Phase Cannon No Longer Phasable

Of course its worth the extra clicks. If you played serious games enough you'd know sieged tanks in your base is a big deal. If you could stop this it could save your ass.
With your blinking idea, if Terran was doing a tank push, he'd effectivly push you into the corner of your base since you're gonna blink the cannons away.
Also how would the whole race be bent around it, its up to you how you use it. Its kind of a thing where it can make a difference if you want but cannons will still work normally.
Also how on earth did the Terran revolve around the Reaper?
The Medic did not get removed because of the Reaper, if you payed close attention you'd know they was thinking of removing the Reaper since the Medivac and Marine combo worked just as effectivly.

Normally to make cannons actually effective you'd need lots of them and we all know making lots of cannons isn't worth it.
With this you don't need as many and they still retain their efficiency, also don't forget Protoss are about maximum effeciency. If they create something they wanna keep it, whereas Terran and Zerg can take some loses since their units are cheaper and build faster, as opposed to the expensive slow build Protoss.

 

IIRC the idea of the medivac came after considering cutting the medic, and the reason behind that was indeed the fact that medics couldn't keep up with reapers, especially when jump packing over cliffs.

 

u know that the viking got put at the star port because of the reaper. The people figered out that if u can reach a viking with about 1 extra step as you would the reaper then what would of been the point of using them?? the made a whole new unit and moved another just for the reaper. But off this topic

Terrans doing a tank push would still have alot of fun with immortals and charging zealots. But i'm not going to get into just one type of combat style with you if thats the only thing you can think of that would push back cannons when there is tons of other supporting units to help. If your rolling back cannons with out pushing any offence your bound to lose anyway..

 

Then I guess its far beyond your comprehension as to what you could do with this ability.

 

I give Shield Channeling a thumbs up anyway. I actually started out not like the idea very much at all, to be completely honest. But I soon saw the merit in practical application.

What LK pointed out is a very valid point and I do understand his cause for concern. However, I believe it's exactly why the Shield Channeling mechanic is any good at all, as well it not being OP but still useful at the higher skill levels. In situations where you have both Cannons and units around battling, I believe it will be like as LK said, it would be most beneficial for most people just to micro the units and leave the Cannons alone. I think that would be how it is in most cases, but for prg gamers and players of a very high skill level they can squeeze out just a little more juice from Shield Channeling in mixed combat.

Very useful situationally that it could easily save your ass, expos, battles, and perhaps even games. Yet, it is tame enough to not be OP.

@ i2new@aol.com, if the only thing you could do is jump straight to "so it's useless" after I gave a sincere effort on my part explaining things thoroughly, you are just lazy and insincere. Please do not waste the time of me or others like me who actually put their time into discussions putting some effort into what they post. Take a hint from LorkKerwyn's post, that's what you do even if you disagree with something. You provide actual reasons and thoroughly explain them. All we have from you is just you claiming Shield Channeling is useless. Why? How? What are your reasons for saying so? If you don't know, then don't claim what you can't explain.

 

Im gonna say this straight up and its been true about me since I have joined this site. I don't give a **** about the pro level. 90% of the people who are going to buy this game won't give a **** about the pro level beyond maybe watching 1 or 2 games. I hate seeing mechanics like this pushed for specificaly because it will add some "diversity" at the pro level. I expecially hate it when these ideas come at the cost of something I might actually find helpful. I can pretty safely say I will never use this mechanic unless it is automated enough where pretty much everyone would use it, at which point the pro level side of this argument is removed from the equation, which from what I am seeing is the primary argument for this mechanic. So either way I am not seeing a good argument in favor of this mechanic. What is the problem with adding a passive bonus or change to Phase Cannons why does this change (assuming there is one) have to be interactive? And if it is going to be interactive, why does it have to be so demanding of actions in already high APM situations?

 

Wow you act like its hard to click one cannon the target another?

 

And you act like using your idea is the easiest thing in the world whats your point?

 

It is easy. But of course doing at easy level doesn't get the sexy results in which you could. But you can still use it to effect without much hassle.

 

If it is as easy as you seem to believe that kind of nullifies the primary argument in support of it over a different mechanic that would require less interaction. You can't have it both ways either its hard to use it to get worthy results meaning it would only be useful at the pro levels (which is a bad thing in my book) or its going to be essy enough to use where everyone can get pretty good results with it, which at that point why have that ability over one that is equally helpful but completely passive?

 

Because then it'd be one less thing which would separate the good players from the mediocre (or the bad from the worse, for that matter).

I see the possibilities it would open up, I just don't like the idea, seeing as how the same thing could be achieved with a buffed up shield battery, which would finally give the Protoss a means of 'healing'.

 

You seem too narrow minded on this one to discuss. It doesn't have to be either of anything, it can we whatever we wish it to be as long as it complies on lore and balance.

 

Ah but Kuvasz the question becomes would that one thing be useful enough that it would actually set mediocre players from the good ones? I don't so, but that’s me.

Also I would actually like it if the Protoss didn't get a way to heal their shields because then they are not actually healing anything. If the Protoss were to get some kind of heal or repair mechanic I think it should be vehicle only. Because when Protoss infantry get badly injured they are just warped out (hence the blue flash and what Blizzard said happened). Protoss vehicles are just outright destroyed which doesn't make sense it seems like they should have some method of repairing them. As far as shields are concerned I say meh, when a unit (or building) loses sp they aren't losing anything of value because the sp will return when they get a chance to rest.

