EPTStarCraft II Multiplayer - Major Design Changes - Page 29
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
vult
United States9400 Posts
| ||
|
wiNgiAN
17 Posts
| ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
If warp gates came out later, you could balance protoss for early game, and let warping in units be an option that opens up in the mid-late game. The increased production rate wouldn't create as much imbalance, because as the game goes on you have a lot of gateways anyway. And getting rid of early game warp ins would get rid of a lot of cheese. I'd like to a protoss with good basic units, that can hold their own in a fight and don't rely on gimmicks. | ||
|
jpg06051992
United States580 Posts
On August 30 2017 13:28 Quineotio wrote: I think Warp gate would work better as a late game upgrade. Trying to balance the game around an early upgrade that makes production faster means you can't make the early units as powerful because you can get more of them. Also, being able to warp anywhere means you have to make the units less powerful because you can get them when and where you need them. If warp gates came out later, you could balance protoss for early game, and let warping in units be an option that opens up in the mid-late game. The increased production rate wouldn't create as much imbalance, because as the game goes on you have a lot of gateways anyway. And getting rid of early game warp ins would get rid of a lot of cheese. I'd like to a protoss with good basic units, that can hold their own in a fight and don't rely on gimmicks. This +1, SC2 is dying and Protoss is the least popular race, they need to take chances and do something big like push WG to be an end game upgrade. | ||
|
ThunderJunk
United States711 Posts
On August 30 2017 15:23 jpg06051992 wrote: This +1, SC2 is dying and Protoss is the least popular race, they need to take chances and do something big like push WG to be an end game upgrade. It's actually a good point. Why did they insist on having WG so early in the tech tree? Seems like a random and bad choice day one. | ||
|
JWD[9]
364 Posts
On August 30 2017 16:03 ThunderJunk wrote: It's actually a good point. Why did they insist on having WG so early in the tech tree? Seems like a random and bad choice day one. It fits the theme of protoss. It makes the race unique. It goes against everything we understand about the Desing of RTS games. It is the reason why Protoss needs this defense bandage. If you either move it too late game, or just make it a tradeoff, as in it produces slower than normal gates, you could buff Gateway units and Protoss would'nt need a defensive gimmick. I hope this is something they look into aswell. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
| ||
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
Protoss doesn't need a defensive gimmick because of warpgate. It was just fine in WoL without overcharge. But with added units and changes in HotS and LotV, that wouldn't have sufficed. Warpin is an integral part of SCII Protoss. It isn't going to be removed or altered drastically and that's a good thing. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 30 2017 20:58 Olli wrote: Protoss doesn't need a defensive gimmick because of warpgate. It was just fine in WoL without overcharge. But with added units and changes in HotS and LotV, that wouldn't have sufficed. It wasn't fine in WoL though. 4-Gate was really strong, and warp gates have had multiple changes. It's always been a problem. On August 30 2017 20:58 Olli wrote: You're not going to get Protoss players back to playing the race by screwing with it even more. Slow warpins and pylon overcharge nonsense was already too much. If the changes end up making protoss, and the game, more fun, why wouldn't people come back? Forcefield, MSC, overcharge and arguably adepts are all unpopular and all band-aid solutions to the same problem, which is warp gates. | ||
|
207aicila
1237 Posts
On August 30 2017 20:58 Olli wrote: You're not going to get Protoss players back to playing the race by screwing with it even more. Slow warpins and pylon overcharge nonsense was already too much. Protoss doesn't need a defensive gimmick because of warpgate. It was just fine in WoL without overcharge. But with added units and changes in HotS and LotV, that wouldn't have sufficed. Warpin is an integral part of SCII Protoss. It isn't going to be removed or altered drastically and that's a good thing. Actually depending on who you ask it might be the single biggest design flaw of the entire race and all its matchups. | ||
|
t0ssboy
Bulgaria681 Posts
| ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
On August 30 2017 21:38 207aicila wrote: Actually depending on who you ask it might be the single biggest design flaw of the entire race and all its matchups. He is right though, it will never get changed anyway  | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On August 30 2017 21:35 Quineotio wrote: It wasn't fine in WoL though. 4-Gate was really strong, and warp gates have had multiple changes. It's always been a problem. If the changes end up making protoss, and the game, more fun, why wouldn't people come back? Forcefield, MSC, overcharge and arguably adepts are all unpopular and all band-aid solutions to the same problem, which is warp gates. The 4gate was a problem until 2011, and then it wasn't — because the problem wasn't warpgate itself, but that its chronoboosted research time was far too low. They adjusted it and then it wasn't a problem anymore. As for "making Protoss fun", your definition of that doesn't matter. Fact is more people used to play Protoss, and now they don't. Changing the race further away from the one they used to play in WoL and HotS gives them no incentive to come back, on the contrary. It will drive away the few that still play the race, because they spent years learning a race only to have its very core fundamentals completely changed. Old chronoboost— that's a huge step in the right direction. New one was a horrible idea and I couldn't be happier to see it patched out. The examples you mentioned are poor as well. Adepts had nothing to do with Protoss needing a bandaid solution. In fact, Adepts are an entirely unnecessary unit. They were added for reasons nobody understands. Overcharge didn't exist in WoL and Protoss didn't need it, even though warpgate existed and was even better than it is now (offensive warpins). Overcharge was added to cope with what Blizzard wanted to be a more split up game, where minimal amounts of units would run around and do things (medivac boost, muta buff, etc.). The game around Protoss changed, and Blizzard decided to go with overcharge as the counterbalancing mechanic. It could've been anything else as well, something like shield recharge being tested right now. This whole argument that overcharge is a bandaid to solve warpgate is so stupid. It's just what Blizzard decided to go with. And seriously, who still complains about forcefields? Terran has speed medivacs, Zerg has ravagers. Forcefields aren't an issue anymore, and forcefield-heavy playstyles generally suck. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 30 2017 22:14 Olli wrote: The 4gate was a problem until 2011, and then it wasn't — because the problem wasn't warpgate itself, but that its chronoboosted research time was far too low. They adjusted it and then it wasn't a problem anymore. As for "making Protoss fun", your definition of that doesn't matter. Fact is more people used to play Protoss, and now they don't. Changing the race further away from the one they used to play in WoL and HotS gives them no incentive to come back, on the contrary. It will drive away the few that still play the race, because they spent years learning a race only to have its very core fundamentals completely changed. But hey, old chronoboost will go a long way. New one was a horrible idea and I couldn't be happier to see it patched out. Making the warpgate come out later made it better. I'm just saying they should push it back further, because it's still a problem due to how it compromises protoss early game design. I don't understand how keeping protoss the same will bring people back. Wouldn't those people still be playing if they liked the current design? I take the point on changes turning people away. It sucks to have skills you've honed become redundant. The dev team are between a rock and a hard place, because there are major problems, but major changes bring major disruption. But I think it's worth going through some disruptive periods if that ends up in a better game. The dev team are moving in the right direction in this patch, and I like to think there will be a major patch every year until the game is closer to perfect. But after we see how the removal of the MSC works out, I think another thing worth looking at is warp gates. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
I agree that this patch is a great step in the right direction for Protoss. But I hope they don't touch warpgate—and if they do, they should turn it back to how it was. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 30 2017 22:14 Olli wrote: The examples you mentioned are poor as well. Adepts had nothing to do with Protoss needing a bandaid solution. In fact, Adepts are an entirely unnecessary unit. They were added for reasons nobody understands. Overcharge didn't exist in WoL and Protoss didn't need it, even though warpgate existed and was even better than it is now (offensive warpins). Overcharge was added to cope with what Blizzard wanted to be a more split up game, where minimal amounts of units would run around and do things (medivac boost, muta buff, etc.). The game around Protoss changed, and Blizzard decided to go with overcharge as the counterbalancing mechanic. It could've been anything else as well, something like shield recharge being tested right now. This whole argument that overcharge is a bandaid to solve warpgate is so stupid. It's just what Blizzard