EPTCommunity Feedback Update - November 17 - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
redloser
Korea (South)1751 Posts
| ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5225 Posts
That very build changed the way maps had to be designed, because Protoss literally could not hold an open third versus that strategy. Blizzard did nothing effective to help prevent it, it was all map makers. | ||
|
Probe1
United States17920 Posts
On November 18 2016 14:11 BronzeKnee wrote: I find it very ironic that they mentioned Stephanos Roach Max as something that took time to figure it out how to stop. That very build changed the way maps had to be designed, because Protoss literally could not hold an open third versus that strategy. Blizzard did nothing effective to help prevent it, it was all map makers. Well. Now you have keyed in on why I personally am so vocal for community maps. Brood War has been balanced and rebalanced for 10 years without a single balance patch because map makers can alter how effective strategies are. Blizz supporting map makers in 2017 gives me hope that we will have too many vetos for a change instead of not enough. | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland425 Posts
On November 18 2016 04:38 bakemonoda wrote: masters 1 terran eu comment pls make void ray speed buff an upgrade, all ins vs terran feel too strong perhaps give cyclone a bit more anti air damage when you get this +2 range, as banshees, oracles, warp prism very strong versus terran also perhaps give the seige tank jump ability like in nova campaign to dodge biles and blinding cloud as those seem very strong versus mech i feel you are going in the right direction but still not there yet keep it up!!!! Jump ability for Siegetank...And u got masters? My god... | ||
|
SwiftRH
United States105 Posts
| ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
A less harass and gimmick dependant protoss race ! What will we get? Blink DTs, photon overcharge remaining in the game, and adept shades being a gamble ! Meanwhile still no reliable low tech AA for factory. Every single TvX will be a turtle fest where moving out of turret cover is a death sentence. Nice. | ||
|
Couguar
Russian Federation54 Posts
On November 18 2016 15:30 JackONeill wrote: What do we want? A less harass and gimmick dependant protoss race ! I am so tired of reading meaningless words like gimmick. I like photon overcharge. I like my darks to have blink. I like to forcefield ramp and blink up. I dont think gateway units are bad. Why should all of it be called gimmick and claimed to be bad, when its not. | ||
|
Krieg1
14 Posts
On November 18 2016 14:57 SwiftRH wrote: why are people so upset at dt blink seems useless. protoss isnt fun to play anymore thats why u barely see them on ladder. engaging vs libs and lurkers as well as disruptors is annoying. having to base trade everygame in pvt and pvz is tedious. the race design is so poor all this time and there is still no unit besides pheonix can deal with muta, protoss units have acceleration and deceleration and feel clunky and immobile, slow warpin mechanic is irritating, protoss has the hardest time expanding. protoss is also the least consistent race. ive noticed when zerg and terran Koreans play on na server they go like 50-0 because you can beat ur opponent trough sheer skill while toss has to take losses because they have to rely on gimmicky play. Also seems like protoss players dont stay at top of the scene for a long time for the same reason like i cant think of a protoss that had anything close to the kind of consitancy that say innovation or life had. Like i am a crappy masters player and i dont care much about the balance its just really depressing that the race is just not fun to play. Yep same here, its not about winning Or losing, the design is just not fun. | ||
|
ILoveZest
9 Posts
| ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
On November 18 2016 15:47 Couguar wrote: I am so tired of reading meaningless words like gimmick. I like photon overcharge. I like my darks to have blink. I like to forcefield ramp and blink up. I dont think gateway units are bad. Why should all of it be called gimmick and claimed to be bad, when its not. Gimmick has a meaning: "a trick or device intended to attract attention, publicity, or business." It's something flashy which is used to distract from the lack of substance. All of the things you described are gimmicky for various reasons: PO Bright, colorful, powerful sound. (flashy) Distracts from the lack of powerful, mobile early-game units that Protoss can use to defend expansions. Forcefield Bright, *pop* sounds, distinctive look. Distracts from the severe lack of mobility and straight-up (raw auto-attacks with any non-damage-ability micro allowed) fighting power in the mid-game. Gateway units All have abilities (blink must be individually microed to have best effect, adepts must shade to have any mobility, zealots are useless without charge), are tanky, and "control the battle-field" through specific use of those abilities. All lack seriously in the DPS / supply department. If perfectly micro-ed in an open field, gateway units should always lose to equivalent supply of opposing mid-game units, since the opponent always has the edge on damage and can, thus, snipe whatever units he wants while kiting against the rest (adept shade vastly reduced this in LotV if you manage to land your once-in-a-blue-moon shade to prevent kiting -- the fundamental issue still remains, however). So, these things are called gimmicks because they are. Worse, the majority of them have historically had little-to-no counter play and required very little investment (with no alternative for either the Protoss or their opponent). | ||
