|
there is an easy solution to all this
1.
Put Warpgates into Twilight Council -> delays the 4 Gate Pushes and any aggressive cheese builds that are build around warpgates.
2.
Put Charge&Blink into Cybernetics Core, so gateway units like T1 units of Zerg and Terran can be upgraded to some strengh this would help Gateway units alot. (would still need to be balanced of course, but without Warpgates this is easily possible!)
Both Zerg and Terran T1 Unit gain alot of strengh early upgrades. (Speed,Stim,Shells)
If Charge & Blink are accessible alot earlier, it would give Protoss the ability to compete and also give the ability use micro. (both upgrades are the most important upgrades in the whole Protoss Arsenal but they can't be get safely, because of detection issues)
Putting them into Core would fix this issue, while opening Protoss the ability to chose their techpath cause they aren't forced into Colossus route after getting Robotics for Detection.
For that to work consistently they only would need to adjust Gateway Production Times so it doesn't get imbalanced. (right now a P playing on Gateways will always lose because it takes way to long to build units with gateways, that why warpgates need to be rushed in PvP!)
Warpgate in such a game would only give Protoss more mobility in midgame/lategame and not in early game anymore which would balance every matchup to the better i think.
this would also make Forcefields not such a big liability so Sentrys & other T3 Units can be balanced way easier than like it is right now.
Protoss right now has absolute crap Gateway Army (which is only viable earlygame because of 4 Gate) going into midgame without Charge/Blink Gateway Armys suck hard. With it they are barely able to compete in midgame at least but going into Mid/late they would still T3 units which could be transitioned way alot more stable.
Protoss Gameplay is so easy predict these days.
either fast gateway pressure (detection doesn't matter then) or rush to Colossus (because Detection is on that route)
every other build is very unsafe (detection) to various gameplays and almost always a buildorder coinflip.
|
On March 14 2011 23:46 Philip2110 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 14 2011 22:29 nihlon wrote:I was expecting pictures when I clicked this thread. I'm dissapointed. 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? speed roach > gateway units
Speed roach is t2, actually.
|
^People are suggesting to nerf some things, and buff others.
|
On March 15 2011 01:09 freetgy wrote:
there is an easy solution to all this
1.
Put Warpgates into Twilight Council -> delays the 4 Gate Pushes and any aggressive cheese builds that are build around warpgates.
2.
Put Charge&Blink into Cybernetics Core, so gateway units like T1 units of Zerg and Terran can be upgraded to some strengh this would help Gateway units alot.
Both Zerg and Terran T1 Unit gain alot of strengh by stronger standard armys (after upgrades)
If Charge & Blink are accessible alot earlier, it would give Protoss the ability to compete and also give the ability to micro. (both upgrades are the most important upgrades in the whole Protoss Arsenal but they can't be get safely, because of detection issues)
For that to work consistently they only would need to adjust Gateway Production Times so it doesn't get imbalanced. (right now a P playing on Gateways will always lose because it takes way to long to build units with gateways, that why warpgates need to be rushed in PvP!)
Warpgate in such a game would only give Protoss more mobility in midgame/lategame and not in early game anymore which would balance every matchup to the better i think.
this would also make Forcefields not such a big liability so Sentrys & other T3 Units can be balanced way easier than like it is right now.
If you put the warpgate tech on the twilight council, youre just favoring that over other tech trees. Its creating a similar problem to the observer problem, whereby one tech tree has something that the player needs. Think about a toss trying to get warpgates AND observer: thats a LOT of gas and two completely different techs. Similarly, if you want a voidray in there too, its even worse.
If you put the warpgate on the core the way it is, any protoss strategy can access it. The catch should be its cost/research time, and other drawbacks, like the one you hint at about making it take longer for warpgates to produce than gateways.
I agree that warpgates should be pushed back to a less volatile part of the game or if they are to be rushed, a high gas cost will eat into your sentry/stalker count. It should be a tough decision on warpgate research timing, not a no-brainer 50/50 upgrade.
Furthermore, by buffing gateway units and nerfing warpgates, you can create some interesting mechanics with PvT and PvZ where (for example), terran has to turtle with bunkers until stim/conc shell are out, then they have an infantry advantage. Then toss is a bit behind until charge/blink come out balancing it out again. Upgrades should matter, and their timing should matter too.
|
I really like the discussion that was created here. Some good points made (and some bad ones).
I see some discussion on a few things:
1. Double Forge upgrades.
This is an odd one, because it shows to me that a few people have missed the point.
I have been experimenting with double forge upgrades with Chronoboost for a long time... a lot longer than the pros have been using it (let me dispell the myth that I "hate" gateway units. I love them... I hate the Colossus). Granted, their mechanics are better than mine, and their timings almost certainly are, but none-the-less, what kind of builds are Double Forge Upgrade builds? They are timing attacks... Attacks that take advantage of an upgrade before your opponent can counter them. Now don't get me wrong, they are solid attacks, especially when combined with Guardian Shield and HT. What it seems to me is that since this is a relatively young build, it is a build that takes advantage of non-preparation. If someone churns out double Evo Chamber/Engineering Bay, and keeps the upgrades coming, then the window in which you have the upgrade advantage tends to close quickly... The culprit are Marines and Roach/Hydra, that take far more advantage of upgrades than Stalker/Zealot anyway. What happens when they catch up in upgrades (the late game... where the real problem is)? Well then Gateway are useless again.
Towards the late game, Gateway are good for nothing but taking hits off the units that deal damage. This is a problem. Double Forge Upgrade builds are timing attacks that increase the window of time before Gateway units are useless again, buying time to get to Cols and sometimes HT. The problem is not the Gateway units are useless the whole game, but that Gateway units are useless the late game.
2. Warpgates
This is very interesting discussion. I didn't miss the concept of Warpgates, but I didn't figure that it was possible to change this anymore.
I had an idea a while back to allow for some units to be produced ONLY from Gateways and others from warpgates. This would encourage people to switch back and forth for different effects, and have half in gateways and half in warpgates. I dislike the idea that there is essentially NO disadvantage to having a Warpgate over a Gateway, and I think it would warrent some discussion.
3. The idea that Gateway units are fine as is, and I want to buff the 4 gate. If you think that is the purpose of the OP, go read it again. If there is a buff to Zealots and Stalkers it would need to accompany either a nerf to force field or a nerf to 4 gate.
4. Force Fields
I understand people feel that you cannot live without force field now. But don't you think it is kind of cheesy? Warp in 3 Sentries and you have essentially an eternally blocked ramp (assuming you are vigilant with placing them). You don't even need any other units. Terran can build walls, but they need to use Supply Depots, so they need units to defend them. Zerg need to use their armies. Protoss can just warp in 3 Sentries.
I would like to see Protoss able to hold off early assaults with their units rather than some cheesy ability that does nothing but say "Nah, i'm scared to fight you, so stay out there until I'm ready."
5. Some people still hung up on the specifics of my balance suggestions. I thought I made it clear in the OP. What is important is NOT the specifics, but the idea.
Cols nerfed in SOME way. This would obviously never occur without buffs in other ways, specifically gateway units.
Charge readjusted. What I am suggesting here is the idea that Charge/Blink/Twilight Council could be used to buff gateway units. Making them too strong in the early game is bad, so make them stronger later, through upgrades
Obs from the nexus. Again, while I think this would be a good option, my suggestion is more to show people what the Obs (or lack of Obs) is doing to builds. It pushes Col builds into the "ONLY right choice" category, slowing down other builds. If this can be lessened to some degree... (I like the idea of it coming out of nexus non-cloaked, so it can be used defensively against DT/Roach/Banshee)
Force Field. I don't like that EVERY battlefield can be turned Protoss Favored with 4 full energy Sentries. Into the lategame this becomes a little obnoxious IMO. As you approach 6-7 Sentries, baiting forcefields becomes useless, because "OH LOOK, I CAN MAKE MORE". I would like to see force field slowed down somewhat. The suggestion I made is one of many MANY possible options.
Carriers are underused. I would like to see them make an appearance again. The only change that I believe is warranted without any discussion is the "Interceptors do not get sucked into your own vortex" change. It is stupid that casting a Vortex near a carrier destroys it's firepower...
|
On March 15 2011 01:20 Knee_of_Justice wrote:
If you put the warpgate tech on the twilight council, youre just favoring that over other tech trees. Its creating a similar problem to the observer problem, whereby one tech tree has something that the player needs. Think about a toss trying to get warpgates AND observer: thats a LOT of gas and two completely different techs. Similarly, if you want a voidray in there too, its even worse.
Yeah but the thing is right now Protoss has to get Warpgates or he will lose every game.
In my idea Warpgates would be a midgame option (TC), but not an something necessary to survive earlygame.
This also fixes the big problem early game that warpgates negate defenders advantage.
(which is a really bad thing)
Warpgate still would have that issue in mid/late but in mid/late the additional production cycle wouldn't make that much of a difference because the game is on a lot higher Production Values and players have the options to scout and react.
This would help PvP alot obviously.
This would balance PvT alot would fix the overpoweredness of M&M while also making them safe since there are no early Warpgate rushes.
Obviously PvZ would be alot more balanced too cause then the strong lategame options as the OP describes can be nerfed to something more balanced.
Attack/Defense Upgrades would play an equal role for each race then too.
|
zealot stalker are just badasses once their upgrades are out, just like in sc1, useless before their upgrades were out. You always wanted goon range asap, and zealot speed was the moment were they finally could fight against the units that destroyed them. Also weapon/armor upgrades made them terrible strong, which is the same way in sc2.
For me they feel stronger than in bw, especially with the new spellcaster in addition. And the colossi is just a nice way to force air to air units, so your pure gateway follow up has an easy moment. (yeah most people go colossi to only force those corrupters or vikings have a bit of time until charge or blink is done and then simply win the ground fight)
So like the reaver its a unit that gives you the time to make your gateway army strong as hell.
But unlike sc1 where you microed your reaver most of the time, gave him targets and everything. You know have to micro your other part, let some zealots charge at something, blink your stalkers somewhere, use guardian shield put a few force fields make some halluzinations after you blink sniped the detection.
So for me the game just got more awesome, as you won't see a single unit microed good, but you see a complete army microing around, while the opponent is busy trying to snipe those artillery and try to avoid their key shots, while you try to defend it.
only thing i would change maybe, is slow their aspd down a lil and move in some weak beam animation pointing at the targeted unit for maybe 0.2 seconds before having its full charge and make land their hit, so the opponent has a little reaction time to save a few units from the damage. But i guess the problems only starts with 5+ colossi as they just destroy any max range concave and if you move units in closer they get autotargeted by the oppenent and die without making some colossi shots go down wrongly.
So to add a lil spice it could also be a nice idea to make the colossi an inverted old carrier. (where the shields should be good against ground units only) and make the shields only effectiv against air units, while ground units will have it easier to snipe them (its hard to reach them so its no real nerf, just that people will ahve to take more care and can't overrun a tank line with a few colossi. Or fall to some burrowed roaches etc.
so like a wise dwarf said if you can't chop of their heads, chop of their legs first and then chop of their heads.
|
I'm not sure how I feel about the "delay the Warpgate" ideas. The problem really isn't limited to the early game. Just look at KA Templar, that's what happens when you let powerful units be deployed almost instantly anywhere on the map, and it's a markedly late-game issue. If you make Zealots and Stalkers good, this is going to manifest itself in one way or the other eventually, I feel.
I'm also not sure whether increasing production rate is going to be sufficient drawback. Lategame, a gas-restricted Protoss could just throw down additional gateways, turn them all into warpgates, and circumvent the drawback just by spending some minerals.
I really think there needs to be some mechanical limit on the Warpgate that makes these types of situations impossible. Making stuff warp-in slower, making it a lot more involved to set up a "warp-in area", we really need a hard restriction on mobility, imo. Or just scrap it and let us use gateways, that's fine too.
On March 15 2011 01:33 FeyFey wrote:+ Show Spoiler +zealot stalker are just badasses once their upgrades are out, just like in sc1, useless before their upgrades were out. You always wanted goon range asap, and zealot speed was the moment were they finally could fight against the units that destroyed them. Also weapon/armor upgrades made them terrible strong, which is the same way in sc2.
For me they feel stronger than in bw, especially with the new spellcaster in addition. And the colossi is just a nice way to force air to air units, so your pure gateway follow up has an easy moment. (yeah most people go colossi to only force those corrupters or vikings have a bit of time until charge or blink is done and then simply win the ground fight)
So like the reaver its a unit that gives you the time to make your gateway army strong as hell.
.But unlike sc1 where you microed your reaver most of the time, gave him targets and everything. You know have to micro your other part, let some zealots charge at something, blink your stalkers somewhere, use guardian shield put a few force fields make some halluzinations after you blink sniped the detection
So for me the game just got more awesome, as you won't see a single unit microed good, but you see a complete army microing around, while the opponent is busy trying to snipe those artillery and try to avoid their key shots, while you try to defend it.
only thing i would change maybe, is slow their aspd down a lil and move in some weak beam animation pointing at the targeted unit for maybe 0.2 seconds before having its full charge and make land their hit, so the opponent has a little reaction time to save a few units from the damage. But i guess the problems only starts with 5+ colossi as they just destroy any max range concave and if you move units in closer they get autotargeted by the oppenent and die without making some colossi shots go down wrongly.
So to add a lil spice it could also be a nice idea to make the colossi an inverted old carrier. (where the shields should be good against ground units only) and make the shields only effectiv against air units, while ground units will have it easier to snipe them (its hard to reach them so its no real nerf, just that people will ahve to take more care and can't overrun a tank line with a few colossi. Or fall to some burrowed roaches etc.
so like a wise dwarf said if you can't chop of their heads, chop of their legs first and then chop of their heads.
Stalkers aren't nearly as good as Dragoons, and they scale horribly with upgrades. Zealots are actually slightly worse in a variety of ways - it's more the new collision and pathing allowing huge ranged balls to form, that makes them significantly worse.
|
On March 15 2011 02:14 Toadvine wrote:
Stalkers aren't nearly as good as Dragoons, and they scale horribly with upgrades. Zealots are actually slightly worse in a variety of ways - it's more the new collision and pathing allowing huge ranged balls to form, that makes them significantly worse.
I agree this is part of the problem. I feel that if the Cleave was added in on Charge, it would make Zealots better because it would encourage unit splits, decreasing the power of compact ranged balls
|
Fantastic post, excellent points.
I feel like Collossus could have a range/speed decrease, making them more marauder-snipeable.
|
Warpgates and blink is just too much mobility, wich forced blizzard to nerf gate units. Blink alone is enough mobility for me.
|
Zealot/Goon as a combo in PvZ was actually an awful combination without support, crackling/ultra or just pure crackling both utterly PWNDIZZLED Zealot/Goon like no other. You needed either reavers, high temps, or archons, or some combination of.
|
Wow what an amazing read I'm impressed. This wasn't just some silly rant this was well thought out and all of it made perfect sense. Kudos to you sir
|
On March 15 2011 02:21 FabledIntegral wrote:
Zealot/Goon as a combo in PvZ was actually an awful combination without support, crackling/ultra or just pure crackling both utterly PWNDIZZLED Zealot/Goon like no other. You needed either reavers, high temps, or archons, or some combination of.
this is true. the only matchup where you could win with pure zlot/goon was pvt.
|
I disagree with this whole labeling gateway units as UP and colossi as OP methodology. You can't expect low tech units to have the same effectiveness as high tech units. You can say there is a problem with this, or you can say that there is a problem with other races using low-tech units throughout the entire game.
In BW, each race in each matchup revolved around a high-tech unit mixed in with a lot of low-tech units. PvZ was templar/archon. ZvT was defiler/ultra. TvP/Z was science vessel. PvT was arbiter. These units were all game-changing. Possibly the only complaint I can see against the colossus in comparison with these is that the colossus is easier to use. But pretty much everything is easier to do in SC2, so I don't think difficulty of use is a large consideration factoring in to game design.
|
How about nerfing warp gates by making the cooldown variable depending on the distance from nexus? There will be of course some threshold in which the cool down will be set and after that the distance from base will come into place. In that way they can buff the gateway units a bit and nerf the 4-gate.
|
On March 15 2011 02:29 Enervate wrote:
I disagree with this whole labeling gateway units as UP and colossi as OP methodology. You can't expect low tech units to have the same effectiveness as high tech units.
I hear this argument a lot, but I couldn't disagree more. High Tier units are wonderful for support, and some raw power, but the bread and butter are usually lower end ones. Example would be Marines, Marauders and Helions, or Roaches, Hydras and Lings. They are capable of packing a punch on their own, and become brutally painful when the are mixed with higher end support units (Medivacs, Thors, Tanks, Infestors, Banelings, Mutalisks). Protoss is borderline unplayable without their high end support units, because their bread and butter units (Zealot, Stalker) have such low damage output. They need the high tech units just to survive, rather than to amplify their effectiveness. This is why you end up seeing 5+ cols in a death ball.
Currently, it feels that the Colossus aren't the support... The Stalkers are.
|
On March 15 2011 02:29 Enervate wrote:
I disagree with this whole labeling gateway units as UP and colossi as OP methodology. You can't expect low tech units to have the same effectiveness as high tech units. You can say there is a problem with this, or you can say that there is a problem with other races using low-tech units throughout the entire game.
In BW, each race in each matchup revolved around a high-tech unit mixed in with a lot of low-tech units. PvZ was templar/archon. ZvT was defiler/ultra. TvP/Z was science vessel. PvT was arbiter. These units were all game-changing. Possibly the only complaint I can see against the colossus in comparison with these is that the colossus is easier to use. But pretty much everything is easier to do in SC2, so I don't think difficulty of use is a large consideration factoring in to game design.
Well, notice most of those are actually spellcasters as opposed to simply "i have an attack and kill" units? Colossus has nothing special, just a retardedly strong attack. Defiler used spells such as plague for damage, and dark swarm for support casting. Science vessel was also a caster, that didn't just A move but irradiated Zerg to death or EMP'd toss. Arbiters weren't as crucial as you make them sound to be, yeah, you're at a massive disadvantage without them, but plenty of toss were able to go pure Zealot/Goon til near the lategame and crush opposition when they finally needed arbiters or carriers (although they could get templar as well, which was quite common until the last year or so). Archons are the only unit you mentioned that are a straight up damage dealer, and at least they were uber short range damage dealers that took "bonus" (full) damage from everything everything unlike Colossus which sits in the back dealing crazy DPS.
It's like a Siege tank with shorter range but doesn't have to siege up. No real unique mechanic about the unit, besides the cliff walking and being able to be shot by air. But that doesn't affect too much on how it's used in battle (it's simply still A-moved, just make sure not to be sniped by vikings).
|
On March 15 2011 02:42 Zanez.smarty wrote:Show nested quote +On March 15 2011 02:29 Enervate wrote:
I disagree with this whole labeling gateway units as UP and colossi as OP methodology. You can't expect low tech units to have the same effectiveness as high tech units. Currently, it feels that the Colossus aren't the support... The Stalkers are.
That's what pains me a lot, and that's whats hurting the game involving protoss the most.
Protoss has some small timing windows, where they can deal massiv damage with their gate units / early robo units (colossus / immortal) / stargate (phoenixe / void-rays), thanks to warp-in reinforcements.
But if you miss those, all you can do is basically camp in your base and try not to fall to much behind, because you can't leave your base until you got a sufficient numbers of colossus to deal the damage while your gateway units are support your colossus (in tvp zealot blocking, stalker shooting vikings / zvp stalker firing corrupter, sentries force fielding)
As a protoss player myself (3600master), i'm often time to scared to move out unless i got 200/200 and many colossus, because if i trade armies, i won't have enough support for my colossus.
And that's not how the game should be, protoss nearly became like terran mech was in bw.
Unmobil, stalling for reaching the critical mass, and then push out and try to overhelm everything with insane cost efficiency.
I would love if protoss to gains some accessable harassment units, that aren't a dead tech tree (dts, phoenixes) or extremely late in the tech (storm drop)
|
On March 15 2011 01:09 freetgy wrote:
Put Warpgates into Twilight Council -> delays the 4 Gate Pushes and any aggressive cheese builds that are build around warpgates.
I LOVE this idea. Obviously gateway production times would need to be adjusted as you said, but it would make for a nice transition over the course of a game to go from gateways > warpgates.
Right now everyone rushes into warpgates which begs the question why are gateways even there?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
