|
United Kingdom36161 Posts
On February 18 2015 21:55 The_Red_Viper wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 21:42 Dingodile wrote:
30supply vs 30supply fights are great and entertaining to watch/play. 120 vs 120 are utterly boring because they take same or less! amount of time to end the fight. Upgrades scales have a big issue! Example: Roach vs Roach
0-0 Roach needs 10 shots to kill a 0-0 Roach.
3-3 Roach needs 9 shots to kill a 3-3 Roach. That wouldn't be a big deal if there wouldn't be any blobs. I am actually not sure how smart units in sc2 target stuff when amoving, do they waste shots or do they target pretty efficiently?
it depends on the type of unit, marines don't waste shots, stalkers do, for example
|
On February 18 2015 22:13 marvellosity wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 21:55 The_Red_Viper wrote:On February 18 2015 21:42 Dingodile wrote:
30supply vs 30supply fights are great and entertaining to watch/play. 120 vs 120 are utterly boring because they take same or less! amount of time to end the fight. Upgrades scales have a big issue! Example: Roach vs Roach
0-0 Roach needs 10 shots to kill a 0-0 Roach.
3-3 Roach needs 9 shots to kill a 3-3 Roach. That wouldn't be a big deal if there wouldn't be any blobs. I am actually not sure how smart units in sc2 target stuff when amoving, do they waste shots or do they target pretty efficiently? it depends on the type of unit, marines don't waste shots, stalkers do, for example
Yeah makes sense, that's at least something right :D
I still hope Blizzard will try a different pathing, something like the starbow one would be already a nice step
|
Warpgate being flat out better than Gateways is what limits a lot of Protoss potential. Nerfing warp-in isn't the way to go. To make the race more diverse, Gateways have to be the main production facility (being faster, thus more economical). Warpgates should come with a drawback (longer total production time, for example).
This does NOT remove Warpgate from the game. What it does do, however, is make Protoss all-ins considerably weaker as time goes on. We can balance the units taking reinforcement time into account, which gives space for Gateway units to be buffed. Protoss can then decide to go for one large surge of units ONCE, but the prolonged all in is weaker.
Additionally, this allows changing or removal of Photon Overcharge (both PvP and PvT) and Forcefield as the Protoss army itself can be much stronger without relying on building walls and poorly designed spells.
The main argument against buffing Gateway Tech (preferably buff Gateway production speed only when Warpgate Research is done, as to not force nerfs to gateway units in early game) is that "Warpgate is a core mechanic of Protoss and it's cool and fun". Well. Warpgate doesn't leave, but now, teleporting your units all the way across the map comes at a cost instead of being the preferable way to go at all times. Additionally, it forces Protoss to position well to defend against Drops and Mutalisk AND allows slight nerfs to Emergency Chargers and Mutalisk. As a last bonus, it really weakens the prolonged Warp Prism Warp In harassment that abuses the Zerg main ramp or Terran Production Mechanics.
Lategame, it's as if nothing changed. Protoss can now afford the additional Mineral cost of building extra Warpgates to compensate for the longer production time.
To summarize:
Once Warpgate Research is completed, Gateways are still the faster/more effective way to produce units. Getting the ability to teleport comes at the cost of a significantly longer Warpgate cooldown.
Overall: Gateway units can be buffed to account for much longer reinforcement time and not being teleportable at no cost.
Early Game: Room to remove Overcharge (Defenders Advantage for Protoss). Protoss units are slightly stronger. Possible changes to Forcefields (HP/Time reduction) because Gateway Tech trades more efficiently now.
Mid Game: Room to nerf Emergency Boosters and Mutalisk, Protoss can now split the army up much better to accommodate the new more spread-out economy, doesn't rely on Collosi/HT tech as much.
Late Game: Protoss can decide to compensate for this change by building a couple additional Warp Gates to compensate for the longer cooldown.
Additional Gateway Tech ideas:
A stronger fighter (DRAGOON PLZ) and change the Stalker to be even more about mobility and harassment! And change Charge to a Movement Speed Boost. TADAM. Fixed Race ^_^
In all seriousness, please let me know what you think of this 
TLDR
Change Warpgate to have a significantly longer cooldown than Gateways. This allows for buffing to Gateway Tech (defenders advantage becomes a thing). Warpgate can be used for it's frontloadedness, but prolonged all ins lose longevity. Better gateway units allow for nerfs to Medivac Boosters/Mutalisk and allow the army to fight when split up. Lategame, building more Warpgates compensates for the longer production time. Protoss doesn't lose it's "core/fun/cool/racedefining" mechanic but it isn't a brainless decision.
|
This discussion about protoss warpgate mecanism being one of the major problems of sc2 is so right, but so WOL beta too . Guys this has been discussed for years now, blizzard kept saying they wouldn't do anything regarding this subject, and nothing was announced for lotv. For myself I just lost faith, we will keep seeing ugly things like corruptors/vikings hard countering colossus and being useless afterward, ridiculous mass CC/mules late game, insta zerg maxout or the so called 300/200 zerg pop, and the never dying 4 gates allins...
|
On February 19 2015 01:48 tamino wrote:This discussion about protoss warpgate mecanism being one of the major problems of sc2 is so right, but so WOL beta too . Guys this has been discussed for years now, blizzard kept saying they wouldn't do anything regarding this subject, and nothing was announced for lotv. For myself I just lost faith, we well keep seeing ugly things like corruptors/vikings hard countering colossus and being useless afterward, ridiculous mass CC/mules late game, insta zerg maxout or the so called 300/200 zerg pop, and the never dying 4 gates allins...