|
prabuty
Poland26 Posts
I'll try to concentrate on three general concepts that I found in those games (applying to the PvZ match-up in general) and that I find absolutely unacceptable in a good RTS game. 1. Adept play and how it is to be nerfed. Regardless of any mistakes on the part of the players or any balance discussions, there was a game in which Stats had approx. 10 adepts with glaives in 3 mineral lines of Scarlett teleporting them randomly from one base to another. How is that strategy? How is even a zerg player supposed to react to it properly? How is as a caster supposed to explain logically to new viewers that what's going on actually takes skill? There is no way to do so. It's much easier to shade your adepts to a certain location than prevent it as zerg in any fashion. Now this strategy is going to be "nerfed" by shade vision reduction, which is going to detriment the strategical play even further. Actually the only thing I like about adept play in the current state is that it allows you to scout properly such things as protoss base, terran army location, your natural's perimiter, etc. so you can base your future decision on what you actually see. Now you're deprived of the only sensbile strategical element of an adept play, and my understanding thus far has been that the problem with the adept is that it can jump from one location to another doing sick damage and not how much vision it has... 2. Decreasing difference between tier 2 and tier 3 units in light of proposed changes in the new patch. Once the LOTV was released, we received "true" immortals whose dmg absorption barrier had to be nerfed by half because of how crazy it was, and now we're getting "truly feasible" void rays that are not fun to use or play against, but as of now it seems that a player will be better-off massing tier-2 units instead of tier-3 once again. This concept also applies to what I saw in a yesterday's game on Dasan Station. Stats made the "ultimate, capital protoss ship of mass destruction" that died within 1 second after being pulled by a viper so any logical conclusion that a new viewer after learning the unit's name could come to was that there was no point in making in the first instance. Back in 2010, MS was hyped so much as being capable of putting an entire fleet into a black hole or destroying an entire line of ground defenses by flyng over it. I don't want to divert into the topic of game balance here because I believe that there is a general consensus as to the proper in-game balance currently, or making MS super imba by increasing its production cost to 1000/1000 and a build time to 10 minutes (such an idea should have never been totally abandoned imho), but if a unit is supposed to be super cool, it should be super cool or entirely removed. The same principle applies to nerfing broodlords or removing the interceptor release ability from carriers that the positioning of both formed an extremely important strategical element of any significant battle. As compensation we will receive stuff like dt blink, which is making things even worse on so many levels, but first of all, it's killing the strategical spirit of the game. I guess that the majority of SC2 players decided to play the game because they wanted to play a strategy game and bother less about such things as blinking your dt's, which is basically idiotic from the standpoint of strategy knowing that they can be easily chased to death with fast lings with an overseer or die to a turret with a burrowed mine in a mineral field. There are so many other games around in which I can do things similar to blinking my dt's and I believe that I don't need it in an RTS game... 3. Current mid-game in PvZ (in all match-ups?) in reference to proposed changes in the new patch. Now for the game on Frost. Scarlett spawned in the upper-left corner with Stats in the upper-right. PvZ games in such spawns is what hate most. PvZ top-level games for what I've seen recently end with protoss allining after cutting corners (or just dies straightaway as Neeb or Stats did against Dark on Frozen Temple in the group stage or quarterfinals of Blizzcon) in some way because there is no chance for an action-packed middle game. Once zerg has secured full saturation on three bases its production output is exponential compared with protoss's linear. This concept is extremely bad because what if protoss wanted to play it totally differently, i.e. took an early 3rd and relied on his excellent blink micro and forcefields for defense? Now it's extremely difficult to execute and it will be impossible once a ton of new +2 hydras and +10 hp baneling is coming. An argument that Zest killed Byul in a GSL game is not valid due to objective reasons, and the swarm in the hands of someone like Dark will be a totally different story. So again, the potential for some extraordinary play is doomed to failure, and I don't wanna rely in every game on fully charged ht's or something like this to take my 3rd because... IT'S SO FUCKING BORING and I want to be left with some potential to play my own game without having to follow a one and only well trodden PvZ path... | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3532 Posts
