|
On November 04 2010 02:27 Bull-Demon wrote:
I' really glad Blizzard balances this game because 99.9% of the suggestions in this thread are terrible and/or would break the game.
You can't just look at the two GSLs we have had and say toss is broken, and completely ignore the successes they are having elsewhere.
Um, it's really only a matter of time until P gets phased out. There has been nothing new or innovative by P players since 1 Gate FE because anything that is any decent that is non-robo (VR timing attack) gets nerf batted down.
Not to mention P is so inflexible until late game because all their harassment options cost way too much early on. Warp Prisms are all-innish/gimmicky, and Blink Stalker / Obs play is really easy to counter. Not to mention you have to get Robo/Citadel and Blink Upgrade to do it anyways.
|
On November 04 2010 02:06 IIDynamicII wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 01:45 Slayer91 wrote:On November 04 2010 01:41 IIDynamicII wrote:On November 04 2010 01:27 Slayer91 wrote:
Buffing stalker would be absurd. The reason its weak early game PvT is because marauders are the direct counter but have no counter early game. If marauders were'nt around they'd dominate early game just like BW. Hellions, banshees, marines, unsieged tanks, all dominated by stalkers. Zerg would lose every game to 4 warpgate on maps you can't mass spinecrawler. Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.
The stalker's speed/range and high hp and anti air make it so well balanced which is why its so poor in a straight up fight. Marauders and roaches have/need UPGRADES for speed (zomg) roaches have low range and neither have anti air. The only other unit similar to the satlker is the hydralisk except it doesn't have the speed off creep and its basically considered terrible because of that.
A large army of hydras, roaches or marauders can be taken out by a few units (air//colossus/storm0 but nothing takes out a large army of stalkers that isn't reasonably up to par on cost. Really cant agree with you.  most arguments you point out are on the paper right but ingame you get another impression of the gameplay and there implementation. I dont talk about making Stalker op...just make it more close to the potential of a marauder or a roach woud equal the game. why woud a less good stalker dominate a better marauder or a roach. I think actually the gap between eachother is to big. "(Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.)" same like helions till speedupgrade comes into play not a big deal. You get another impression because you're the one who thinks stalkers need to be buffed. I just said that stalkers are never designed to be close to the potential of the roach/marauder because they're specialized anti ground that can only really fight in big battles. Protoss sending out stalkers allows them to force zerg to make lings early on, something you claimed protoss can't do. (spine crawler maps can deny it though, open maps are ones you need lings.) The stalker should not be compared to the marauder or roach. The immortal is the unit that is like the maruder/roach. Sick good in battles but don't have the versatility that the stalker does. You'll find the immortal is about the same vs light units as 2 stalkers (same cost/supply) but far better than the stalker, roach and marauder against armoured. Roaches are obviously better against light units. and yeah, stimmed marines are sick good but so are storm and colossus and banelings so it works out pretty ok. I don't like the way some units are underpowered and just balanced out by overpowered units though. Make everything overpowered! But the immortal tech force the protoss to 1 dimensional play. And make the immortal to a must have. That makes them vulnerable to tech switches of the enemys (Zerg and Terra can switch much easier Tech). And if a stalker isnt designed fo it it shoud be changed becuase in real it´s used as a backbone of the Protoss armee.
Marauders and roaches force the same 1 dimensional play then? The immortal is so strong that you can add them into your army without having to skip too many other units and suddenly you can win battles against roach/marauder. You seem to think backbone unit means "I don't need to make any other unit". You can't have anything. You seem to want a stalker so good you don't need any other units. You have sacrifice the mobility range and anti air of a stalker for a more powerful immortal, but you can't have both. Terran can't tech switch any easier than protoss. In fact, warpgates are more flexible than most terran. You can make colossus or immortals from robotics. Tech lab barracks = mostly marauder (or 1 marine which kinda sucks) reactor barracks = marines reactor factory = hellion tech lab barracks = tanks/thors etc.
