Printable View
Ok seriously this whole "decision" thing is getting out of hand. Why does every single thing that a player does have to involve decision? Building supply depots as walls is something that everyone does, and there shouldn't need to be a "decision" for it anymore than there it a decision to build workers and have them sent to mine.
I swear, we're getting to the point where "omg he's building overlords, we need to make decisions for that because it doesn't have enough decision making!!!"
That is hardly a tradeoff worthy of making submerge a research. If Terrans are going to use Barracks walls, that completely refutes any means to make submerge researchable. Buildings will be used as walls. Thinking a research will impact the early part of game is moot. The barracks is there to be a door even if depots can't be submerged.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xyvik
Raising a barracks does very little to impact unit production. It takes only one moment to raise barracks and mobilize your army, and you will always have more barracks in your base producing more when you need em. One choke-point Barracks in the air isn't going to heavily impact early game, when you're obviously going to turtle anyways.
By the time you hit tech parallel to Supply Depot Submerge, that choke point barracks won't even be considered much for unit production, so why bother with a research? It's like making Nukes a research before you can make em. What's the point when you've already reached that tech level and it doesn't impact that part of the game. It's just an unnecessary loop to jump through.
Didnt you get mad at me for bringing up that same point in the macro debate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandonetho
When? I don't remember.Quote:
Didnt you get mad at me for bringing up that same point in the macro debate?
I think the reason people want there to be decision-making (by way of drawbacks) for this is because using Supply Depots as walls is not their primary function (which is to provide supply, full stop). It's akin to how proxy Pylons have the drawback of essentially being a relatively unprotected structure in the middle of an open field.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pandonetho
Not everything needs to be a choice or a trade off. And your right Supply Depots as walls is not thier primary function....its there secondary function.
I don't get the Depot buried -> less supply idea. It's another incentive to have your Depots as normal, making a wall, so what's the idea?
Anyways, submerging Depots is a very good way to make your base more transitable.
In SC1, it wasn't even that. Certainly, that was a case of 'not meant to be used that way' and so, their cost did not reflect this aspect of use. In SC2, Blizzard has since added features that make it better suited for this function. Whether its new cost, stats and balance take this into account only time will tell. Until then, most pro-drawback supporters are still thinking in terms of the the SC1 Depot's balance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ArcherofAiur
I think it should be research. If Blizzard does make it research, yet protoss and zerg players want even more delay, make the cost of the research higher.
One of the reasons I'm proposing this change is because it'll offer up more variety in build orders and introduce further choices for Terran players who have it as an option. Because I'm telling you right now, with the way it currently is every single Terran player who's worth a damn will be doing this on maps that allow for it. 95% of the population will be opening up with the same build order as David Kim just did to get his choke blocked off. Anticipating any repeat actions is sure to get me to rebel because I despise mindless routine.Quote:
Originally Posted by mr. peasant
Now we have the argument that players can still block chokes with a combination of depots and barracks...which is fine. Having to move a barracks out of the way to allow passage is far more tedious than simply raising/lowering a depot. On top of that, doing so temporarily cuts production from that building. If players want to rely on that then let them, but whose who want more flexibility can invest in the research later on and simply toggle the depot when needed.
I see this on par with the burrow research of the Zerg. It's not necessary, but offers just that much more flexibility and is one more choice for players to contend with in the grand scheme of things.
Another argument for this decision: Terrans have so many unique abilities that are innate. Without need for research they can already salvage buildings, liftoff select buildings, and raise/drop supply depots. While these ideas are all incredible and unique to the race, why do they get to use them without any research? Why can't the Protoss warp-in units by default? Why can't the Zerg burrow by default? Isn't there even a research needed for the overlords creep drop? Doesn't it seem rather one-sided when you think about it?
You introduce a small level of choice into the players hands and suddenly their build orders see even more variety. Protoss players won't always bump up against a depot wall preventing their zealot or dark templars sneaking into the mineral line without drops. Zerglings might be able to sneak by and do raid attacks instead of getting gunned down by marines that are rallied to behind the depot wall.
I just don't want to have to deal with that in every single game against them.