Page 2 of 22 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 215

Thread: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

  1. #11

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    The video provides direct physical evidence that 2 is not enough to keep Proton Charge up 100% of the time. Remember the Banelings that killed a bunch of Probes in the main? They didn't have Proton Charge up for the duration of that attack.

    That's not to say that PC isn't an APM sink, however. Only that 2 Obelisks isn't enough to keep PC up permanently.
    Oh yes, you're so right. Lets ignore that DK isn't a pro and probably forgot to cast the ability a couple times because his attention was focused on killing things.

    2-4 is the number of Obelisks I expect to maintain constant PC. I've said it innumerable times.

  2. #12

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Calling Proton Charge "nothing but a fucking APM sink" is short-sighted and unfair. What would be an APM sink is if you had to click proton charge every so often or your probes just STOP mining. That would add base management and APM, but it wouldn't give you any benefit, only stop a detriment.

    You GAIN something from Proton Charge. Something significant. If it's just an APM sink, then so is building supply depots, reseraching upgrades and spells, and having to manually build every worker, rather than just typing in a number and it building them continuously as resources allow. Why do I have to go back to my base and build these stupid little boxes just to keep playing? What a BS APM sink, Blizzard. God.

    If you're going to attack a sound RTS game mechanic, then how about you suggest a base management, macro-oriented Protoss mechanic that ISN'T an "APM sink", and explain why?


  3. #13

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by Nicol Bolas View Post
    Total fail on your analysis.
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur View Post
    Wow you have a great understanding of the situation.
    The differences in opinion are catastrophically astounding.

  4. #14

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by SaharaDrac View Post
    Calling Proton Charge "nothing but a fucking APM sink" is short-sighted and unfair. What would be an APM sink is if you had to click proton charge every so often or your probes just STOP mining. That would add base management and APM, but it wouldn't give you any benefit, only stop a detriment.

    You GAIN something from Proton Charge. Something significant. If it's just an APM sink, then so is building supply depots, reseraching upgrades and spells, and having to manually build every worker, rather than just typing in a number and it building them continuously as resources allow. Why do I have to go back to my base and build these stupid little boxes just to keep playing? What a BS APM sink, Blizzard. God.

    If you're going to attack a sound RTS game mechanic, then how about you suggest a base management, macro-oriented Protoss mechanic that ISN'T an "APM sink", and explain why?
    Proton Charge a "sound" RTS game mechanic? That's disgusting.

    An APM sink is anything which exists solely to create macro though busywork. It requires no strategy, merely a memorization of timing. The nature of Proton Charge makes it required to do every x seconds or else your economy will fall behind. The mechanic isn't there as a pacer, like making buildings. Its not there for strategy, like "do I build a cybernetics core or another 2 zealots?" Its there to appease the pro gamers who bitch that SC2 lacked enough macro. Not because its a "sound" mechanic.

    I have also suggested multiple non-busywork, non-APM sink macro mechanics over the 2 years I've been on this site.
    Last edited by DemolitionSquid; 06-20-2009 at 04:11 PM.

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    4,102

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    There are two ways I can think of solving this:
    1. The Obelisk is a costly upgrade of the Pylon (50/100-150)
    2. The Obelisk is an alternate form of the Pylon (ie, the pylon looses its power radius to gain the abilities)

    I have to admit though, neither of those ideas really solve the issue. What the Obelisk really needs is an increased price, a toned down PC, and some properly useful combat abilities, something so you have to make a real choice about where you place it.

  6. #16
    Pandonetho's Avatar SC:L Addict
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    5,214

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Not sure about this but I think at one point in time I read somewhere that Proton charge lasted 40 seconds.

  7. #17

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by Pandonetho View Post
    Not sure about this but I think at one point in time I read somewhere that Proton charge lasted 40 seconds.
    I know its between 20 and 40, I'm leaning toward 40. Given we know PC costs 50 energy, and relating that to the energy regen of SC1, that's why I predict u'll currently need 2-3 Obelisks to sustain a constant PC.

  8. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    311

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    you forget that you need to choose from 2 CC modes!

  9. #19

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by DemolitionSquid View Post
    Oh yes, you're so right. Lets ignore that DK isn't a pro and probably forgot to cast the ability a couple times because his attention was focused on killing things.

    2-4 is the number of Obelisks I expect to maintain constant PC. I've said it innumerable times.

    Can you please not guess at these kinda things. We have one video of queens and obelisks in action. It shows that queens are spammed more than obelisks. Untill you get another video that shows obelisks are spammed more you really dont have any evidence to support your claims.

    In short saying "oh this guy just used it to much and this guy not enough" isnt a convincing arguement at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by SaharaDrac View Post
    You GAIN something from Proton Charge. Something significant. If it's just an APM sink, then so is building supply depots, reseraching upgrades and spells, and having to manually build every worker, rather than just typing in a number and it building them continuously as resources allow. Why do I have to go back to my base and build these stupid little boxes just to keep playing?
    Very good points SaharaDrac. The back to base mechanic is fundamental to the micro macro tension that starcraft must have. Supply is an example of it as is proton charge. People just dont realize supply is because they are used to it.

    That being said I do think that we can create better tension on the Obelisk if we make the other two abilities better (more useful). For instance Recharge shields is a good abilitity but could be made even more useful if it recharged HP.
    Last edited by ArcherofAiur; 06-20-2009 at 04:59 PM.

  10. #20

    Default Re: Obelisk -vs- Orbital Command

    Quote Originally Posted by SlickR View Post
    you forget that you need to choose from 2 CC modes!
    No, you're choosing between increased income which can be used to build anything including defensive units, and a purely defensive unit. There is no choice, no professional player will build PF's.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur View Post
    Can you please not guess at these kinda things. We have one video of queens and obelisks in action. It shows that queens are spammed more than obelisks. Untill you get another video that shows obelisks are spammed more you really dont have any evidence to support your claims.

    In short saying "oh this guy just used it to much and this guy not enough" isnt a convincing arguement at all.
    I said nothing about spamming Obelisks more than Queens. I said it that you would see 2-4 Obelisks in each mineral patch to maintain maximim Proton Charge, given known stats that I posted for all to calculate for themselves. I fully expect there to be more Queens than Obelisks because Proton Charge is completely predictable. My guess is as accurate and informed as possible.

    Quote Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur View Post
    Very good points SaharaDrac. The back to base mechanic is fundamental to the micro macro tension that starcraft must have. Supply is an example of it as is proton charge. People just dont realize supply is because they are used to it.
    Introducing a back to base mechanic purely for the sake of creating back to base mechanic does not a good mechanic make. Proton Charge only exists because pros judge their skill based on how fast they click, and they're nostalgic for the limited UI of SC1.

Similar Threads

  1. Obelisk Update from Karune
    By DemolitionSquid in forum StarCraft II Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-12-2009, 08:31 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •