EPTProtoss From Many Angles - Page 2
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
| ||
|
Iamyournoob
Germany595 Posts
On March 14 2011 18:44 WhiteDog wrote: Gateway units are good enough, what exactly is wrong about them ? Stalker get demolished by marauders, but gateway + forcefield can take a heavy bio army. They can take a heavy bio army in small numbers - yeah that is true. But once it gets to the size of maybe 20 units, stimmed marines and marauders just rip through gateway units. I can't tell you how frustating it was to me in the beginning to actually macro better than a terran but not get Colossi out in time and lose to the way more cost efficient Terran bio ball. | ||
|
B.I.G.
3251 Posts
| ||
|
niTsEn
Germany86 Posts
But like the OP mentions in PvT you just need the colossi to be that strong because if not you can`t hold a bio push with stim etc. it just feeld unrealistic how gateway unit sucks against stimmed bio units. So for that scenario collusus needs it splash and its damage. And added to this point my late game against t was always zealot/immortal/ht. With KA now removed i kinda feel like i won`t do this transition anymore and just will hope that my colossi won`t get sniped by vikings before the real engagement starts. As last thing i really really love your idea with the observer going to the nexus and you "just" have to build one of our higher tech buildings. I told my buddies so often that we are forced into one tech tree just to be safe against DT/Banshee/Burrowed Roaches. No other race is forced to go one tech path just to get detection. | ||
|
alepov
Netherlands1132 Posts
| ||
|
Philip2110
Scotland798 Posts
| ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
Forcefields costing 75 energy i think could make them too weak for their cost. 100 gas is not cheap, and forcefields, specially in these new open maps, need to be used in quantity to have effect or armies just go around them. Still, this one is debatable. Also agree with the carriers, specially now that battlecruisers got a ridiculous speed buff (needed but the speed increase they gave it is too much imo). Still it won't change the fact that they are so hard to get, and only rarely will we see them. | ||
|
arbitrageur
Australia1202 Posts
| ||
|
hmunkey
United Kingdom1973 Posts
It would reward scouting, preparation and forward thinking, and it would allow their opponent to strategically pick targets knowing they have a small window before the storms hit. As it stands, late-late game PvT seems like a serious uphill battle. And honestly, I think FF costing a little more wouldn't hurt, but it would have to be balanced in such a way that Protoss could still defend against Zerg all-ins and whatnot in the very early stages of the game where FFs are vital. | ||
|
wristuzi
United Kingdom1168 Posts
Is there anything wrong with having strong and weak points during the length of the game? Yes, protoss are weak pre- and post-4gate, but so is zerg before they get their FE expansion up, and so is terran when they go MMM or mech and haven't got a critical amount of tanks/MM up. You talk about zealot/stalker being useless late game, when at the moment there is an increasing popularity of double upgrade builds, which zealots benefit from massively, stalkers less so. And I think it's a bit silly to call the blink upgrade anything but a massive upgrade as well - it leads to so much more than 'a harass tool, and a way of allowing Stalkers to occasionally frontload some damage or take some extra hits'. And charge is also nothing but a huge upgrade, which is actually being buffed in 1.3, something everyone seems to forget about. Zealot - Charging Zealots will now hit fleeing targets at least once. This looks to be a big buff against MM especially. As far as unit diversity (especially T3) in the late game goes, I'll concede that the colossi seems to be becoming an almost compulsory unit to have in your army. I will not agree however, that you don't see enough of the other T3 units, carriers and archons, let alone mothership which it's not even uncommon to get in the late game anymore. I feel like my post has kind of lost direction now. Bah. I feel like the OP is not a whine, but it can't help come across as a little whiney. I KNOW IT'S NOT. Just consider that protoss use of colossus isn't the only unit composition that players are forced into - I haven't seen a pro level ZvP where the Z has won with ling-muta since people discovered the 6 WG push. And you very infrequently see ZvT where the Z doesn't go ling-muta-bling. Hopefully the infestor change in the next patch will help move the focus of the Z matchups away from the deathball situation that it seems to be in now. I hope I don't offend, I just think protoss is in a good place at the moment, and probably will be even with the KA change. I realise that being forced into using one unit in all matchups isn't ideal, but that's a huge part of the game - forcing unit compositions. Sure, terran has an incredible diversity of units to use, but that's part of the race that they have to learn also - finding the right unit composition. Also bear in mind that having lots of unit diversity does not necessarily equal having lots of strategic diversity. Gonna end with a mollifying '  ' | ||
|
CrumpetGuvnor
Australia302 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On March 14 2011 19:10 Iamyournoob wrote: They can take a heavy bio army in small numbers - yeah that is true. But once it gets to the size of maybe 20 units, stimmed marines and marauders just rip through gateway units. I can't tell you how frustating it was to me in the beginning to actually macro better than a terran but not get Colossi out in time and lose to the way more cost efficient Terran bio ball. I have seen tyler going for heavy upgraded gateway army against bioball, he did that to Jinro recently and crushed him. You have not taste frustration until you have seen your 200/200 hydra roach army getting destroyed by a 150 food colossi stalker army without killing one unit. That's how SC2 is, hard counter. And about observer in nexus : bad idea, that would make toss scouting ability imba (it's already way better than zerg & terran). | ||
|
Moja
United States313 Posts
1) takes more skill to use (potentially need warp prisms for moving around quickly) 2) clearer distinction between colo and HT tech 3) same combat effectiveness but worse map control/counterattack ability With the trend towards bigger maps this will have an even greater impact. | ||
|
kirkybaby
Korea (South)781 Posts