Yea! Those 4 Gate all-ins! So problematic! What year are we in?
|
On February 19 2015 01:54 ZAiNs wrote:
Yea! Those 4 Gate all-ins! So problematic! What year are we in?
Of course its not like its a big damn issue like in the old days, but it's still a viable build with some adjustments made and I find it so ridiculous... But agreed you dont see it often anymore on pro level. Its just funny such a no brain build (not no skill, but no brain) is still around after such a long time. Obviously it wasnt the main part of my post, but it is heavily related to warp gate, and look at how many changes were needed to try to solve it .
And I play protoss.
|
Someone on reddit brought up an interesting idea. Would there be any room for new buildings in LotV? The tech tree as far as we know has been untouched.
|
On February 19 2015 02:12 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Someone on reddit brought up an interesting idea. Would there be any room for new buildings in LotV? The tech tree as far as we know has been untouched.
Well, the Lurker Den or whatever they'll call it will be a new building, won't it?
|
I like where LotV is going now. I wasn't that impressed about what they showed at the beginning. I think the changes are good.The new Protoss unit sounds interesting aswell.
|
On February 17 2015 15:40 jinjin5000 wrote:
It seems to be LotV is heading towards more moba-like micro centric units rather than overall macro and strats.
That isn't bad but it sure feels like it.
If this is the case then its a good thing, but please do not compare micro to MOBA. Its an insult. If SC2 was WC3 just with a higher unit cap, then game would have been amazing.
|
On February 19 2015 00:52 SC2Toastie wrote:
TLDR
Change Warpgate to have a significantly longer cooldown than Gateways. This allows for buffing to Gateway Tech (defenders advantage becomes a thing). Warpgate can be used for it's frontloadedness, but prolonged all ins lose longevity. Better gateway units allow for nerfs to Medivac Boosters/Mutalisk and allow the army to fight when split up. Lategame, building more Warpgates compensates for the longer production time. Protoss doesn't lose it's "core/fun/cool/racedefining" mechanic but it isn't a brainless decision.
I still completely disagree that warping in is the core/fun/cool/racedefining mechanic. The only reason people feel that way is, like you said, it's practically an upgrade protoss HAS to get to win reliably. It's just something so essential and important for Protoss that people FEEL it's what defines protoss, but the matter of fact is Protoss didn't need that to feel like Protoss in Brood War, and it's not what people talk about when you ask them "what is Protoss?". I sadly don't have a questionnaire right now for that, but whenever I talk about Protoss with people the consensus is "lasers, technology, psy abilities, stronger but fewer units, lots of micro potential for each individual unit". Depending on skill level of the player it's a litle different, but those are the most mentioned things.
I think that our thinking of "What defines a race?", or rather Blizzard's thinking of it, is what prevents most of the changes. In Blizzard's eye, Protoss is the warping in oneway race, Zerg is the free unit race that needs creep to win, and Terran is the race that sits on front of the enemy's base shooting stuff 24/7. Thats not a very fun way of defining the races.
(Note: That is my interpretation of their definitions, but things like "free units" are what Browder talks about when he talks about whether or not something feels "Zergy")
As someone looking at Lore and Brood War mainly, neither Swarm Hosts nor Brood Lords feely zergy to me. Lurkers do, and Mutalisks, Zerglings and Banelings feel very zergy. Those are the kind of units I talk about when people ask me "so what does Zerg have?".
So I think we're stuck with these weird race-definitions that are completely flawed and seem to lead the design team into a mostly wrong direction. It's surprising that they didn't think of another "free units"-unit for zerg. Maybe a Swarm Host Host. Free Units are zergy, right?
|
I might want removal of attack and armor upgrades for LotV. It's a really archaic mechanic that's seemingly never questioned, but what specifically does it add to the game outside of possibly undesirable complexity?
|
To be fair, I do think free units feel pretty zergy, but free units have so many bad design implications that I find the game much better off without them. You can bring out the zerg feel without shoehorning a free unit ability on them, and I'm hoping Blizzard realizes that and cuts down on the abilities that do so.