decided to go with. And seriously, who still complains about forcefields? Terran has speed medivacs, Zerg has ravagers. Forcefields aren't an issue anymore, and forcefield-heavy playstyles generally suck. Forcefields were put in to give protoss a strong defensive option in lieu of strong units in the early game. I'm not complaining about them in the current game (although I still hate them), I only brought them up to illustrate an example of flawed design caused by warpgates. If you remember in WoL the most common strat was to build lots of sentries to defend early. Overcharge and MSC are in the same boat, in that they give protoss stronger defense in the early game to make up for their weaker units. With adepts I said "arguably", but they are a very strong early game unit. I have other issues with adepts... So in every version of the game, protoss has a powerful defensive options in the early game to make up for weak early game units. And these options (forcefields, overcharge, MSC, arguably adepts) are among the most complained about things in SC2. Which is why I think they're band-aid solutions to the problem of warp gate having too large of an effect on the early game. | ||
|
Quineotio
Australia128 Posts
On August 30 2017 22:42 Olli wrote: A lot of Protoss players left with LotV, because chronoboost is stupid (for now!) and the most important thing in the game is where you put your pylons. That and no aggressive warpin build now works without a robo, which a lot of people did. I don't like the macro mechanics... It's interesting how they keep pushing warp gate back in the tech tree. I think if protoss had better units early, they wouldn't need warp gates to be aggressive. | ||
|
Olli
Austria24422 Posts
On August 30 2017 22:49 Quineotio wrote: Forcefields were put in to give protoss a strong defensive option in lieu of strong units in the early game. I'm not complaining about them in the current game (although I still hate them), I only brought them up to illustrate an example of flawed design caused by warpgates. If you remember in WoL the most common strat was to build lots of sentries to defend early. Overcharge and MSC are in the same boat, in that they give protoss stronger defense in the early game to make up for their weaker units. With adepts I said "arguably", but they are a very strong early game unit. I have other issues with adepts... So in every version of the game, protoss has a powerful defensive options in the early game to make up for weak early game units. And these options (forcefields, overcharge, MSC, arguably adepts) are among the most complained about things in SC2. Which is why I think they're band-aid solutions to the problem of warp gate having too large of an effect on the early game. The problem with that is that people have always complained about everything except the strengths of their own race. When Protoss made sentries people complained about forcefields. When the MSC was introduced they complained that Protoss no longer made sentries. This entire theory is based on the foregone conclusion that warpgate is a problem. It isn't, though. Warpgate is an integral part of how Protoss is designed in SCII, and it's an awesome mechanic that you won't find in any other RTS. So what if that means Protoss needs extra protection early on? These aren't 'bandaid solutions', because warpgate isn't a problem. They're not the most elegant, I agree with that, but they're what Blizzard decided on. I'm glad that they're trying something new for early protection now, but I disagree entirely with the idea that warpgate is an issue. | ||
|
The_Red_Viper
19533 Posts
I don't think we can^^ With that being said it seems clear to me that warpgate is a big problem as a design choice. It is directly attacking the concept of defenders advantage. Especially with the warpprism we saw this time and time again where toss can snowball this advantage. At the same time it most likely made warpgate units worse because you have to balance around this warpin threat. It's basically in the game because it's unique and "cool". Would protoss be more or less fun to play if we remove it? That has to be the question tbh. | ||
|
207aicila
1237 Posts
On August 30 2017 22:52 Quineotio wrote: I don't like the macro mechanics... It's interesting how they keep pushing warp gate back in the tech tree. I think if protoss had better units early, they wouldn't need warp gates to be aggressive. Yeah that's what we've been saying since the very beginning, but Blizzard as always are set in their ways and too stubborn to admit they might have ever made a mistake. Either that or "you don't really want that; trust us you think you do but you don't". And of course if they don't completely nail the razor's edge balance, you end up in situations where Protoss is either completely fucked and can't hold all-ins, or their warp-gate based all-ins are way too strong (see also: 4gate, 6gate/7gate/8gate blink allin, all those adept rushes in early LotV etc.) | ||
| ||
