|
On April 23 2011 05:12 Geiko wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 05:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 05:07 Geiko wrote:On April 23 2011 04:54 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 04:51 Geiko wrote:
IMO, Blizzard people are a bit overreacting here due to the amount of QQ from protoss players who find it easier to blame there loss on game design rather than their own flaws.
4 Gate is only really a problem on Tal Darim Altar and Scrap Station where you don't have a small ramp. On other maps, a three gate with one or two sentries and stalkers beat a 4 gate easily (don't believe me ? Geiko.813 on EU server) so I wouldn't worry too much about high level PvP. Pros only lose to 4 gate because a) they are too greedy sometimes and 4 gate punishes that b) Tech paths in mid game hard counter each other (robo vs blink vs stargate) and encourage point a).
If they feel it is really much easier to 4 gate then to defend 4 gate at lower levels, a quick and easy fix would be to prevent warping in behind a ForceFielded ramp. But I don't feel even that should be necessary, there are plenty of other all ins in this game much harder to deal with than 4 gate in PvP and they aren't doing anything about that (3 racks before orbital in TvP for example). People have tried to use 3 gate and sentries to defend but then you will not have enough DPS to take out the pylons at your ramp then they warp up zealots and you will never be able to keep up in production. Actualy, quite a lot of pros defend 4 gate by defensive 3 gate. The key is knowing when to Forcefield. If they try to go up your ramp with the initial zealot + 6 stalkers, just FF the army in half and kill off easily 2 stalkers and a zealot. From there on, they are 3 units late = 3 warp cycles late, and they can't afford a 4th cycle of production so you should be equal in units and you have the ramp advantage. If they wait for the next 4 zealots, know the timing on when they can warp in zealots (it's usually right when the pylon on the bottom of the ramp finishes for a perfect 4 gate). Just FF as he pushes up, you will be facing 4 zealots + 1 zealot or 4 zealots + 1 zealot + 1 stalker vs your 7-8 stalkers. Just micro away from your ramp, kill off a hand full of zealots and a stalker, and then you are good to go when your FF wears off. If they are not doing the 4gate perfectly, you can even have an extra FF after that. The problem with defensive 3 gate is not that it is hard to hold 4 gate, it is that it is hard to scout if he is actually doing 4 gate... and you can fall a bit behind if he does some other greedy build. But that is the problem for all PvP builds I think, Blizzard should work on that rather than changing the Warpgate mechanism. What pro games are you watching? I know you what you are saying but any sentry heavy builds die as you will be short on stalkers. Remember for every one sentry you have you are down 2 stalkers in a way. I can't remember a sentry heavy 3 gate defending 4 gate in any recent major pro game.... Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear, I warp in only 1 sentry and only stalkers after that.
Then you are banking on one ff which is pretty insane. That's a high risk build in my opinion if you rely one one single thing to win/lose the game. A defensive 4 gate is MUCH safer and does not rely on hitting a perfect ff.
Also with only one FF you will still die most of the time. If you split the army they just hold position on the ramp and you will take lots of damage engaging because you are behind on units. If you do the trap the zealots in method, they can just again hold them on the ramp at the base of the ff, and you will be behind because you have one less gate.
|
I feel like they're side-stepping the issue instead of really dealing with it.
Here's the problem with PvP: each unit is so expensive, that if you're only 1 unit behind, it is nearly impossible to win against an equally skilled opponent.
PvP has sucked since before 4gate was "the build" to do in the matchup. I remember 2 gate zealot rushes before the build time was nerfed. The only way to win was to have more zealots. That seems like exactly what's going to happen when this change is implemented, early rushes are still going to be the way to go, they're just going to change slightly. Robo tech will still be too slow, and you'll end up just matching your opponent's gateway count. Which happens to be exactly what is going on now.
|
On April 23 2011 05:15 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 05:12 Geiko wrote:On April 23 2011 05:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 05:07 Geiko wrote:On April 23 2011 04:54 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 04:51 Geiko wrote:
IMO, Blizzard people are a bit overreacting here due to the amount of QQ from protoss players who find it easier to blame there loss on game design rather than their own flaws.
