|
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On March 20 2019 18:04 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 17:55 xongnox wrote: In fact it adds a fine line of strategic depth in 1 games on 500 or so.
I get that it is very annoying when you face a terran doing that, but eh it's like 1000 other things in this game, race are asymmetrically annoying to opponent. Unborrowed spores under the BL army are annoying too.
But if we want to improve the game and the experience for the vast majority of players (and watchers ), we probably should focus in other things that are really happening often and really ruin the experience, like getting rid of the photon rush (something as simple as forge requiring cyber would do it)
We're going in circles. The idea that " it's an issue but let's not fix it, cuz there are other bigger problems out there" is so silly. it would take 2 lines of codes to solve this. There are any number of ways that it could be done, several have been suggested, that would have 0 impact on actual balance and normal game-play, but would solve the odd scenario that happens once in a few hundred games in pro play, and would be a Quality-of-life improvement for your average ladder player, not only to reduce the forced draws but also by discouraging/ nerfing the grieving potential of terran players. This is not a balance issue, a change isnt indicated because let's say TvZ is 52%-48% in favor of terran, and let's attempt to fix it by this, NO. This would have virtually 0 impact on the overall state of balance in the matchups, it's about eliminating a rarely used, but stupid and very annoying mechanic. It can always be balanced by maps, ezpz. This would help to not park drops behind mineral lines in untouchable positions. It would help with clearing immortal overlords/observers too.
|
On March 20 2019 18:17 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 18:04 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 17:55 xongnox wrote: In fact it adds a fine line of strategic depth in 1 games on 500 or so.
I get that it is very annoying when you face a terran doing that, but eh it's like 1000 other things in this game, race are asymmetrically annoying to opponent. Unborrowed spores under the BL army are annoying too.
But if we want to improve the game and the experience for the vast majority of players (and watchers ), we probably should focus in other things that are really happening often and really ruin the experience, like getting rid of the photon rush (something as simple as forge requiring cyber would do it)
We're going in circles. The idea that " it's an issue but let's not fix it, cuz there are other bigger problems out there" is so silly. it would take 2 lines of codes to solve this. There are any number of ways that it could be done, several have been suggested, that would have 0 impact on actual balance and normal game-play, but would solve the odd scenario that happens once in a few hundred games in pro play, and would be a Quality-of-life improvement for your average ladder player, not only to reduce the forced draws but also by discouraging/ nerfing the grieving potential of terran players. This is not a balance issue, a change isnt indicated because let's say TvZ is 52%-48% in favor of terran, and let's attempt to fix it by this, NO. This would have virtually 0 impact on the overall state of balance in the matchups, it's about eliminating a rarely used, but stupid and very annoying mechanic. It can always be balanced by maps, ezpz. This would help to not park drops behind mineral lines in untouchable positions. It would help with clearing immortal overlords/observers too. It could be, yes. But which one is easier, impose a rule on mapmakers, and keep verifying whether the new maps/ new versions of maps fully comply with the rule, OR put in those couple lines of code and be done with it once and forever? Occam's razor and all that....
|
On March 20 2019 18:04 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 17:55 xongnox wrote: In fact it adds a fine line of strategic depth in 1 games on 500 or so.
I get that it is very annoying when you face a terran doing that, but eh it's like 1000 other things in this game, race are asymmetrically annoying to opponent. Unborrowed spores under the BL army are annoying too.
But if we want to improve the game and the experience for the vast majority of players (and watchers ), we probably should focus in other things that are really happening often and really ruin the experience, like getting rid of the photon rush (something as simple as forge requiring cyber would do it)
We're going in circles. The idea that " it's an issue but let's not fix it, cuz there are other bigger problems out there" is so silly. it would take 2 lines of codes to solve this. First, you fail to acknowledge at least two knows factors :
-Blizzard's time to do "simple things" (and the quantity of apparently unrelated bugs they add by doing anything) that take "2 lines of code".
-The limited mental pressure, we, as a community of players, have on blizzard. If everyone focus in this "issue" and complain round the clock about it, maybe they will do it in 1 year, while doing nothing else during this time. For historic illustration thinks about "We Want LAN" ! That needed years of complaints and scandals to find a semi-decent solution (that require "5 lines of code" : launch the game motor with players input from the replay, like in replay mode, then switch to live mode from this state of the game )
Second, you read me bad. I didn't knowledge this as an issue, but a fine line of strategic depth, this subtle and fine mechanic is a cool feature, which gave us epic historical games.
|
On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end.
I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game.
On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races.
Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics.
|
Netherlands201 Posts
I feel that Terran has no permanently cloaked units, zerg has burrow and protoss has DT to win the lategame basetrade. It's very a-symmetrical and floating to create a draw, while destroying the nexi and probes is very strategic if you are behind. In the same way when you make DT's and snipe orbitals, but thats just my opninion, and yes i'm terran and yes it does happen that you get a draw like that.
|
On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. Show nested quote +On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done.
2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it.
Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important.
There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data.
The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell.
Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups.
|
On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote: Conclusion> One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups.
Why is it not fine? And yes I read all your post and still couldn't find anything except repeating it is not fine.
I really don't like people here basing their entire posts on the assumption that it is a problem. Because it really is not or at least debatable. I also do enjoy watching draw games the most and it is an interesting feature of the game.
|
On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups.
Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced
|
On March 20 2019 22:31 Argonauta wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups. Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host. I just find it really strange to think of locusts/broodling as free, without taking into consideration that it is made by another unit which costs money, requires tech and can be killed, and does nothing aside from spawning the "free-unit" that carries out the attack.
It's like saying that ghosts can cast spells for free, because energy doesnt cost minerals/gas. EDIT> but this is completely off-topic discussion, not relevant to the point i was making one way or another. It's a unit (pair of units) used for attack or defence, with the aim of killing off the enemy, and not to force a draw.
|
Dno if this was suggested, but they could make it so that when the text comes up that says Stalemate detected, it also reads that flying buildings will run out of fuel before the game ends. So that when the 5 minutes have run out, Terran flying buildings instantly die and thereafter the game ends, in either a draw, or victory. This way it literally only affects games that would end in draw only because of a few flying Terran buildings. Also the scenario where flying buildings causes draws, is only one where no mining can be done, since otherwise the other player would be eventually able to get air units, or the Terran would eventually be able to build something.
I'm not saying I'm for or against it, there's some cool strategy that could be lost, but maybe it would be for the better?, similar to the 12 worker start.
|
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On March 20 2019 22:48 Geo.Rion wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 22:31 Argonauta wrote:On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups. Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host. I just find it really strange to think of locusts/broodling as free, without taking into consideration that it is made by another unit which costs money, requires tech and can be killed. It's like saying that ghosts can cast spells for free, because energy doesnt cost minerals/gas. There's not price tag on locusts. First wave costs the price of the SH and then? With every wave you're lowering the price of the wave, in the end they become free. At the same time literally everything else(except brood lings ) costs energy OR material. From the SC2 perspective locusts are free as they don't cost energy or material.
Just giving my view, but how that's gonna solve draws with Terrans in the air
|
On March 20 2019 11:37 Ben... wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 09:06 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 07:47 Ben... wrote:On March 20 2019 04:44 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:41 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 04:38 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:28 hg2g2 wrote:On March 20 2019 04:11 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 03:50 hg2g2 wrote:On March 20 2019 03:34 Charoisaur wrote: [quote] I don't see the difference
Buidlings are Win conditions. Units are not. Only Terran can make their opponents Win condition inaccessible without the need for their own units (Protoss needing a deathball or DTs to defend their nexus is not the same as a flying Nexus in a corner that marines couldn't even shoot). There is no offense, there is no defense. The King is simply not on the board. you can also force draws by building cannons/spines when the opponent doesn't have enough units to kill them. then they also force draws without the need for their own units. That's a draw because they are not willing to engage, not because they are incapable of engaging, the player offering the draw is at risk of losing, the other player could theoretically attempt it if said static D couldn't win them the game if they lost and the draw becomes apparent regardless of agreements. Not having enough units isn't the same as having units, even more than enough units, that are prevented from engaging in any way. That's really nit-picking here. If you have 1 Zealot vs 20 Spines it's really not a "choice" to engage or not. On March 20 2019 04:38 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 02:31 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 02:11 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 02:03 Charoisaur wrote: [quote] otherwise be lost? why? If the opponent does not have the ability to kill the buildings why should he deserve to win?