Personally I don't think there's much room for DT Blink, except for extreme late game scenarios, where players are so poor that they need 100% cost efficiency. I do however adore the idea behind FF's, Storms, Disruptors, Adept Shade, Blink, Hallucination, Tempest stun, DT's, Stasis Trap and the likes. We don't have enough Protoss players standing up for their race, if Zerg and Terran players design the Protoss race, it will appeal to no one, it will just be whatever you guys like to play against. Protoss players should decide the future of the Protoss race, Protoss players unite! | ||
|
insitelol
845 Posts
On November 18 2016 14:57 SwiftRH wrote: why are people so upset at dt blink seems useless. protoss isnt fun to play anymore thats why u barely see them on ladder. engaging vs libs and lurkers as well as disruptors is annoying. having to base trade everygame in pvt and pvz is tedious. the race design is so poor all this time and there is still no unit besides pheonix can deal with muta, protoss units have acceleration and deceleration and feel clunky and immobile, slow warpin mechanic is irritating, protoss has the hardest time expanding. protoss is also the least consistent race. ive noticed when zerg and terran Koreans play on na server they go like 50-0 because you can beat ur opponent trough sheer skill while toss has to take losses because they have to rely on gimmicky play. Also seems like protoss players dont stay at top of the scene for a long time for the same reason like i cant think of a protoss that had anything close to the kind of consitancy that say innovation or life had. Like i am a crappy masters player and i dont care much about the balance its just really depressing that the race is just not fun to play. Just a matter of prefference. I'm a crappy master myself and i don't find my race boring at all. I play zerg on a masters level as well and i don't see much difference regarding "fun" elements if any. Can't agree with inconsistancy of protoss players. It applies as much to any race player. Look at snute/uthermal/nerchio etc etc. Some games they look almost invincible and then go on a 2-3 month periods of slump. On November 18 2016 19:32 ejozl wrote: You say you don't want gimmicks, but that's why you don't play Protoss. There's something great about having 3 distinct races, people who want fun gimmicky stuff can play Protoss, people who only want straight up games and rely on multitasking, can play Terran. This is a common misleading concept if you ask me. I'm a macro orientated player and pref protoss above all races and do not rely on any gimmick-plays. I can only guess that people don't want to play protoss cause you can be bearly make a come back after mistakes (1 mine blowing the entire mineral line, wasting crusial CD like PO=autoloss, heavy reliance on proper micro etc). | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3532 Posts
| ||
|
KT_Elwood
Germany1177 Posts
The loss of Medivac pick-up seems to have hurt the Siege Tank a bit more than we expected. Oh has it ? Was it because of the 7 Second Psi-storm from the roach or from the "I take no damage because I jsut can shade" unit, or the I take no damage because I teleport, or the I take only one shot, but on 0-0 thats not enough to kill all of us, we are only 1/2 suply and 25 minerals units? That are all supposedly countered by the siege tank. Sieged Drop must go, Siege pickup must stay. Add Weapon speed, not damage. If it should take advantage from its superior range, it should lay down fire in a fashion that is updated to the new pace of the game, wich tends to pump out mobile units faster and advertising dynamic and mobilit<, making an immobile Siege weapon a thing from yesteryear. There is no more fight for Vision with siege Tanks. just stim 20 marines, you replace them in 24 seconds.... | ||
|
MiCroLiFe
Norway275 Posts
| ||
|
Aegwynn
Italy460 Posts
On November 18 2016 20:35 MiCroLiFe wrote: zergs whine about reapers lol? last year only time ive seen terrans winning zergs are whit reapers. get rid of autowinninglisk, thenwe can talk. 1 armor less dont do that much imo So its ok if terran wins only with reapers and keep the win rate at %50? You must be a really fun person. Kelazhur 3-0 Lambo only with reapers, uthermal 3-0 Scarlett only with reapers. So basically we watched 1 series less in both groups. Its only byun guyzz | ||
|
Elentos
55593 Posts
On November 18 2016 20:35 MiCroLiFe wrote: zergs whine about reapers lol? last year only time ive seen terrans winning zergs are whit reapers So you watched like 5 games is what you're saying. | ||
|
Penev
28536 Posts
On November 18 2016 20:11 KT_Elwood wrote: Sieged Drop must go, Siege pickup must stay. yup | ||
|
zyce
United States649 Posts
On a more serious note, there seems to be a deficit of Protoss voices/perspective both in the discussions and the community feedback threads. It's discomfiting, and it seems like they're becoming the whipping boy for other race's frustrations. I'd like to see a more holistic approach to game balance from all sides, particularly Blizzard's. This is just my own, personal observation, nothing scientific nor a comment on balance. Please dont hurt me Zerg/Terran users.  | ||
| ||