4 Gate is only really a problem on Tal Darim Altar and Scrap Station where you don't have a small ramp. On other maps, a three gate with one or two sentries and stalkers beat a 4 gate easily (don't believe me ? Geiko.813 on EU server) so I wouldn't worry too much about high level PvP. Pros only lose to 4 gate because a) they are too greedy sometimes and 4 gate punishes that b) Tech paths in mid game hard counter each other (robo vs blink vs stargate) and encourage point a).
If they feel it is really much easier to 4 gate then to defend 4 gate at lower levels, a quick and easy fix would be to prevent warping in behind a ForceFielded ramp. But I don't feel even that should be necessary, there are plenty of other all ins in this game much harder to deal with than 4 gate in PvP and they aren't doing anything about that (3 racks before orbital in TvP for example). People have tried to use 3 gate and sentries to defend but then you will not have enough DPS to take out the pylons at your ramp then they warp up zealots and you will never be able to keep up in production. Actualy, quite a lot of pros defend 4 gate by defensive 3 gate. The key is knowing when to Forcefield. If they try to go up your ramp with the initial zealot + 6 stalkers, just FF the army in half and kill off easily 2 stalkers and a zealot. From there on, they are 3 units late = 3 warp cycles late, and they can't afford a 4th cycle of production so you should be equal in units and you have the ramp advantage. If they wait for the next 4 zealots, know the timing on when they can warp in zealots (it's usually right when the pylon on the bottom of the ramp finishes for a perfect 4 gate). Just FF as he pushes up, you will be facing 4 zealots + 1 zealot or 4 zealots + 1 zealot + 1 stalker vs your 7-8 stalkers. Just micro away from your ramp, kill off a hand full of zealots and a stalker, and then you are good to go when your FF wears off. If they are not doing the 4gate perfectly, you can even have an extra FF after that. The problem with defensive 3 gate is not that it is hard to hold 4 gate, it is that it is hard to scout if he is actually doing 4 gate... and you can fall a bit behind if he does some other greedy build. But that is the problem for all PvP builds I think, Blizzard should work on that rather than changing the Warpgate mechanism. What pro games are you watching? I know you what you are saying but any sentry heavy builds die as you will be short on stalkers. Remember for every one sentry you have you are down 2 stalkers in a way. I can't remember a sentry heavy 3 gate defending 4 gate in any recent major pro game.... Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear, I warp in only 1 sentry and only stalkers after that. Then you are banking on one ff which is pretty insane. That's a high risk build in my opinion if you rely one one single thing to win/lose the game. A defensive 4 gate is MUCH safer and does not rely on hitting a perfect ff. Also with only one FF you will still die most of the time. If you split the army they just hold position on the ramp and you will take lots of damage engaging because you are behind on units. If you do the trap the zealots in method, they can just again hold them on the ramp at the base of the ff, and you will be behind because you have one less gate.
I think the point he was trying to make was that people are QQing about 4 gate like it's impossible to defend against which isn't true and that blizzard should work on changing the coinflip aspect of pvp where you never really know what your opponent is actually up to and what tech they're going. Although i really don't know how that can be done without limiting the viability of certain builds like the 4 gate for example.
|
On April 23 2011 05:10 DreamSailor wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 05:09 Eury wrote:On April 23 2011 05:07 DreamSailor wrote:
Interesting to see how they implement changes without making proxy Gates really strong.
2Gate (chrono zealots)in beta was pretty damn strong, vs. Zerg specifically, I wonder if it will make a comeback Just increase the build time of the gateways while decreasing the build time of the tier 1 units. But then you may break some of the current balances, its already incredibly hard to hold 6pool and the like as Protoss if you scout it late.
Which could be fixed by removing close positions on 4 player maps >_> they should really do that anyways.
|
i like to do naniwa's style of holding off the 4 gate because its easy to mass stalkers with a wall vs a well executed 4 gate
|
While I am open to the possibility of 4-gate needing a change (not fully convinced, but don’t care either way – as long as the changes are reasonable), I think that the proposed changes by blizzard thus far will not serve the purposes they desire.
Their current solution (specifically the decrease build time of zealots) would bring us back to the issue of the proxy gates that we had back when the game was released. Delaying the warp gate tech would probably not change the matchups vs zerg or terran too much. It would change up the 4-gate pressure vs zerg (possibly making it stronger or weaker). Faster gateway build time would allow toss to put some good pressure on terran before their stim comes out.