because the other 2 races flat out would lose in similar position. Now if you think Terran deserves this bonus, fine, each to his own, but dont pretend you dont understand why people find this a problem. If a Protoss has nothing left except DTs and the opponent has no detection he wins. Unfair? Lol, no? That's not how this game works? You don't have to kill those DTs to win. The win condition is to destroy the buildings. and if you're incapable of doing that because the buildings are protected by DTs? That is when you write 'gg' and leave. Except if you are Terran, then you can lift your building, fly to the corner and go for a beer with your buddies with NO RISK of losing if opponent doesn't have air. Ah I get it. Only Protoss is allowed to win/draw a game they should have lost. I mean, it's obvious you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually care about how people respond, but your argument is absolutely horrid. If a base trade occurs and the opponent has a better equipped army to deal with the scenario, then they have won fair and square. It's no different than a zerg taking out all detection from an opponent and surrounding their last hatchery with lurkers or something. They made a strategic choice that won them the game because now the onus is on the opponent to attack or leave the game. The person with the worse army is the one who has to make something happen in these scenarios. Ah so we agree then. But why do you think a Zerg/Toss with no flying unit is better equipped to deal with the baserace then the terran? It's the exact same situation. Thank you for proving my point that you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually want to discuss the topic at hand. Why even bother posting in this thread if all you are going to do is argue against win conditions that don't exist and deliberately ignore what people are saying about the actual topic at hand. Everyone who disagrees with Ben... is arguing in bad faith guys, heard it here first! Why post in a forum if you're not up for discussion? This joke thread doesn't deserve any responses tbh, not sure why I even bothered.
|
On March 20 2019 23:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 11:37 Ben... wrote:On March 20 2019 09:06 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 07:47 Ben... wrote:On March 20 2019 04:44 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:41 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 04:38 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:28 hg2g2 wrote:On March 20 2019 04:11 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 03:50 hg2g2 wrote: [quote]
Buidlings are Win conditions. Units are not. Only Terran can make their opponents Win condition inaccessible without the need for their own units (Protoss needing a deathball or DTs to defend their nexus is not the same as a flying Nexus in a corner that marines couldn't even shoot). There is no offense, there is no defense. The King is simply not on the board. you can also force draws by building cannons/spines when the opponent doesn't have enough units to kill them. then they also force draws without the need for their own units. That's a draw because they are not willing to engage, not because they are incapable of engaging, the player offering the draw is at risk of losing, the other player could theoretically attempt it if said static D couldn't win them the game if they lost and the draw becomes apparent regardless of agreements. Not having enough units isn't the same as having units, even more than enough units, that are prevented from engaging in any way. That's really nit-picking here. If you have 1 Zealot vs 20 Spines it's really not a "choice" to engage or not. On March 20 2019 04:38 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 02:31 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 02:11 Geo.Rion wrote: [quote] because the other 2 races flat out would lose in similar position.
