| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:18 robopork wrote: I think he's just blinded by protoss hate, I wouldn't bother. I just want to say it's pretty silly to not come up with reasonable counter arguments and instead draw the "he hates ... so his opinion is invalid" card. | ||
|
billynasty
United States260 Posts
| ||
|
SuperYo1000
United States880 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:37 SC2Toastie wrote: I just want to say it's pretty silly to not come up with reasonable counter arguments and instead draw the "he hates ... so his opinion is invalid" card. that may be true but gateway units not being able to compete with terran bio is an ancient concept. Its been discussed to death and is pretty much accepted. Its weird to think people would actually argue this still | ||
|
SC2Toastie
Netherlands5725 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:44 SuperYo1000 wrote: that may be true but gateway units not being able to compete with terran bio is an ancient concept. Its been discussed to death and is pretty much accepted. Its weird to think people would actually argue this still Well, IMO (very symplistically) Upgraded + Medivac MMM > Upgraded Gateway units >> Gateway Units >>> Basic MM So there is some merit to it, but the current metagame has MM upgrades out usually before engagements happen. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:18 TheDwf wrote: Don't see what's so gimmicky in that, think of that "Sentry Nexus" as an upgrade like Orbitals or PFs are for CCs. Casting range for Forcefield: same as now, 9. Don't see any map where you couldn't Forcefield the main ramp from that distance. It would work just like now, you select the area and the Forcefield appears. Guardian Shield could have a similar range as well, unchanged AoE. The Hallucination would spawn on top of the Sentry (unchanged). I think probably the max range that Blizzard will seriously consider is 15, because if it's more than that the unit and the target can't fit on the same screen together. | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany15956 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:44 SuperYo1000 wrote: that may be true but gateway units not being able to compete with terran bio is an ancient concept. Its been discussed to death and is pretty much accepted. Its weird to think people would actually argue this still most people who say that gateway units can't compete with bio mean only zealots and stalkers although high templar and archons are also gateway units. if you say zealots and stalkers can't compete with bio (marines, marauder +MEDIVACS) than i agree with you. however zealot archon templar can very well compete with bio if it wasn't for the stupid +shield mine damage. since templars and archons are gateway units, the statement that gateway units can't compete with bio is technically wrong. also it seems weird to say I'm blinded by protoss hate although i support a revert of the +shield damage. | ||
|
Estancia
Korea (South)335 Posts
The gateway units are designed to be shit because of the warp gate. | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:24 Charoisaur wrote: zealots sentrys and stalkers CAN compete with pure bio; once medivacs are added they have to tech out of pure zealot sentry stalker. I already admitted that i think it's bad that protoss has to tech to collossi that early, but this is mainly caused by the stupid +shield damage on widow mines, otherwise templar openings would be viable and toss could compete in the midgame with pure gateway units again. (high templar are a gateway unit). yeah I think this is what people aren't understanding, medivacs are a tier 3 support unit. It would be stupid if plain zealots etc. could beat that comp. Maybe part of the problem is that if you look at the tech paths needed, terran has it a lot easier in terms of building costs and time. Barracks -> factory -> starport. Protoss has an extra step: gateway -> cycore ->robo/twilight -> bay/archives. And then if you look at the total cost of upgrades, terran is 250/250 for stimpak/shields/shells, whereas protoss needs WAY more. Thermal lance 200/200, zealot charge 200/200, blink 150/150, psi storm 200/200. On top of that, you need time for sentries/templar to charge up their energy. I think all this causes considerable delays in protoss being able to push out early on which leads to turtling, the most boring of starcraft playstyles. | ||
|
Ouija