Balance in PvP is something that overall I think could use some tweaking. Obviously when we discuss balance in a mirror matchup different rules apply than when comparing non-mirror matchups. PvP has a problem with 4-gates and the effectiveness of colossus (which, interestingly enough, when 1-base colosus wars was the theme, blizzard did not seem to care).
Here are a couple solutions that I think may provide more of a desired effect
Solution 1: If they increase the gateway build time by 10 seconds and decrease the build time of zealots/stalkers/sentries by 10 seconds, it will allow protoss to get more forces out quickly (but the first forces they get out will be at the same time. This method would prevent an increase in proxy-cheese.
Solution 2: Leave gateway build time the same, but decrease the build time of sentries and stalkers (not zealots). This would allow the sentries to be out faster (potentially giving you an extra sentry or the energy for one additional FF). It would also increase the effectiveness of the 3-stalker push. This method would likely increase the occurrence of early stalker aggression vs terran and zerg on the smaller maps (creating a bit more risk for them in taking a blind fast expansion; which I think is reasonable).
Solution 3: I consider this to be the simplest method of preventing the aggressive 4-gates. Make it so that a pylon can only power ground on the same level as it. It will essentially not be able to warp over water, or warp up a cliff. This will increase the effectiveness of the sentries (if you let them build a pylon in your base that is your own fault). The maps that don’t have a ramp also are not FFable anyways and 4-gate is inherently strong on these maps.
Solution 4: Change the statistics of the immortal – a unit that is already underused and effectiveness pales in comparison to the colossus in nearly every situation. Perhaps make it cheaper or build faster or have longer range to be able to hit the pylons.
|
Bisutopia19399 Posts
They should just add a tier 1 reaver that can fly and land like a viking. That would solve everything.
On a serious note: This sounds like zealot heavy armies are going to be in play a lot more early games. Which does two things: 1. Against terran they will have to tech marauders. and 2. Terran teching marauders is never fun for a zealot.
|
in 3v3 damn toss are too weak early game, the first zealot even when CB doesnt come out in time. you are stuck defending until warp gates. so i like it if they buff the normal gates a bit, 2 gate rushing is risky for both sides
|
About this...we want defensive warpgate tech right to hold off rushes? But offensive warpgates are what is causing so many problem...
So why not differentiate between 'home warpins' and 'away warpins' by this...if your pylon is not in the same energy area/chain that includes a nexus then your warpins could incur a penalty. Could be increased cooldown...increased cost...or maybe even another research option. So you research basic warpgate...that let's you warp in units to any pylon that is in the energy blob/area as a nexus. Advanced warpgate then let's you warp to any pylon...even if it doesn't connect to the main 'grid'. Warp Prism's could be the exception to the rule to encourage their use (not enough people use them now).
The problem with PvP is that toss lacks a good defending option like spines or bunkers. On paper in RTS the answer to rushes should be static defense...but the cannon is not effective enough to hold off the 4 gate (or if it does it puts you way behind on tech and/or macro). Protoss needs better defenese...and one such option could be bring back the shield battery...would require lots of micro and positional play to say keep refilling that immortal blasting away at those stalkers but could be effective and very fun.
|
On April 23 2011 05:34 TrickyGilligan wrote:
I feel like they're side-stepping the issue instead of really dealing with it.
Here's the problem with PvP: each unit is so expensive, that if you're only 1 unit behind, it is nearly impossible to win against an equally skilled opponent.
PvP has sucked since before 4gate was "the build" to do in the matchup. I remember 2 gate zealot rushes before the build time was nerfed. The only way to win was to have more zealots. That seems like exactly what's going to happen when this change is implemented, early rushes are still going to be the way to go, they're just going to change slightly. Robo tech will still be too slow, and you'll end up just matching your opponent's gateway count. Which happens to be exactly what is going on now.
That wouldn't be a problem with defender's advantage. In BW, the player with fewer units could retreat behind a ramp and use high-ground advantage to defend while teching or doing something of that sort. Without that high ground advantage, you're right. Whoever has an extra unit is going to win. Since Blizzard changed high ground advantage, they needed to come up with something creative to give some sort of defender's advantage. Instead, they came up with a mechanic that even reduces it.