Zerg can tech switch but they can't exchange units they already have for new ones. If they have mass roaches they can't suddenly make 20 muta, they need to build up 2k gas and somehow survive if you have mass immortals sentry stalker..
|
On November 04 2010 02:33 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 02:06 IIDynamicII wrote:On November 04 2010 01:45 Slayer91 wrote:On November 04 2010 01:41 IIDynamicII wrote:On November 04 2010 01:27 Slayer91 wrote:
Buffing stalker would be absurd. The reason its weak early game PvT is because marauders are the direct counter but have no counter early game. If marauders were'nt around they'd dominate early game just like BW. Hellions, banshees, marines, unsieged tanks, all dominated by stalkers. Zerg would lose every game to 4 warpgate on maps you can't mass spinecrawler. Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.
The stalker's speed/range and high hp and anti air make it so well balanced which is why its so poor in a straight up fight. Marauders and roaches have/need UPGRADES for speed (zomg) roaches have low range and neither have anti air. The only other unit similar to the satlker is the hydralisk except it doesn't have the speed off creep and its basically considered terrible because of that.
A large army of hydras, roaches or marauders can be taken out by a few units (air//colossus/storm0 but nothing takes out a large army of stalkers that isn't reasonably up to par on cost. Really cant agree with you. most arguments you point out are on the paper right but ingame you get another impression of the gameplay and there implementation. I dont talk about making Stalker op...just make it more close to the potential of a marauder or a roach woud equal the game. why woud a less good stalker dominate a better marauder or a roach. I think actually the gap between eachother is to big. "(Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.)" same like helions till speedupgrade comes into play not a big deal. You get another impression because you're the one who thinks stalkers need to be buffed. I just said that stalkers are never designed to be close to the potential of the roach/marauder because they're specialized anti ground that can only really fight in big battles. Protoss sending out stalkers allows them to force zerg to make lings early on, something you claimed protoss can't do. (spine crawler maps can deny it though, open maps are ones you need lings.) The stalker should not be compared to the marauder or roach. The immortal is the unit that is like the maruder/roach. Sick good in battles but don't have the versatility that the stalker does. You'll find the immortal is about the same vs light units as 2 stalkers (same cost/supply) but far better than the stalker, roach and marauder against armoured. Roaches are obviously better against light units. and yeah, stimmed marines are sick good but so are storm and colossus and banelings so it works out pretty ok. I don't like the way some units are underpowered and just balanced out by overpowered units though. Make everything overpowered! But the immortal tech force the protoss to 1 dimensional play. And make the immortal to a must have. That makes them vulnerable to tech switches of the enemys (Zerg and Terra can switch much easier Tech). And if a stalker isnt designed fo it it shoud be changed becuase in real it´s used as a backbone of the Protoss armee. Marauders and roaches force the same 1 dimensional play then? The immortal is so strong that you can add them into your army without having to skip too many other units and suddenly you can win battles against roach/marauder. You seem to think backbone unit means "I don't need to make any other unit". You can't have anything. You seem to want a stalker so good you don't need any other units. You have sacrifice the mobility range and anti air of a stalker for a more powerful immortal, but you can't have both. Terran can't tech switch any easier than protoss. In fact, warpgates are more flexible than most terran. You can make colossus or immortals from robotics. Tech lab barracks = mostly marauder (or 1 marine which kinda sucks) reactor barracks = marines reactor factory = hellion tech lab barracks = tanks/thors etc. Zerg can tech switch but they can't exchange units they already have for new ones. If they have mass roaches they can't suddenly make 20 muta, they need to build up 2k gas and somehow survive if you have mass immortals sentry stalker..
lol, pretty sure Z and T just mass 1 unit primarily and only switch to counter the counters to Roach/Mauraders. Even then, T just needs EMP/Maurader/Tank to rape everything on the ground that P has.
Stalkers need a buff, they were good vs Z when you could blink out of Fungal Growth, but they are really starting to go down hill now that Roaches are like 100x better with that 4 range upgrade, which makes a huge difference in PvZ.
|
On November 04 2010 01:40 bokeevboke wrote:
Marauders, Stalkers, Zealots are all ok.
Blizzard mentioned that stimmed marines are actually overpowered at Blizzcon. And believe it or not I tested it on unit tester map: equal upgrades 20 stimmed marines vs 10 speedlots without micro (equal cost). Marines win, 6 stay alive. If microed 10 marines stay alive.
Now, lets analyze. Marines shoot air and ranged, versatile unit. Zealots melee and specialize in GtG fight. In a perfect world zealots should win but they don't.
Now list of P units countered by marines:
Zealot
Stalker
Sentry
DT
Immortal
Carrier
Phoenix
Void Ray.
Mothership
Pretty impressive, huh?
Edit: Have to test it vs Archons, but who cares, HTs are much better.
When was it stated that stimmed Marines are overpowered? I am genuinely interested because stimmed Marines are insane. They burn down Zealots so fast.
Yes, with the Charge upgrade Zealots close the distance, but that just allows the Zealots to get in an extra hit or two. Any smart Terran player will have Marauders in front to tank Zealot damage so the Marines are free to blast everything.
The really sad part is how weak Gateway units are. Zealots with Charge are great early to mid game, then late game they suck horribly. I'm thinking there should be something to improve their survivability.
|
One issue I have with this thread and with how the game is going is the insistence that if you go robo tech you have to use the robo tech. I understand there is cost to the building itself, but with the way people are getting that expansion up sooner now, you can afford the extra building even if you only make observers from it. I think people are to focused on only making buildings they can produce several units from, and worried to much about making a robo that isn't used to full capacity.
I think this is the reason we see less HT play then we should be seeing. People end up making the robo for the OBS and then are just like, "well I'm stuck now have to commit to it!" On one base sure, but on 2 bases that isn't the case. I'd love to start seeing more army mix from protoss and I think that would help instead of locking into gateway/colosi and then maybe late game HT. This also opens up more warp prism play because you aren't needing that robo to produce immortals/colosi. I know people on the last few pages have argued that it is to costly to use WP, but if it was viable in SC/BW to go with HT/Zealot drops it should still be now.
I play mostly zerg but have found I had a similar mindset for a long time, especially against terran. I wouldn't get ling speed if I was going roaches, or wouldn't waste money on a roach warren if I was going ling/muta etc. But lately I've found that if terran is going to spend on opening up all their tech options which they typically do, I can afford to open up the tech options as well especially on 2 base or more.
TL;DR - Would like to see toss players open up more tech path mid game for more army mix instead of waiting till late game. I think they can afford it on 2 bases more than they think, and earlier HT could be devastating, along with Warp Prism harass. If that still isn't viable then the only change I'd love to see would be to cheapen up building costs for tier2/3 for toss then so they are less locked into tech paths.
|
Gateway units vs Terran are fine, it's just a lot more difficult to get as many units, and make them as useful as terran units, due to costs for the units themselves, and the upgrades.
|
On November 04 2010 02:27 Bull-Demon wrote:
I' really glad Blizzard balances this game because 99.9% of the suggestions in this thread are terrible and/or would break the game.
You can't just look at the two GSLs we have had and say toss is broken, and completely ignore the successes they are having elsewhere.
It's because at other events the opponents aren't good enough to poke the massive flaws in the Toss defense.
Blizzcon for instance was appaling play from Loner no pressure at all letting mass up to 200/200 3+ bases.
If Toss masses up to 3+ bases w/o having to trade units or loose probes you deserve to loose.
|
Protoss is the new zerg on these forums. Protoss sucks early game, Stalkers suck, Protoss will never be good, Blizzard hates protoss, insert any other weakness blown out of proportion here.
This thread started out as a pretty good discussion on Protoss issues, it has turned into anyone and everyone throwing in their poorly thought out balance ideas. It's beginning to be repulsive to read.
Should start a thread speculating on what the next QQ race is going to be.
|
The problem I feel wrong with Protoss are the terrible, terrible decisions Blizzard is making with regards to balance. Basically, they made a lot of overpowered units and mechanics which they refused to nerf. The balancing team's strategy always seems to be this: avoiding the real issue at hand. Protoss as a whole has been the biggest victim of these indirect nerfs, but the best example of Blizzard's balancing strategy is evident in the recent nerf to Marauder drops. Instead of changing the Marauder, which would be the simple way to do it, Blizzard went and gave a bunch of buildings an arbitrary health boost and nerfed medivac speed. Instead of one simple change, Blizzard went with the series of convoluted changes which addresses the problem in the most indirect way possible.
This balancing strategy has been applied most extensively to the two Protoss mechanics, Warp-in and Chronoboost. The two abilities were inherently strong because they both affected timing, a hugely important aspect of Starcraft. Chronoboost does it directly while Warp Gates change army movement and negate rush distances. The 33 second zealot build time was never the problem for anyone. However, the chronoboosted 22 second zealot build times were too strong for zerg, who could not wall off but was pressured to expand. But instead of moving chronoboost further up the tech tree to make the 2 gate much less powerful, Blizzard decided to extend the zealot build time. The Dark Shrine nerf was another poor decision done by Blizzard. Because warp gates negated build times and rush distances, Dark templar came almost a minute faster. That resulted in a nerf to the Dark Shrine's build time. It's also reasonable to assume that the Protoss early game had to be nerfed during internal testing in order to stop one base protoss rushes with forward pylons.
Now that the game is out, I fear it is much too late to make the radical changes necessary to fix the Protoss race, which I believe mainly consist of moving Chronoboost and Warp Gates farther down the tech tree so that Protoss units can be buffed, leading to a more flexible early-mid game. I can understand, from a designer's viewpoint, how these decisions were made, they simply wanted the game to be more enjoyable by making these cool mechanics available to all players. The best way to do so was to put these abilities early in the tech path for Protoss. However, their hesitance to delay these techs for balance has made the Protoss early game extremely difficult to balance.
|
On November 04 2010 02:41 Zrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 02:27 Bull-Demon wrote:
I' really glad Blizzard balances this game because 99.9% of the suggestions in this thread are terrible and/or would break the game.
You can't just look at the two GSLs we have had and say toss is broken, and completely ignore the successes they are having elsewhere. It's because at other events the opponents aren't good enough to poke the massive flaws in the Toss defense. Blizzcon for instance was appaling play from Loner no pressure at all letting mass up to 200/200 3+ bases. If Toss masses up to 3+ bases w/o having to trade units or loose probes you deserve to loose.
You named one series from one event? Give me a break, using a tournament in which a TOSS won to support your argument that toss is broken, awesome. And the opponents aren't good enough? Did you see the list of names that played in Blizzcon?
Look at the top 200s, look at the wins since last patch thread. Look at the idra/nony showmatch. Toss is performing just fine.
|
On November 04 2010 02:40 FLuE wrote:
One issue I have with this thread and with how the game is going is the insistence that if you go robo tech you have to use the robo tech. I understand there is cost to the building itself, but with the way people are getting that expansion up sooner now, you can afford the extra building even if you only make observers from it. I think people are to focused on only making buildings they can produce several units from, and worried to much about making a robo that isn't used to full capacity.
I think this is the reason we see less HT play then we should be seeing. People end up making the robo for the OBS and then are just like, "well I'm stuck now have to commit to it!" On one base sure, but on 2 bases that isn't the case. I'd love to start seeing more army mix from protoss and I think that would help instead of locking into gateway/colosi and then maybe late game HT. This also opens up more warp prism play because you aren't needing that robo to produce immortals/colosi. I know people on the last few pages have argued that it is to costly to use WP, but if it was viable in SC/BW to go with HT/Zealot drops it should still be now.
I play mostly zerg but have found I had a similar mindset for a long time, especially against terran. I wouldn't get ling speed if I was going roaches, or wouldn't waste money on a roach warren if I was going ling/muta etc. But lately I've found that if terran is going to spend on opening up all their tech options which they typically do, I can afford to open up the tech options as well especially on 2 base or more.
TL;DR - Would like to see toss players open up more tech path mid game for more army mix instead of waiting till late game. I think they can afford it on 2 bases more than they think, and earlier HT could be devastating, along with Warp Prism harass. If that still isn't viable then the only change I'd love to see would be to cheapen up building costs for tier2/3 for toss then so they are less locked into tech paths.
In BW P can do this because comparatively the P Gateway units are much stronger, mainly because Goons pack some serious firepower compared to the Stalker. Plus, leg upgrade Zeals were also nasty in BW.
Roaches/Mauraders really hurt P badly, and thus it forces P to get those Robo bay units because there's no way they can survive early Roach/Maurader aggression without units, as their Gateway units loses to Roach/Maurader mixes.
Basically in BW Gateway units were enough to hold off a freaking 2 Fac Terran, while here in SC2, your entire Gateway gets countered by a Maurader who when controlled correctly and positioned correctly, will fucking wipe out your entire army.
On November 04 2010 02:47 Bull-Demon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 02:41 Zrah wrote:On November 04 2010 02:27 Bull-Demon wrote:
I' really glad Blizzard balances this game because 99.9% of the suggestions in this thread are terrible and/or would break the game.
You can't just look at the two GSLs we have had and say toss is broken, and completely ignore the successes they are having elsewhere. It's because at other events the opponents aren't good enough to poke the massive flaws in the Toss defense. Blizzcon for instance was appaling play from Loner no pressure at all letting mass up to 200/200 3+ bases. If Toss masses up to 3+ bases w/o having to trade units or loose probes you deserve to loose. You named one series from one event? Give me a break, using a tournament in which a TOSS won to support your argument that toss is broken, awesome. And the opponents aren't good enough? Did you see the list of names that played in Blizzcon? Look at the top 200s, look at the wins since last patch thread. Look at the idra/nony showmatch. Toss is performing just fine.
Loner didn't put any pressure on Nexgenius and allowed him to enter late game on even or better footing then Loner. You seriously think you're gonna take a 3 attack P army late game? Don't think so.
|
On November 04 2010 02:40 FLuE wrote:
One issue I have with this thread and with how the game is going is the insistence that if you go robo tech you have to use the robo tech. I understand there is cost to the building itself, but with the way people are getting that expansion up sooner now, you can afford the extra building even if you only make observers from it. I think people are to focused on only making buildings they can produce several units from, and worried to much about making a robo that isn't used to full capacity.
I think this is the reason we see less HT play then we should be seeing. People end up making the robo for the OBS and then are just like, "well I'm stuck now have to commit to it!" On one base sure, but on 2 bases that isn't the case. I'd love to start seeing more army mix from protoss and I think that would help instead of locking into gateway/colosi and then maybe late game HT. This also opens up more warp prism play because you aren't needing that robo to produce immortals/colosi. I know people on the last few pages have argued that it is to costly to use WP, but if it was viable in SC/BW to go with HT/Zealot drops it should still be now.
I play mostly zerg but have found I had a similar mindset for a long time, especially against terran. I wouldn't get ling speed if I was going roaches, or wouldn't waste money on a roach warren if I was going ling/muta etc. But lately I've found that if terran is going to spend on opening up all their tech options which they typically do, I can afford to open up the tech options as well especially on 2 base or more.
TL;DR - Would like to see toss players open up more tech path mid game for more army mix instead of waiting till late game. I think they can afford it on 2 bases more than they think, and earlier HT could be devastating, along with Warp Prism harass. If that still isn't viable then the only change I'd love to see would be to cheapen up building costs for tier2/3 for toss then so they are less locked into tech paths.
Problem is if you go fast templars after robo with expansion you will have 2-3 storms ready at around 12minutes, keydaran amulet will be just started.
The problem is if you get timing push between 10-12min, before energy reaches 75 on your 2-3 templars you are so dead. You invest massive amount in getting the tech and required upgrades which cuts a lot into your unit amount. It's like balancing on a tight rope over a river filled with alligators.
And sometimes those 3 storms are just not enough and you have 10-15 marauders at 20hp tearing your expo.
I am just low 1.8k toss but thats my opinion on fast storm 
|
There are a few things i would like to address. The first is harassment is much harder for P. Sure we have blink stalkers, warp prisms, phoenix and i suppose ht and dt. But thats the thing. In comparison to burrowed roaches, speedlings, banelings, overlords and mutas for Z, and Medivacs, reapers, banshees, ravens, hellions and vikings, it is less viable to do. The reason being protoss harass doesnt come from its main army/ usual tech paths. You have to go out of your way to harass, where as terran and zerg generally make these units as a main composition. (with stalkers as an exception.) Also is that for zealots to really be effective they need charge, which takes a long to time get. (without it they are usually only meat shields when playing higher level opponents)
|
On November 04 2010 02:50 Zrah wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 02:40 FLuE wrote:
One issue I have with this thread and with how the game is going is the insistence that if you go robo tech you have to use the robo tech. I understand there is cost to the building itself, but with the way people are getting that expansion up sooner now, you can afford the extra building even if you only make observers from it. I think people are to focused on only making buildings they can produce several units from, and worried to much about making a robo that isn't used to full capacity.
I think this is the reason we see less HT play then we should be seeing. People end up making the robo for the OBS and then are just like, "well I'm stuck now have to commit to it!" On one base sure, but on 2 bases that isn't the case. I'd love to start seeing more army mix from protoss and I think that would help instead of locking into gateway/colosi and then maybe late game HT. This also opens up more warp prism play because you aren't needing that robo to produce immortals/colosi. I know people on the last few pages have argued that it is to costly to use WP, but if it was viable in SC/BW to go with HT/Zealot drops it should still be now.
I play mostly zerg but have found I had a similar mindset for a long time, especially against terran. I wouldn't get ling speed if I was going roaches, or wouldn't waste money on a roach warren if I was going ling/muta etc. But lately I've found that if terran is going to spend on opening up all their tech options which they typically do, I can afford to open up the tech options as well especially on 2 base or more.
TL;DR - Would like to see toss players open up more tech path mid game for more army mix instead of waiting till late game. I think they can afford it on 2 bases more than they think, and earlier HT could be devastating, along with Warp Prism harass. If that still isn't viable then the only change I'd love to see would be to cheapen up building costs for tier2/3 for toss then so they are less locked into tech paths. Problem is if you go fast templars after robo with expansion you will have 2-3 storms ready at around 12minutes, keydaran amulet will be just started. The problem is if you get timing push between 10-12min, before energy reaches 75 on your 2-3 templars you are so dead. You invest massive amount in getting the tech and required upgrades which cuts a lot into your unit amount. It's like balancing on a tight rope over a river filled with alligators. And sometimes those 3 storms are just not enough and you have 10-15 marauders at 20hp tearing your expo. I am just low 1.8k toss but thats my opinion on fast storm
I tried the Forge/Templar build too and I didn't get very good results, the T will just force you to Storm, run away, and come in and rape you.
|
The thing about the Banshees and DTs is ridiculous...Cost effective wise goes to Banshees hands down...the ability for it to fly makes it more of a threat than a ground unit ten fold...it can just fly to the back of the mineral line and harass your harvesters whereas the DTs have to warp in and if you turtle in DTs are basically useless. Not to mention range vs. melee. Range is always ideal
Against Zergs - Banshees are more effective because Zergs don't really have an AA unit besides the Queen in the early stages...DTs they can just get surround the DTs with zerglings if they wish or however they want to stall time for the overseer and then attack the DT with their ground unit.
Against Terrans - Banshees are more effective because Terran has the ability to block their choke point which forces DTs to be warped in from a warp prism to be somewhat productive. Banshees however can fly their way over behind the mineral line and find little spots to harass the harvesters without getting shot by the Missile Turret with that 6 range.
Against Protoss - Both are somewhat the same but the fact that Banshees have range makes them a lot more preferable.
This is my opinion however 
|
[/QUOTE]
Marauders and roaches force the same 1 dimensional play then? The immortal is so strong that you can add them into your army without having to skip too many other units and suddenly you can win battles against roach/marauder. You seem to think backbone unit means "I don't need to make any other unit". You can't have anything. You seem to want a stalker so good you don't need any other units. You have sacrifice the mobility range and anti air of a stalker for a more powerful immortal, but you can't have both. Terran can't tech switch any easier than protoss. In fact, warpgates are more flexible than most terran. You can make colossus or immortals from robotics. Tech lab barracks = mostly marauder (or 1 marine which kinda sucks) reactor barracks = marines reactor factory = hellion tech lab barracks = tanks/thors etc.
Zerg can tech switch but they can't exchange units they already have for new ones. If they have mass roaches they can't suddenly make 20 muta, they need to build up 2k gas and somehow survive if you have mass immortals sentry stalker..
No they dont, let me explaine what iam thinking here. The reason is if you decide to counter with immos you are spending a lot of time/ress to get them. You can NOT replace Immortals fast(heavy buildtime/heavy costs) like marauders or roaches(Zerg insane macro). And because they are expensive an timeintensiv its much harder establish a tech switch out of the robo. Makes you fragile to early mutas for exampel.