Now if you think Terran deserves this bonus, fine, each to his own, but dont pretend you dont understand why people find this a problem. If a Protoss has nothing left except DTs and the opponent has no detection he wins. Unfair? Lol, no? That's not how this game works? You don't have to kill those DTs to win. The win condition is to destroy the buildings. and if you're incapable of doing that because the buildings are protected by DTs? That is when you write 'gg' and leave. Except if you are Terran, then you can lift your building, fly to the corner and go for a beer with your buddies with NO RISK of losing if opponent doesn't have air. Ah I get it. Only Protoss is allowed to win/draw a game they should have lost. I mean, it's obvious you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually care about how people respond, but your argument is absolutely horrid. If a base trade occurs and the opponent has a better equipped army to deal with the scenario, then they have won fair and square. It's no different than a zerg taking out all detection from an opponent and surrounding their last hatchery with lurkers or something. They made a strategic choice that won them the game because now the onus is on the opponent to attack or leave the game. The person with the worse army is the one who has to make something happen in these scenarios. Ah so we agree then. But why do you think a Zerg/Toss with no flying unit is better equipped to deal with the baserace then the terran? It's the exact same situation. Thank you for proving my point that you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually want to discuss the topic at hand. Why even bother posting in this thread if all you are going to do is argue against win conditions that don't exist and deliberately ignore what people are saying about the actual topic at hand. Everyone who disagrees with Ben... is arguing in bad faith guys, heard it here first! Why post in a forum if you're not up for discussion? This joke thread doesn't deserve any responses tbh, not sure why I even bothered.
You never really discussed anything, you just expected other people to knock down your irrelevant straw man arguments that aren't equivalent draw mechanics, that you didn't understand well enough in the first place and needed explained back to you, but think that made you right.
Your DT argument actually makes no sense whatsoever in retrospect now because if the Protoss has enough DTs to protect a nexus from an army and you can't detect them, there's no reason they wouldn't use one of them to go kill your buildings and win the game. Everyone keeps bringing up things that aren't draws/stalemates as arguments against this discussion about draws/stalemates. The spore/spine crawler one isn't even unfair because it forces a draw, it's unfair because it could technically still win a game with only those buildings left, effectively making them units, but not making it access to a draw mechanic. But you know what the real difference is? That doesn't happen! And that possibility had to be theory-crafted into existence.
Honestly, not having any units should be a loss condition if you can't make more.
|
On March 20 2019 22:53 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 22:48 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 22:31 Argonauta wrote:On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups. Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host. I just find it really strange to think of locusts/broodling as free, without taking into consideration that it is made by another unit which costs money, requires tech and can be killed. It's like saying that ghosts can cast spells for free, because energy doesnt cost minerals/gas. There's not price tag on locusts. First wave costs the price of the SH and then? With every wave you're lowering the price of the wave, in the end they become free. At the same time literally everything else(except brood lings ) costs energy OR material. From the SC2 perspective locusts are free as they don't cost energy or material. Just giving my view, but how that's gonna solve draws with Terrans in the air
I mean, bullets/missiles aren't free, everything has unlimited ammunition in this game, only Protoss has to pay for Interceptors! I literally just thought of this, totally unplayable
|
On March 20 2019 23:42 Charoisaur wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 11:37 Ben... wrote:On March 20 2019 09:06 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 07:47 Ben... wrote:On March 20 2019 04:44 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:41 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 04:38 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 04:28 hg2g2 wrote:On March 20 2019 04:11 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 03:50 hg2g2 wrote: [quote]
Buidlings are Win conditions. Units are not. Only Terran can make their opponents Win condition inaccessible without the need for their own units (Protoss needing a deathball or DTs to defend their nexus is not the same as a flying Nexus in a corner that marines couldn't even shoot). There is no offense, there is no defense. The King is simply not on the board. you can also force draws by building cannons/spines when the opponent doesn't have enough units to kill them. then they also force draws without the need for their own units. That's a draw because they are not willing to engage, not because they are incapable of engaging, the player offering the draw is at risk of losing, the other player could theoretically attempt it if said static D couldn't win them the game if they lost and the draw becomes apparent regardless of agreements. Not having enough units isn't the same as having units, even more than enough units, that are prevented from engaging in any way. That's really nit-picking here. If you have 1 Zealot vs 20 Spines it's really not a "choice" to engage or not. On March 20 2019 04:38 Majick wrote:On March 20 2019 02:31 Charoisaur wrote:On March 20 2019 02:11 Geo.Rion wrote: [quote] because the other 2 races flat out would lose in similar position.
Now if you think Terran deserves this bonus, fine, each to his own, but dont pretend you dont understand why people find this a problem. If a Protoss has nothing left except DTs and the opponent has no detection he wins. Unfair? Lol, no? That's not how this game works? You don't have to kill those DTs to win. The win condition is to destroy the buildings. and if you're incapable of doing that because the buildings are protected by DTs? That is when you write 'gg' and leave. Except if you are Terran, then you can lift your building, fly to the corner and go for a beer with your buddies with NO RISK of losing if opponent doesn't have air. Ah I get it. Only Protoss is allowed to win/draw a game they should have lost. I mean, it's obvious you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually care about how people respond, but your argument is absolutely horrid. If a base trade occurs and the opponent has a better equipped army to deal with the scenario, then they have won fair and square. It's no different than a zerg taking out all detection from an opponent and surrounding their last hatchery with lurkers or something. They made a strategic choice that won them the game because now the onus is on the opponent to attack or leave the game. The person with the worse army is the one who has to make something happen in these scenarios. Ah so we agree then. But why do you think a Zerg/Toss with no flying unit is better equipped to deal with the baserace then the terran? It's the exact same situation. Thank you for proving my point that you are arguing in bad faith and don't actually want to discuss the topic at hand. Why even bother posting in this thread if all you are going to do is argue against win conditions that don't exist and deliberately ignore what people are saying about the actual topic at hand. Everyone who disagrees with Ben... is arguing in bad faith guys, heard it here first! Why post in a forum if you're not up for discussion? This joke thread doesn't deserve any responses tbh, not sure why I even bothered. You were talking about Terran not being able win because they can't kill units to win the game, which is not a win condition. You constantly are putting up arguments that have nothing to do with the actual topic at hand while twisting the words of everybody else to suit your non-arguments.
I can quite literally quote your own post to prove my point:
If a Protoss has nothing left except DTs and the opponent has no detection he wins. Unfair? In this scenario, the Protoss already lost because they have no buildings. The win conditions is that there are no buildings left. Units don't matter for the win condition of there being no buildings left. You've been posting on this forum for years and have likely played starcraft for years. The above quote is a textbook bad faith argument because you are arguing from a position you know to be false in order to try and weaken the argument of others.
I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. What I do have a problem with is somebody being deliberately deceitful while also being disrespectful to people who have corrected them.
|
Czech Republic12116 Posts
On March 21 2019 00:21 hg2g2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 22:53 deacon.frost wrote:On March 20 2019 22:48 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 22:31 Argonauta wrote:On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups. Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host. I just find it really strange to think of locusts/broodling as free, without taking into consideration that it is made by another unit which costs money, requires tech and can be killed. It's like saying that ghosts can cast spells for free, because energy doesnt cost minerals/gas. There's not price tag on locusts. First wave costs the price of the SH and then? With every wave you're lowering the price of the wave, in the end they become free. At the same time literally everything else(except brood lings ) costs energy OR material. From the SC2 perspective locusts are free as they don't cost energy or material. Just giving my view, but how that's gonna solve draws with Terrans in the air I mean, bullets/missiles aren't free, everything has unlimited ammunition in this game, only Protoss has to pay for Interceptors! I literally just thought of this, totally unplayable You don't have to kill bullets/missiles to get to the unit launching them FFS, body blocking is a thing in this game, have you like ever tried walking under broodlords?!! Stop saying nonsense, remove their hp, make them bullets, it's fine. Edit> also changeling, infested marine, the turret of RAven... ONLY PROTOSS... do you even play this game? Edit 2> MULE
|
On March 21 2019 01:47 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2019 00:21 hg2g2 wrote:On March 20 2019 22:53 deacon.frost wrote:On March 20 2019 22:48 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 22:31 Argonauta wrote:On March 20 2019 20:46 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 18:58 JustPassingBy wrote:On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. I disagree, I find it very exciting to watch terran players suicide all their units to destroy key units and infrastructure of their opponents to draw the game. On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: And one that is without parallel for the other races. Yes, we have three races in starcraft which are distinctly different. Zerg can end games by slowly grinding you down with swarms of free units. Protoss can end games with massive amounts of instant splash damage. It creates interesting dynamics. 