That and the reaver is awesome in small skirmishes but the colossus is pretty much a deathball unit.
|
On April 23 2011 05:15 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2011 05:12 Geiko wrote:On April 23 2011 05:10 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 05:07 Geiko wrote:On April 23 2011 04:54 iCCup.Diamond wrote:On April 23 2011 04:51 Geiko wrote:
IMO, Blizzard people are a bit overreacting here due to the amount of QQ from protoss players who find it easier to blame there loss on game design rather than their own flaws.
4 Gate is only really a problem on Tal Darim Altar and Scrap Station where you don't have a small ramp. On other maps, a three gate with one or two sentries and stalkers beat a 4 gate easily (don't believe me ? Geiko.813 on EU server) so I wouldn't worry too much about high level PvP. Pros only lose to 4 gate because a) they are too greedy sometimes and 4 gate punishes that b) Tech paths in mid game hard counter each other (robo vs blink vs stargate) and encourage point a).
If they feel it is really much easier to 4 gate then to defend 4 gate at lower levels, a quick and easy fix would be to prevent warping in behind a ForceFielded ramp. But I don't feel even that should be necessary, there are plenty of other all ins in this game much harder to deal with than 4 gate in PvP and they aren't doing anything about that (3 racks before orbital in TvP for example). People have tried to use 3 gate and sentries to defend but then you will not have enough DPS to take out the pylons at your ramp then they warp up zealots and you will never be able to keep up in production. Actualy, quite a lot of pros defend 4 gate by defensive 3 gate. The key is knowing when to Forcefield. If they try to go up your ramp with the initial zealot + 6 stalkers, just FF the army in half and kill off easily 2 stalkers and a zealot. From there on, they are 3 units late = 3 warp cycles late, and they can't afford a 4th cycle of production so you should be equal in units and you have the ramp advantage. If they wait for the next 4 zealots, know the timing on when they can warp in zealots (it's usually right when the pylon on the bottom of the ramp finishes for a perfect 4 gate). Just FF as he pushes up, you will be facing 4 zealots + 1 zealot or 4 zealots + 1 zealot + 1 stalker vs your 7-8 stalkers. Just micro away from your ramp, kill off a hand full of zealots and a stalker, and then you are good to go when your FF wears off. If they are not doing the 4gate perfectly, you can even have an extra FF after that. The problem with defensive 3 gate is not that it is hard to hold 4 gate, it is that it is hard to scout if he is actually doing 4 gate... and you can fall a bit behind if he does some other greedy build. But that is the problem for all PvP builds I think, Blizzard should work on that rather than changing the Warpgate mechanism. What pro games are you watching? I know you what you are saying but any sentry heavy builds die as you will be short on stalkers. Remember for every one sentry you have you are down 2 stalkers in a way. I can't remember a sentry heavy 3 gate defending 4 gate in any recent major pro game.... Sorry, maybe I wasn't clear, I warp in only 1 sentry and only stalkers after that. Then you are banking on one ff which is pretty insane. That's a high risk build in my opinion if you rely one one single thing to win/lose the game. A defensive 4 gate is MUCH safer and does not rely on hitting a perfect ff. Also with only one FF you will still die most of the time. If you split the army they just hold position on the ramp and you will take lots of damage engaging because you are behind on units. If you do the trap the zealots in method, they can just again hold them on the ramp at the base of the ff, and you will be behind because you have one less gate.
Yes, I guess I kind of came off as "dUH ! it's easy to hold off 4 gate with 3gates" while what I really meant was, it's possible if you work on it a bit.
It is true that you are taking some risks, but to be honest, so is the 4 gater. Because if you hold off his 4 gate, you basically won (unless you lose to DTs like me :'( ). With good execution I stand by my point, 2 gas 3 gate sentry + stalkers holds off an offensive 4gate and transitions nicely into Blink play for example.
Holding position behind the FF is a possibility, but your zealots still die, you only get a couple of extra shots off on 1 or 2 stalkers. If you don't hold position, you can go up the ramp after the FF wears off (because your zealots chased the stalkers), whereas you have to fight at a disadvantage trying to go up a ramp defended with a perfect concave if you just hold position zealots.
Also, if the 4 gate timing isn't perfect, you get 2 FFs which makes this fairly easy to stop, considering 75% of the QQ here comes from lower than master league, I think that is something they should look into.
At high level, pros are reluctant to get a sentry out because they want to rush to tech as soon as possible (in particular in the whitera vs MC games that someone mentioned in this thread, you can see whitera losing to a 4gate because he does the 3 stalker rush and then tries to save gas by not making the standard sentry. The real problem is indeed the "coin flip" aspect of mid game which encourages people to play risky and susceptible to losing to 4 gate.
Last point, offensive 4 gate does seem a bit OP on Tal Darim and Scrap 
|
You know, everybody is talking about how PvP is now just going to become "mass colossus drudgery," but I think we're forgetting that colossi were mentioned (along with HT) as a unit that Blizzard was currently looking at (with the intention of tweaking).
They've already tweaked HT.
Colossus production already largely dominates EVERY matchup with a Protoss in it. Sure, robo isn't the only tech path, but can you seriously remember the last PvZ or PvT you played in which you DIDN'T get colossi (provided the game lasted long enough -- I'm not talking about all-in 4-gates or 6-gates)?
I think what Protoss players should be complaining about is the fact that they feel compelled to always get colossi. Getting colossi is almost always a good choice. It's not a PvP issue. It's a PvX issue.
As always, it seems there are far too many doomsayers out there. I do personally believe Blizzard is patching this game far too often for its own good already -- the community is resilient and can often find solutions to trendy strategies without the aid of balance patches. Then again, if the community is THAT resilient, then that means that whatever warpgate change comes down the pipe won't actually make too much of a difference. Chances are, if you're losing to something before the change, you'll still be losing to it afterwards (for 99% of the players out there).
|
On April 23 2011 05:46 Fungal Growth wrote:+ Show Spoiler +About this...we want defensive warpgate tech right to hold off rushes? But offensive warpgates are what is causing so many problem...
So why not differentiate between 'home warpins' and 'away warpins' by this...if your pylon is not in the same energy area/chain that includes a nexus then your warpins could incur a penalty. Could be increased cooldown...increased cost...or maybe even another research option. So you research basic warpgate...that let's you warp in units to any pylon that is in the energy blob/area as a nexus. Advanced warpgate then let's you warp to any pylon...even if it doesn't connect to the main 'grid'. Warp Prism's could be the exception to the rule to encourage their use (not enough people use them now).
The problem with PvP is that toss lacks a good defending option like spines or bunkers. On paper in RTS the answer to rushes should be static defense...but the cannon is not effective enough to hold off the 4 gate (or if it does it puts you way behind on tech and/or macro). Protoss needs better defenese...and one such option could be bring back the shield battery...would require lots of micro and positional play to say keep refilling that immortal blasting away at those stalkers but could be effective and very fun.
I actually really like the idea of a "chain" of pylons, but I don't like the idea of it being a chain from the nexus - I prefer the idea of having a chain from the warpgate in question. I dunno if you would actually have to include an upgrade for advanced warp-in, if you want to warp in on the other side of the map without consequence maybe having to use a warp prism or a huge pylon chain to do it isn't such a bad idea. This could also lead to some cool tactics i.e trying to break the chain while doing some harass/drop on the other side of the map from the warpgates.. would add a really cool dimension to the game (kind of similar to zerg creep I suppose).
|
They could've just added a mana bar on pylons. Warped in pylons start with ~40 energy, 10 energy per warp-in. Assuming it regenerates 0.9 energy per in-game second like everything else does, you would only be able to warp in 3 units per warpgate cycle rather than 4 due to the energy limitation (Unless you threw up two pylons rather than one). Blizzard could tweak the starting energy to whatever value they wish if they're still concerned about pylons that are preemptively warped in in order to regenerate more energy for a future 4-gate push.
Throw in a twilight council upgrade that increases the pylon energy regeneration rate or removes the energy requirement if you think it'd hurt toss late-game too much.
I know there are tournaments on the line, but considering that the state of balance is going to be absolutely destroyed when HOTS comes out anyways, it's disappointing to see Blizzard be so unimaginative about tweaks. But of course, Blizzard is going to go with the easy change.
|
On April 23 2011 05:46 Fungal Growth wrote:
About this...we want defensive warpgate tech right to hold off rushes? But offensive warpgates are what is causing so many problem...