United States129 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:28 Decendos wrote: gateway units arent weak. we see blinkstalker and chargelot in both PvT and PvZ basically every mid and lategame. its just before blink and charge both are weak because they suck in an open field without the needed mobility and protection vs surrounds. problem is that earlier blink is too strong as seen many times (1 base blink all ins with MSC giving vision was so OP). Oh I didn't know just because the units are built that makes them good. Trust me, if it was actually possible to not use gateway units and build a pure colossus templar army with air every game then that is what would happen. Gateway units are the core of the protoss army whether you or anyone else likes it or not. Mass zealots have to be built late game to act as what many have said multiple times a MEAT SHIELD. Not a unit that actually does good damage because chargelots get 1 hit when they charge and then they are kited until they charge again. PvZ is a way different story, but for PvT stalker are used for nothing more than to snipe vikings and medivacs. Why is that?? I'll tell you the answer. It is because stalkers can't fight marines and marauders. | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3380 Posts
However Sentry/WarpGate are things I hold very dearly and is actually one of the reasons I enjoy playing Protoss. | ||
|
hariooo
Canada2830 Posts
We've already gone from "we stick to new ideas because old ideas are bad because they're old" to "yeah Lurkers were great so they're back" so can Blizzard just pick the best unit designs from BW and bring them back already? Also this complaint about balancing the amount of micro needed in every is absurd. Forcing your opponent into situations where they are at a disadvantage in control has been part of the game since forever. | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
Without fusing of roles, we probably won't be able to get the number down, but what we can do is make a path through Templar like people have been pointing out. I was thinking of some unit that is very strong but dilutes the imapct of DPS density. Fresh out the box from Twilight with no need for upgrades or any of that crap, mineral heavy. And what's his MO? Like an AoE KB of sorts. The KB can wreck Lings but not Roaches. The KB can split Marine packs. This also disincentivizes the focus on AoE dps on both sides and more on stuff like Voids/Carriers/Phoenix/Stalkers. Should be fast and tanky but do little damage so its focus is disrupt and annoy. Can be used for mineral harass with the same KB. Reducing the gimmickiness of Gateway can only be accomplished by tweaking Zealot/Stalker/Sentry themselves. I do like the Dark Archon idea for the unit design, combined with Dark Templar being unlocked at Templar archives, since tech timings have been destroyed by 12 worker start. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:54 Charoisaur wrote: most people who say that gateway units can't compete with bio mean only zealots and stalkers although high templar and archons are also gateway units. if you say zealots and stalkers can't compete with bio (marines, marauder +MEDIVACS) than i agree with you. however zealot archon templar can very well compete with bio if it wasn't for the stupid +shield mine damage. since templars and archons are gateway units, the statement that gateway units can't compete with bio is technically wrong. also it seems weird to say I'm blinded by protoss hate although i support a revert of the +shield damage. Ghosts are also bio, feel free to include them if you're going to include high templar. As for zealot archon, it's a midgame strategy, and one that doesn't really work anymore anyway. It gets crushed if terran just waits for critical mass and a few extra medivacs, and EMP solves all of your gateway problems. It's irrelevant anyway, all this bio vs. gateway stuff is just a nonsense discussion anyway. What compositions do and do not work is irrelevant to a balance discussion, only the timings of them matter. Since Protoss doesn't go pure gateway and terran doesn't go pure barracks, I don't even know why this discussion is happening. | ||
|
robopork
United States511 Posts
On December 19 2014 03:37 SC2Toastie wrote: I just want to say it's pretty silly to not come up with reasonable counter arguments and instead draw the "he hates ... so his opinion is invalid" card. Fair enough, you're right. In the context of the argument I thought Ouija hit the big points, but I'll throw something in. The relationship between the tech and the lower tier units bothers me. A Terran army seems to be a core of marines and marauders supported by medivacs/vikings/mines/ghosts, a protoss army plays like a core of colossi/Templar/archons supported by zealots/stalkers/sentries. What I want to see is a protoss army that scales more smoothly into the midgame, and late game units that are toned down to compensate. Especially if we're expected to expand beyond three bases before 15 minutes. And as a little extra, comparing the cost efficiency of marines and marauders to the cost efficiency of zealots, stalkers, and sentries is a little whacky to begin with given that pretty much all the muscle comes from the sentry, and they can run out of ff's. Marines and Marauders don't run out of bullets. And even if he wants to believe that gateway units can contend with bio, in a vacuum, I think most of us can agree making protoss less top heavy makes the game more fun. Edit: I lost track of who was talking. | ||
|
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