A Terran tech most times anyways for a Factory and a Starport its a important aspect/part of his solid strategie and not hard to discover in game progress and allows him from there to switch his unit compositions really easaly into air harras/counter or ground harras/counter units. I dont wanne start to talk about the insane macro and units switch abbility of the Zergs . So maybe you see my point of view when you comparing this two race.
PS: You completly missunderstoud my hole comments, if you think i want equal the marauder with the roach and the stalker. The gap between stalker and maruader/roaches is actually to big and the reason for the bad early game from the protoss that force them to play robo and determinate the other techtrees. Its clearly that the Marauder is more important for the Terrans then the Stalker is for the Protoss about roaches i dont wanne talk its insane actually ^^
|
On November 04 2010 02:33 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 02:06 IIDynamicII wrote:On November 04 2010 01:45 Slayer91 wrote:On November 04 2010 01:41 IIDynamicII wrote:On November 04 2010 01:27 Slayer91 wrote:
Buffing stalker would be absurd. The reason its weak early game PvT is because marauders are the direct counter but have no counter early game. If marauders were'nt around they'd dominate early game just like BW. Hellions, banshees, marines, unsieged tanks, all dominated by stalkers. Zerg would lose every game to 4 warpgate on maps you can't mass spinecrawler. Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.
The stalker's speed/range and high hp and anti air make it so well balanced which is why its so poor in a straight up fight. Marauders and roaches have/need UPGRADES for speed (zomg) roaches have low range and neither have anti air. The only other unit similar to the satlker is the hydralisk except it doesn't have the speed off creep and its basically considered terrible because of that.
A large army of hydras, roaches or marauders can be taken out by a few units (air//colossus/storm0 but nothing takes out a large army of stalkers that isn't reasonably up to par on cost. Really cant agree with you. most arguments you point out are on the paper right but ingame you get another impression of the gameplay and there implementation. I dont talk about making Stalker op...just make it more close to the potential of a marauder or a roach woud equal the game. why woud a less good stalker dominate a better marauder or a roach. I think actually the gap between eachother is to big. "(Already protoss are sending out 1-2 stalkers to harass early zerg before ling speed because they don't die.)" same like helions till speedupgrade comes into play not a big deal. You get another impression because you're the one who thinks stalkers need to be buffed. I just said that stalkers are never designed to be close to the potential of the roach/marauder because they're specialized anti ground that can only really fight in big battles. Protoss sending out stalkers allows them to force zerg to make lings early on, something you claimed protoss can't do. (spine crawler maps can deny it though, open maps are ones you need lings.) The stalker should not be compared to the marauder or roach. The immortal is the unit that is like the maruder/roach. Sick good in battles but don't have the versatility that the stalker does. You'll find the immortal is about the same vs light units as 2 stalkers (same cost/supply) but far better than the stalker, roach and marauder against armoured. Roaches are obviously better against light units. and yeah, stimmed marines are sick good but so are storm and colossus and banelings so it works out pretty ok. I don't like the way some units are underpowered and just balanced out by overpowered units though. Make everything overpowered! But the immortal tech force the protoss to 1 dimensional play. And make the immortal to a must have. That makes them vulnerable to tech switches of the enemys (Zerg and Terra can switch much easier Tech). And if a stalker isnt designed fo it it shoud be changed becuase in real it´s used as a backbone of the Protoss armee. Marauders and roaches force the same 1 dimensional play then? The immortal is so strong that you can add them into your army without having to skip too many other units and suddenly you can win battles against roach/marauder. You seem to think backbone unit means "I don't need to make any other unit". You can't have anything. You seem to want a stalker so good you don't need any other units. You have sacrifice the mobility range and anti air of a stalker for a more powerful immortal, but you can't have both. Terran can't tech switch any easier than protoss. In fact, warpgates are more flexible than most terran. You can make colossus or immortals from robotics. Tech lab barracks = mostly marauder (or 1 marine which kinda sucks) reactor barracks = marines reactor factory = hellion tech lab barracks = tanks/thors etc. Zerg can tech switch but they can't exchange units they already have for new ones. If they have mass roaches they can't suddenly make 20 muta, they need to build up 2k gas and somehow survive if you have mass immortals sentry stalker..
First Bold - Do you see a problem with that though? Look at the tech tree a protoss has to go through compared to Terran to get that offensive dominance feeling.