So why not differentiate between 'home warpins' and 'away warpins' by this...if your pylon is not in the same energy area/chain that includes your nexus then your warpins could incur a penalty. Could be increased cooldown...increased cost...or maybe even another research option. So you research basic warpgate...that let's you warp in units to any pylon that is in the energy blob/area as a nexus. Advanced warpgate then let's you warp to any pylon...even if it doesn't connect to the main 'grid'. Warp Prism's could be the exception to the rule to encourage their use (not enough people use them now).
The problem with PvP is that toss lacks a good defending option like spines or bunkers. On paper in RTS the answer to rushes should be static defense...but the cannon is not effective enough to hold off the 4 gate (or if it does it puts you way behind on tech and/or macro). Protoss needs better defenese...and one such option could be bring back the shield battery...would require lots of micro and positional play to say keep refilling that immortal blasting away at those stalkers but could be effective and very fun.
^ This is way too complicated.
It's funny because for a long time I've been claiming that Blizzard should reduce gateway build times and increase either warpgate cooldown time or research time.
This change makes sense and doesn't weaken protoss much, if at all. Yes, warpgate comes at a later time but you are making units just as fast from gateways early on in the game. But this will reduce Cheese and all ins. Relate this to the Terran Barrack build time being increased and supply depot prerequisite. The point is to stop early game strats that were controlling the entire match up.
In simpler terms, they are giving PvP the defenders advantage for a while longer in order to prevent the dumb 4 gate all ins.
|
On April 23 2011 05:56 Ksi wrote:
They could've just added a mana bar on pylons. Warped in pylons start with ~40 energy, 10 energy per warp-in. Assuming it regenerates 0.9 energy per in-game second like everything else does, you would only be able to warp in 3 units per warpgate cycle rather than 4 due to the energy limitation (Unless you threw up two pylons rather than one). Throw in a twilight council upgrade that increases the pylon energy regeneration rate or removes the energy requirement if you think it'd hurt toss late-game too much.
I know there are tournaments on the line, but considering that the state of balance is going to be absolutely destroyed when HOTS comes out anyways, it's disappointing to see Blizzard be so unimaginative about tweaks. But of course, Blizzard is going to go with the easy change.
This is an awesome idea, but I still stand by the fact that people can be more creative when it comes to defending 4gates without gimping yourself
|
A darkhorse option to alleviate 4gate-itus might be to address either the build time or the cost of the robo facility. 4 gate is essentially mass stalker...and on paper the counter to the stalker is supposed to the immortal...but it is not and the blizzard balance team has to be asking themselves why?
Big problem is that the robo facility takes 65 seconds to construct (that's huge for 6-7 minute 4 gate and costs 200/100. So say I build only 1 immortal...that didn't cost 250/100...because you have to factor in the shared cost of the facilty so the first one was really 450/200...does that sound cost effective vs an army of stalkers and taking zealots? If I build 2 immortals it gets better so each immortal would cost 350/150 but still that's not good (not even factoring in the pylon cost).
Bottom line...immortals are not the counter they are supposed to be and need buffing which would not be a detriment to pvz and pvt. Could be a range buff or a decrease in their 55s build time or a decrease in the robo faciltiy build time or a decrease in the cost of the robo facility but something has to be done and of all units to buff to create balance they are the most logical one because now they are far from overpowered. Maybe even an upgrade you could purchase that would lower the hardened shield activation from 10 to say 8 might be cool...
|
Honestly I think the matchup would be the best if in PvP neither player could even get warpgate tech.
|
we were already seeing the 3stalker rush that was countering 4gates as you chrono'd out 3 stalker to his 1 zelot/1stalker/1probe and effectively slowed down his 4 gate.
Except now builds like that won't work because the whole strength in them if you didn't have to chrono warpgate research instead you chrono'd gateways. Now with the warpgate research time being longer, toss that spend 3-4 chrono's on warpgate will have a much bigger advantage than toss who try this no chrono boost on warpgate 3 stalker rush tactic.
I think warpgate tech should be a TC research upgrade.
|
I think colossi are still the overbearing problem in PvP, probably PvZ too. Fixing 4 gate will be wonderful if they can pull it off without hurting the other matchups too much, but beyond that, things won't get that much better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