On December 19 2014 04:17 Ouija wrote: Oh I didn't know just because the units are built that makes them good. Trust me, if it was actually possible to not use gateway units and build a pure colossus templar army with air every game then that is what would happen. Gateway units are the core of the protoss army whether you or anyone else likes it or not. Mass zealots have to be built late game to act as what many have said multiple times a MEAT SHIELD. Not a unit that actually does good damage because chargelots get 1 hit when they charge and then they are kited until they charge again. PvZ is a way different story, but for PvT stalker are used for nothing more than to snipe vikings and medivacs. Why is that?? I'll tell you the answer. It is because stalkers can't fight marines and marauders. ??? so they have their role, you just dont like it? i mean try fighting marines without 10000 banelings as Z...you cant...or fight MMM with roaches....again you cant (at least not once you reach 150+ supply of MMM). thats MMM being too strong, not gateway or roach ling being too weak. if you want to talk weak, lets talk about hydras.... imo they need to tone down MMM strenght in LotV while buffing other T stuff like BCs which they finally do. | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On December 19 2014 04:48 Whitewing wrote: As for zealot archon, it's a midgame strategy, and one that doesn't really work anymore anyway. It gets crushed if terran just waits for critical mass and a few extra medivacs, and EMP solves all of your gateway problems. It's irrelevant anyway, all this bio vs. gateway stuff is just a nonsense discussion anyway. What compositions do and do not work is irrelevant to a balance discussion, only the timings of them matter. Since Protoss doesn't go pure gateway and terran doesn't go pure barracks, I don't even know why this discussion is happening. It's not just a balance discussion, it's about fun gameplay and game design. Having an entire tech path be effectively dead is not good game design. Maybe some people don't like being forced into building colossus every game as their major tech choice? I don't find A-moving colossus to be a fun playstyle and I want an alternative. And as a zerg player I think games would be more interesting if protoss could be active on the map throughout the game rather than conceding dominance until they've reached their deathball/all-in timing. | ||
|
Ouija
United States129 Posts
On December 19 2014 04:51 Decendos wrote: ??? so they have their role, you just dont like it? i mean try fighting marines without 10000 banelings as Z...you cant...or fight MMM with roaches....again you cant (at least not once you reach 150+ supply of MMM). thats MMM being too strong, not gateway or roach ling being too weak. if you want to talk weak, lets talk about hydras.... imo they need to tone down MMM strenght in LotV while buffing other T stuff like BCs which they finally do. Well that's like the same thing i'm saying... You think bio is too strong, which I agree with. I just think buffing gateway units would be a better option, because then protoss can become less reliant upon big splash damage. Where as you think that bio should just be nerfed ( which I wouldn't mind either ), in which case gateway units can stay as is. For terran and zerg though, what I was trying to point out is that their core units are capable of fighting each other and trading. And this is true for PvZ as well. But PvT is really the only match up where those units cant fight each other and trade somewhat decent. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7031 Posts
On December 19 2014 05:14 BaronVonOwn wrote: It's not just a balance discussion, it's about fun gameplay and game design. Having an entire tech path be effectively dead is not good game design. Maybe some people don't like being forced into building colossus every game as their major tech choice? I don't find A-moving colossus to be a fun playstyle and I want an alternative. And as a zerg player I think games would be more interesting if protoss could be active on the map throughout the game rather than conceding dominance until they've reached their deathball/all-in timing. High templar and archons are used in virtually every game? I don't think you can make a case that there is "an entire tech path [which is] effectively dead". | ||
|
MarlieChurphy
United States2063 Posts
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=7e0_1418890798 | ||
|
BaronVonOwn
299 Posts
On December 19 2014 05:33 Grumbels wrote: High templar and archons are used in virtually every game? I don't think you can make a case that there is "an entire tech path [which is] effectively dead". yeah they are tacked on to a colossus based army if it fails to do the job after the first couple fights. Are you purposefully not seeing the point? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Wardi Open
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV European League
Online Event
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
Sparkling Tuna Cup
|
|
|
EPT