On March 14 2011 22:09 Moja wrote: Best way to nerf the colossus is a move speed reduction imo. This makes it so: 1) takes more skill to use (potentially need warp prisms for moving around quickly) 2) clearer distinction between colo and HT tech 3) same combat effectiveness but worse map control/counterattack ability With the trend towards bigger maps this will have an even greater impact. great points and concisely articulated. +reputation to you sir | ||
|
Ravomat
Germany422 Posts
In my opinion a lot of the problems come with the fact that units ball up and are easy to micro because of that. So I think reducing the movement speed of the Colossus could help out a lot because you need to be more careful when moving your ball around and it gives Zerg and Terran more time to react and set up flanks. Also i believe this could help out PvP for the same reasons. To touch on your other suggestions: 2. Charge is getting a buff so let's see how this will help. 3. I don't agree with this. Observers are incredibly powerful. They are permanently invisible so they can permanently watch an area for only 25/75 and with their speed upgrade they are as fast as a worker. If your build is an autoloss to Cloak Banshee steal a gas like many people do when 3gate expanding in PvT. That way you have more time to see if Banshees are coming and get your Robo up. It makes the game more interesting because mindgames get more involved. Also a Robo is always useful to have for emergency Immortals or Warp Prism play. I would not change the Protoss detection thing. 4. I'm not sure about this one. It would effectively reduce the numbers of Force Fields from 4 to 2 per sentry. This means PvZ sentry expand would become considerably weaker and make it much harder for Protoss to fast expand. Protoss needs those extra forcefields. I could be biased because I'm a Protoss player but I don't think it should be changed now. 5. Well, Carriers have the highest DPS in the game but their cost especially with interceptors and build time even with chronoboost...I don't know they are strong but almost impossible to tech to. Maybe it would help to increase their mineral cost but make the interceptors untargetable. Also I think it's wrong to just remove Khaydarin Amulet without trying to tweak the numbers. I got some more ideas: I) An expensive Sentry upgrade which increases the effectiveness of Guardian Shield. So Zealot/Stalker stand a better chance against MMM and Roach/Hydra in the mid/lategame. II) Increase range of Immortals to 6 to get them in line with Stalkers and Marauders. I think it's disgusting that Immortals have less range than Stalkers/Marauders because of Blink and Conc Shell. Yea, I know about Force Fields but you cannot really replenish sentries later in the game which are obvious targets for hit-and-run tactics or suicide squads which have the sole purpose of sniping sentries. III) Increase range of Archons to 3 to make them more viable. IV) Reducing the energy cost of Hallucinations in conjunction with increasing the cost and/or build time of the Colossus. It would make the Death Ball itself stronger but the acquisition of it harder. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
| ||
|
babysimba
10466 Posts
The reason why protoss is so strong mid-late game is not colossus or hts, its the underlying issue that most people don't see, strongest tech switches. Ability and strength of tech switch relies mainly on 2 things - upgrades and build-up cost (building of infrastructures). Heavy stalkers/zealots, immortals, colossus/hts, all of them requires different unit responses from the opponent, and all of them share the same upgrades. The remaining units, phoenixes and VRs (with the exception of carriers) do not even require upgrades for their usual purposes. Just imagine the strength of zerg and terran, if terran's mech&bio and zerg's melee&ranged share the same upgrades. Protoss only need to build gateways that can produce so many different type of units, compare that to terran's raxes and facts that requires reactors/tech-lab for maximum efficiency for different type of units. Protoss "mech" army are so expensive (yet strong), they only requires 1-2 robo/stargates in 2 bases which implies low build-up costs. Protoss also has the strongest macro mechanics in CONTEXT of protoss. Chronoboost allows faster production of probes to keep up with zerg and terran economy, while allowing to chronoboost upgrades (that actually affects 80% of their units) and boost production of their robo and stargates units (this further reduces their build-up costs). This is why you see protosses going for all the techs in certain games, even though they cannot support all the production yet, but they can use them so effectively when the situation calls for it. You don't see that in terran or zerg games (unless zerg is so ahead). Protoss can easily transition to another tech without losing strength, zerg can tech switch but their upgrades will fall behind, terran.... well with the exception of hellions that only need blue flame upgrade. (seriously terran players should start to learn how to complement their bio army with blue flame hellions to fight zealots heavy army) For units, i honestly feel sentries should be nerfed somehow without losing their early game usage, either by increasing starting energy and energy of forcefield together, or by reducing their maximum energy. I am actually ok with colossus and warp in hts, but not with chargelots. Chargelots are just too cost effective as a mineral dump when used together with colossus and hts. Colossus are really fragile units that will make or break the game with micro, most importantly they need to be supported by gateway units. Hts alone are not really a threat without zealots. Notice sc vs san games carefully, sc actually get owned by chargelots not hts. His ghosts and micro can actually handle hts without zealot support with more cost effectiveness (shown in certain situations). Chargelots not only can tank, they also restrict the army too much for good storms. They are also too good against mech right now. (like i said earlier, terran players need to complement BF hellions into their army, their damage are so ridiculous against light, so time will tell if chargelots are actually balanced). Lastly for phoenixes, few phoenixes actually thrash few mutas in terms of harrassment ability lol, they are just too good with protoss' tech switches, so if that get sorted out it should be fine. Edit: They can always buff sentries energy regeneration to balance it out. | ||
|
da_head
Canada3350 Posts
| ||
|
nihlon
Sweden5581 Posts
On March 14 2011 19:56 B.I.G. wrote: i think your right about the balance among stages.. toss being pretty impotent in t1 but strong lategame (i dont really think OP but whatever) while terran and zerg seem to be able to win even lategame with only t1 and some t2 units How has zerg stronger t1 than protoss? | ||
|
Tomken
Norway1144 Posts
| ||
| ||