1. That is a perfectly fine opinion to have, different people find things interesting/annoying, it's really pointless to argue that aspect, if Blizz/ someone is interested of the general opinion, a poll could be done. 2. Races are different, yes, for the hundredth time, yes. Races have different racial mechanics. The game is asymmetrically balanced, and it was always intended that way, Yes. Nobody is arguing this, or saying we need to go back to warcfraft 1 game design. I dont understand why is it so hard to grasp, that this particular instance is an exception, and the other races lack anything comparable to it. Zerg doesnt have free units. Infestors spawn units with energy, just like all the other casters. BL's and swarmhosts spawn short-lived units, they arent free, they're the method with which those units attack. There is plenty of inbuilt weaknesses if you rely on those units. Swarhmhosts/BLs cant attack or cast spells, they just spawn locusts/broodlings, which you define as "free". No, if a swarmhost manages to launch a single volley before it dies, than that locust cost exactly as much as a full swarmhost. If you manage to launch several, or even dozens it means you were very cost efficient, as the locusts cost a fraction of it. It's not that different compared to a siege tank that manages to shoot dozens of times during the course of the game. Sure it is not the same thing, but it's comparable. Terrans can repair everything. Protoss regenerates or can even fill up shields, but not effective HP. Zergs regenerate freely to full HP, but they do it very slowly. Only Zerg has burrowed (cloacked) units that can deal AOE. Terran is the only one that has ranged air units with cloak. Protoss is the only race with perma-cloacked units that can move around freely. Some of these are or can be stronger than their racial counterparts, that's not really important. There are tons of race-specific tricks that dont have 1-1 exact matches. But they have something similar, and they all fit the RTS theme of being used either for offense, defense, crowd control (or economy). The " when behind, playing to draw" strategy doesnt really fit into this, and more importantly only one race can do it. Again, whether you enjoy watching this or not, is subjective, i believe majority of the community doesnt, but it's hard to tell without hard data. The problem isnt even the fact that terran is favored in a base-race situation due to racial mechanics. This is (mostly) fine. Two opponents could overrun each other's bases, and Terran comes out ahead because he floats away his CCs and production buildings, the other race has to turn around eventually and make sure to confront the terran army before losing every building, while Terran enjoys a strategic advantage due to being able to defend a new position after the dust settles, even if he was left without any money or workers. It is theoretically possible that both parties are left with 0 workers and 0-49 minerals, and either no armies or very similar strength armies. In this case, the Terran automatically wins, as long as he could float away one CC, because even with 0 minerals, 0 workers, you can build up a new eco using energy for mules. This is a race-specific advantage (that is balanced out by the strengths of the other racial mechanics like injects or Chronoboost/recall) to change this aspect, the game would need to be drastically altered, the racial mechanic completely redesigned and re-balanced. One of the main reasons why Terrans dont draw more games is, that they can flat out win those hectic base-race scenarios, if they start out on even grounds. Nobody was arguing for nerfing the mules or the general relocation ability of terran, in this specific thread, as far as i could tell. Conclusion> If the specific racial strength of the race helps it to win in a certain scenarios that is fine, as the other races also have comparable/similar racial strength helping them win in different ways. One race having the ability to force draws while the others dont is not fine (even if it is 0.x% of the games), especially because it would be so easy to do a clean fix, without having any unintended side-effects, or impacting the balance of the matchups. Well the are called free units because you cant treat them as a unit attack as they have HP. A tank shot do not have HP. That being said, I like free units. They are a cool way to make zerg different and they are balanced If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host. I just find it really strange to think of locusts/broodling as free, without taking into consideration that it is made by another unit which costs money, requires tech and can be killed. It's like saying that ghosts can cast spells for free, because energy doesnt cost minerals/gas. There's not price tag on locusts. First wave costs the price of the SH and then? With every wave you're lowering the price of the wave, in the end they become free. At the same time literally everything else(except brood lings ) costs energy OR material. From the SC2 perspective locusts are free as they don't cost energy or material. Just giving my view, but how that's gonna solve draws with Terrans in the air I mean, bullets/missiles aren't free, everything has unlimited ammunition in this game, only Protoss has to pay for Interceptors! I literally just thought of this, totally unplayable You don't have to kill bullets/missiles to get to the unit launching them FFS, body blocking is a thing in this game, have you like ever tried walking under broodlords?!! Stop saying nonsense, remove their hp, make them bullets, it's fine. Edit> also changeling, infested marine, the turret of RAven... ONLY PROTOSS... do you even play this game? Edit 2> MULE
One: the statement "Totally Unplayable" is a pretty common comic meme meant to exaggerate there being something wrong with a game based on the completely necessary oversimplification of reality gaming requires.