But back to the other debate, why this mechanic why do we have to keep monkeying with shields to achieve efficiency, that’s not what the Protoss are about. That’s what the Terran's are about because every unit of theirs has ways of being fully healed/repaired so they can live to fight another day, as well as the fact that every Terran unit is ranged so they continue to try and get as much as possible out of their little health pool. The Protoss are about overwhelming force in a can. Every unit of theirs can go 1 for 1 with their counter part and when they can achieve large numbers they nearly unstoppable except by an opponent trying to be more efficient because they won't be able to go blow for blow with the Protoss head on. This mechanic seems to subscribe to the Terran line of thinking, not the Protoss one and that bugs me from a lore perspective as well as the gameplay ones I mentioned earlier.

EDIT: @Psion It's a good sign when you start calling me narrow-minded because it means you have no other way to defend your position, which means you should probably either think of some new ways to attack my position or get out of this debate.

 

Will the Phase Canon be more resistant against the Siege Tank ? We all know that just two shots from the siege tank in siege mode destroyed a photon canon easily.

So what for the phase canon ? Will this structure use a more powerful shield like the Immortal against big assault units like siege tanks ?

 

@Lk. Why the hostility? I mearly told you to ME it seemed you were being narrow minded. But my stance hasn't changed, I don't see what the big problem about this is, like I said, it can be anything we want as long as it complies with lore and balance.

@Samir. How does 70x2 beat 100/100 shield and hitpoints?
and no they have a normal shield, but it can be transfered preferably to the cannons which are under attack to boost their survival rate and possible stop your self from getting owned completly.

 

With the Phase Cannon no longer being able to phase, we might as well call it a Photon Cannon. Blizzard will have to come up with a new ability that will make the Photon Cannons unique.

 

@ Psion, trust me I am nowhere near hostile. Right now we are just having a debate (atleast thats what I am doing). I simply don't like your idea and I am providing reasons why I don't like it, as well as providing arguments and reasons why your arguments may be invalid or ill-supported. Once you chose to stop debating and go after my character by calling me narrow-minded (even if it just your opinion), I chose to point out the most likely reason you did so was because you lacked any other way of defending your idea, which so far has proven accurate. I would rather to get back to the debate at hand instead of this little side disscussion but that's up to you.

@Samir as of right now I think it would take a few shots from a Siege Tank in siege mode to kill a cannon just like in Sc1 (which was more than 2). Howvever the Phase Cannon hasn't been given any abilities to specifically counter Siege Tanks and I doubt it will because the Siege Tank is suppose to be the counter to stationary defenses.

 

Hay Lordkerwyn, u said you wouldl ike to see a passive ability. Why dont they just give the cannon an energy drain effect per hit? or a passive fininshing attack when it hits a small unit below a specific % of life??

 

The "Protoss thing" has always been about durability and resilience. People who believe that Protoss was suppose be the offensively overpowering race in SC1 have an incorrect understanding of the race. Protoss overall, has had the lowest damage output, period. And Protoss not about healing everything? I agree. Which is exactly why shield point management is the better answer. The Protoss is not efficient when you have a large enough number to swarm the enemy, that is Zerg. Protoss plays the card of unit preservation through minimal micro(in comparison to T and Z) because units start off with much higher resilience naturally, having higher total HP pool and higher armor in general.

Having the Shield Channeling or any other mechanic reaching maximum potential isn't why it should be in the game, it is why it would not be OP. In ZvZ matchups, a Zerg is supposed to be able to Scourges as an emergency means to counter mutalisks, and it works out fine like that in most cases. However, at the pro level, Mutas can not be taken down with Scourges due to insane micro. So are Mutas broken? No, because the only people who will be playing against the pro Muta controllers will be other pro players.

It is the same with Shield Channeling or anything else in SC. Players of medium skill and higher micro their units under fire away from the frontline to preserve them, they gain something by putting in a little extra micro. Is that then not fair because there are players who just can't perform such tasks in the heat of battle? Should all units then not be allowed to be microed away from focus fire and only allowed to charge forward after being given an attack command once? Of course not.

No one says you have to micro your Cannons at all in the heat of battle. You can simply group select some Cannons in the back of your base and designate the receiving Cannons at the front when there is no threat, and just leave it as such for the rest of the game. I merely mentioned the mechanic providing a little something extra at higher skill levels, because concerns on Cannons initially dying later might give too much of an advantage. It could, if your good enough, but for most people, you can just do what you need outside of battles and leave it at that. How much you want out of it only depends on how much micro you're willing to put into it.

Cannons will already provide an advantage to higher skilled players over less sklled players by using them to focus fire in the heat of battle. Not everyone can do it, but people who can manage to do so in the heat of battle, will have an advantage. Anyone who's played any WC3 multiplayer with a tiny bit of skill knows what I'm talking about. The Shield Channeling mechanic isn't any better than such an advantage resulting from user micro. I see no reason as to why something providing extra results to more players of higher skill levels who are willing to put some effort into micro should be considered a reason why it's good or bad. No one is trying to justify Shield Channeling's merits because of what it can be at the pro level, I'm nowhere near the pro level and I think I can benefit from it.

Also, I don't think anyone has said that it must be Shield Channeling and it just can not be some other passive mechanic. However, it's not fair for any idea not to be considered and judge for what it is on it own. I do not see these other ideas in the passive category that shows an equal level of promise, balance, and apparent functionality. Without providing such alternatives, you are merely shooting down the Shield Channeling idea just because something never brought up could be better. That's not really saying much of anything at all.

 

@Lk. Me and Remy have given points of reason and balance through out this discussion yet everyone comes out with the same ''its useless and its overpowered'' or ''why would you micro cannons instead of units'', stuff like that.
If any of you fail to understand the possibilities behind this or think something doesn't work, help us come up with an alternative, at first I just outlined the inital idea. Thats how great things are produced by group input to further improve a workable idea.
Nice post btw Remy.