Second Bold - Terran are a lot more versatile can transition smoother and easier than Protoss. The fact that it can switch from reactor/tech lab helps. Robo can only produce units that can shoot ground only (excluding the observer as it's purpose is to detect/scout only). Factory can produce tanks for ground units and thor for air. You also have to take into consideration the differences for the tech tree between Protoss and Terran. It's a lot cheaper and faster to get a tech lab/reactor than Protoss to tech up to.
|
Ok so if the issue is that HT are taking to long to be effective when needing then address that, and maybe look at the cost of that tech path, because I always think that balance is sometimes more about the timing then the strength of the units. The HT is very strong, very underused, and I also know that was the case in SC very early but as people got better with their storm play it was amazing to see how much could be held off with some photons and some HT. Perhaps it needs to be available earlier and cheaper to get there.
There are a few things i would like to address. The first is harassment is much harder for P. Sure we have blink stalkers, warp prisms, phoenix and i suppose ht and dt. But thats the thing. In comparison to burrowed roaches, speedlings, banelings, overlords and mutas for Z, and Medivacs, reapers, banshees, ravens, hellions and vikings, it is less viable to do. The reason being protoss harass doesnt come from its main army/ usual tech paths. You have to go out of your way to harass, where as terran and zerg generally make these units as a main composition. (with stalkers as an exception.) Also is that for zealots to really be effective they need charge, which takes a long to time get. (without it they are usually only meat shields when playing higher level opponents)
Who is harassing with burrowed roaches? It isn't viable to go burrow roach simply to harass, it can be a byproduct but 1 cannon ends that pretty fast. This whole statement to me just seems silly. You list several viable harass options that toss have and then just dismiss them and then state that it is standard play to burrow harass yet isn't standard to get blink stalkers, or HT? I mean why isn't a Warp Prism part of standard toss play? You already spend 100 minerals on proxy pylon sometimes several why not have that to bring into battle more often. I can't remember which pro game/replay I watched where the player used terrific warp prism immortal drop play against tanks. Reminded me of reaver drops and was nasty.
You also completely ignore photon cannons as a tool to harass which might be one of the best harass tool in the game now especially vs. zerg. No way a toss can harass? Give me a break, my ramp patrolling drone says otherwise.
|
warp prism could be used to protect ht's from emp and as a mobile pylon in big (end)fights. i tried it and it worked but at my gaminglevel i can't really say if its efficient or not. maybe some of the 10000+ toss try it out and report... just an idea
|
On November 04 2010 00:38 Bouja wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2010 00:24 quasit wrote:On November 03 2010 23:08 Jermstuddog wrote:On November 03 2010 22:44 Severedevil wrote:
DTs at the Citadel would be pretty sick; you'd be able to get them in the opposing base at ~6 minutes.
I'm pretty sure the better suggestion is to put DTs in the Templar Archives. If that's too fast, you could also delay the Templar Archives to take 100 game-seconds to build. That wouldn't change the timing of DTs, but it would allow you to follow up DTs with Templar. (Or to threaten DTs while teching Templar.) Just for the record, Banshees with cloak take 280 seconds to make from the time you put down your Barracks. Dark Templar take 265 seconds from the first gateway assuming you managed to finish Warp Gate by the time your Shrine finishes. One of these flies. One of these has 6 range. One of these has 20 more health than the other. One of these is useful even without stealth. Which unit do you think is OP? The one that has permanent cloak and is spammable? It doesn't matter if it's not permanent, since it kills probes pretty fast, and has good enough range that it can evade cannons. How many probes can you kill in 20 seconds with a cloaked banshee?
i honestly cant beleive of all the thing wrong with terran u people pick cloaked banshees. 1 observer with some stalkers easily stops that.
the problem people have is they hot key every single unit they own to one hotkey instead of leaving a few in there main/natural untill they get ready to push. that is the main problem i see people have when they TRY to deal wit a banshee. they send every single unit they have cuz its on one hot key (zealots collusus temps and all) just to deal with maybe ONE or TWO banshees. i even see top level players doing this and it needs to stop.
try seperating ur units and see how much you shut down banshees. oh and dont forget the detection range on static defenses like cannons/spores/etc. day9 demonstrated this. the detection range is like 9 or 10 so one correctly placed cannon should be enought as far as detection goes....
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