I fully agree on the warp gate thing though. Protoss have gone 10+ years in SC1/BW just fine without warpgates, and never needed them to feel protoss. In all honesty, I dislike warpgates because they actually weaken what I feel is the number one defining feature of the protoss, which is that they're the "high tech, very powerful but expensive" race. Gateway units don't trade well at all unless backed up by silly abilities and warp-in as a crutch, which to me doesn't feel "very powerful" at all.
|
On February 19 2015 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
I might want removal of attack and armor upgrades for LotV. It's a really archaic mechanic that's seemingly never questioned, but what specifically does it add to the game outside of possibly undesirable complexity?
Generally it allows people that, for whatever reason, have less or the same economy as the opponent to still get a better army . Example is that if Protoss can't get a third, that cuts into his general unit production a lot. By investing a few resources into upgrades he compensates for that a bit.
They also create a new type of timing attack that would otherwise not exist(same production as before, just better units; usually it's just new production buildings -> first wave of units).
It also creates a mechanic to have "the same, but better" units in mirror matches.
Upgrades are an important thing, imho.
|
On February 19 2015 02:59 Spawkuring wrote:
To be fair, I do think free units feel pretty zergy, but free units have so many bad design implications that I find the game much better off without them. You can bring out the zerg feel without shoehorning a free unit ability on them, and I'm hoping Blizzard realizes that and cuts down on the abilities that do so.
I fully agree on the warp gate thing though. Protoss have gone 10+ years in SC1/BW just fine without warpgates, and never needed them to feel protoss. In all honesty, I dislike warpgates because they actually weaken what I feel is the number one defining feature of the protoss, which is that they're the "high tech, very powerful but expensive" race. Gateway units don't trade well at all unless backed up by silly abilities and warp-in as a crutch, which to me doesn't feel "very powerful" at all.
This so much. Because of Warpgates, Protoss units feel like a crystal canon instead of powerful, high-tech units.
|
On February 19 2015 02:15 OtherWorld wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 02:12 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:
Someone on reddit brought up an interesting idea. Would there be any room for new buildings in LotV? The tech tree as far as we know has been untouched. Well, the Lurker Den or whatever they'll call it will be a new building, won't it?
Arguably I guess. Come to think of it, this would mean that the Lurker upgrade isn't absolutely permanent so that sniping the Lurker Den would force a player to start over from a Hydra Den. That's definitely a departure from Brood War.
|
On February 18 2015 14:24 Estancia wrote:
- Buff gateway units
- Remove forcefield
- Rework warp gate
Congrats, you just solved the entire protoss early game bullshit all-ins and stuff.
How about making Warp Gate warp in units w/o shields at all, sounds like it would partially solve the problem of strong All-ins* and it sure is less clunky than that "takes double dmg during warp-in cycle"-"solution"
* as after being warped in 5-10 seconds before entering a fight (=close warp-inpylon) Units would still have ~40 less shields aka 25-33% less hp when compared to waiting/producing normally.
It would need around 25-30 seconds to regen to full shields for most GW-units, which is abit less time than walking across the map.
|
On February 19 2015 03:00 KeksX wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 02:57 Grumbels wrote:
I might want removal of attack and armor upgrades for LotV. It's a really archaic mechanic that's seemingly never questioned, but what specifically does it add to the game outside of possibly undesirable complexity? Generally it allows people that, for whatever reason, have less or the same economy as the opponent to still get a better army . Example is that if Protoss can't get a third, that cuts into his general unit production a lot. By investing a few resources into upgrades he compensates for that a bit. They also create a new type of timing attack that would otherwise not exist(same production as before, just better units; usually it's just new production buildings -> first wave of units). It also creates a mechanic to have "the same, but better" units in mirror matches. Upgrades are an important thing, imho.
But generic plus-attack upgrades just seem lazy. They more strongly force you into certain tech paths (might be necessary for zerg though) and they make timings inscrutable, especially for new players that have to wonder about the paltry performances of their armies. They also add kinda pointless buildings to the game and they don't seem that inspiring in terms of effect, especially next to upgrades like metabolic boost or combat shield that have visually obvious impacts. It strikes me as the kind of mechanic that clearly dates to the origins of rts games, and just like single-building selection and such it has had its place but should probably be replaced by something that has the same beneficial effects but which is more specifically tailored to modern day expectations.
I also think that strategic complexity is a double-edged sword in SC2 since it's so difficult to recover from a deficit based on picking the wrong build order, which is mostly something you deal with in-between games, so it's not as fun. Personally I associate upgrades with that kind of thinking, but I'll admit I can't tell precisely. Anyhow, it seems like a worthwhile idea to test, imo.
|
|
|
Heh, looks like they're already about to drop the idea of slowing down attack speed. No surprise as that was a dumb idea in the first place.
Still pretty annoying that they won't tweak unit pathing. I can guarantee that whatever pathing change they tested out in the past was half-assed and didn't address what people want anyway. Not to mention that addressing unit clumping isn't some panacea that will solve all of SC2's problems. It's just one of the many factors that need to be addressed to stop deathballing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
