lose.
I cannot beleive i have to actually spell this out for you, everyone understands your point.. the 3 races shouldnt be different in that way, the original guy KNEW that they were different in that way and he LIKES IT THAT WAY. You failed to understand what he was saying due to your lack of reading comprehension. The fact you didnt understand after my last post leads me to beleive you are either really young or just very, very dumb.
EPT
Oracle