Two: them being units and having unit interactions is separate from them being free and a different balance conversation altogether. You don't actually have a problem with them being free. People get under brood lords all the time, and that's when they die.
Three: None of your bloody examples require MINERALS to make from the unit making them. I am not the one here who clearly lacks both an understanding of the game and critical reading comprehension skills.
|
On March 20 2019 22:48 Geo.Rion wrote: If locusts are "free-units" then Swarmhosts are the most useless units in the history of RTS since they cant attack or cast spells yet cost a lot of money and can be killed rather easily. For me, it only makes sense to think of swarmhosts together with the locust, since one cannot exist without the other. And because one of them costs money, the other isnt free either, cuz the cost is priced into the host.
Exactly. The locusts are the shots of the swarmhost, and the crappiest of all in the game, by the way. Ok, they have some range and hit hard, but they are f***ing slow and shoot once in ages and they can be shot down. Seriously?
|
On March 20 2019 18:46 xongnox wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2019 18:04 Geo.Rion wrote:On March 20 2019 17:55 xongnox wrote: In fact it adds a fine line of strategic depth in 1 games on 500 or so.
I get that it is very annoying when you face a terran doing that, but eh it's like 1000 other things in this game, race are asymmetrically annoying to opponent. Unborrowed spores under the BL army are annoying too.
But if we want to improve the game and the experience for the vast majority of players (and watchers ), we probably should focus in other things that are really happening often and really ruin the experience, like getting rid of the photon rush (something as simple as forge requiring cyber would do it)
We're going in circles. The idea that " it's an issue but let's not fix it, cuz there are other bigger problems out there" is so silly. it would take 2 lines of codes to solve this. First, you fail to acknowledge at least two knows factors : -Blizzard's time to do "simple things" (and the quantity of apparently unrelated bugs they add by doing anything) that take "2 lines of code". -The limited mental pressure, we, as a community of players, have on blizzard. If everyone focus in this "issue" and complain round the clock about it, maybe they will do it in 1 year, while doing nothing else during this time. For historic illustration thinks about "We Want LAN" ! That needed years of complaints and scandals to find a semi-decent solution (that require "5 lines of code" : launch the game motor with players input from the replay, like in replay mode, then switch to live mode from this state of the game ) Second, you read me bad. I didn't knowledge this as an issue, but a fine line of strategic depth, this subtle and fine mechanic is a cool feature, which gave us epic historical games. Looking at your line of code estimations, even taking some rhetorical liberties into account, I am not sure how much experience you have with complex software projects.
On March 17 2019 16:27 Highrock1 wrote: Hi,
I've always found Terran's ability to draw the game by floating away their buildings a very unsatisfying way for the game to end. And one that is without parallel for the other races.
I'm suggesting a very simple fix, Terran buildings take VERY LITTLE damage while floating, something along the line of a single HP per second. Meaning a command center would take over twenty minutes to die. But it would eventually die, making float away stalemate not viable. Maybe even give a certain grace period, having the damage only start after a few minutes floating.
Would like to hear your thoughts? It sounds reasonable to me in many ways, that building relocation and stalemate floating would come at a price.
However, it would address only some, but not all stalemate conditions. Adding complexity to the game for this might not be the overall best idea, but I am not sure. Then again, it could add some strategic component for proxy buildings, when they have to be flown home.
|
I personally think that if the other player has been put in a position where they can't destroy the floating buildings, they don't deserve to win. The ability to draw is pretty cool imo.
|
|
|
|