EPTBut you know, it can be mighty hard to get an expansion but vs an allining terran who has no interest in expanding too. It's basically the same deal there.
PvP is going to change in the next Patch ! - Page 35
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
But you know, it can be mighty hard to get an expansion but vs an allining terran who has no interest in expanding too. It's basically the same deal there. | ||
|
anatem
Romania1369 Posts
blabla: + Show Spoiler + they want to address the retardedness of pvp, and the only way they can do it is mess with warpgate. only warpgate is the cornerstone of protoss design in sc2, and fucking with it will only expose more issues, which will be addressed, only to discover more flaws in the design and so on. the consecutive void ray redesigns stands testament to this process. they might make a genius change that will play out awesome though, i hope for it, but seeing how they're prone to just reducing/increasing build times/straight-up removing upgrades instead of trying to rework how the race operates, switching things around in the tech tree and compensating where appropriate, i doubt it. then again, who knows what changes they got in mind for the long run that will synergize with what they're patching in now. waiting on hots new units and tech modifications for all races to complete this unfinished game, and they better deliver, so i can get back to playing toss and feeling like this is starcraft. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
PVP in bw actually felt like there was just as much luck involvement as in sc2. (though it was more fun since expansions were more likely to be involved) | ||
|
This is Aru
United States91 Posts
On April 22 2011 17:48 sleepingdog wrote: Though PvP would simply get back to the fast one base colossus pushes, wouldn't change the crappy-ness of this match-up all that much. It's impossible to know that yet. There is so much unexplored space there, none of it has really been investigated, because if it didn't stand up to 4gate, it was irrelevant. With the larger maps nowadays and easier thirds, etc. things won't necessarily be the same. Beyond that, players like WhiteRa have shown us what you can do with Warp Prisms, etc. | ||
|
Cloud9157
United States2968 Posts
| ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:40 Cloud9157 wrote: I kinda like the idea of having warp gate being mid game research. Like you need a Twilight Council or something? It actually pains me to read this. Like, I felt physical pain. I'll just leave the thread so the mods don't have to warn me too much :D | ||
|
WniO
United States2706 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:32 travis wrote: Really though PVP in sc2 is no more retarded than zvz in bw. It's just a fact of life. You win the matchup through unit control or by taking a big risk. Same as zvz in bw. Does that mean that they should just ignore the issue? Personally, I'd rather that Blizzard recognize a problem and attempt to solve it (without breaking other things) than to ignore a problem with the game. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:43 NicolBolas wrote: Does that mean that they should just ignore the issue? Personally, I'd rather that Blizzard recognize a problem and attempt to solve it (without breaking other things) than to ignore a problem with the game. If they can make pvp more fun without breaking other matchups then by all means. But I wish them the best of luck with that. (I don't really think there is that much of an issue anyways.. just some blandness early game). | ||
|
kNightLite
United States408 Posts
My best guess is that they're going to decrease all gateway units from gateways by 2 sec to equalize them with warpgates in terms of production capacity. Although who knows how much they'll add to warpgate tech research time, I can't imagine more than another 20sec. I hope they increase the amount of time it takes to convert a gateway into a warpgate instead. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:47 kNightLite wrote: I hope they increase the amount of time it takes to convert a gateway into a warpgate instead. This alone doesn't help anything, because in pvp both players will have to do that same thing. So the attackers warp gates are slightly later? So are the defenders. It basically leads to the same situation. | ||
|
Fungal Growth
United States434 Posts
This is why I would prefer either: A) Map redesigns to make spotting proxy pylons easier (including maybe in house xel-naga towers) B) Decrease immortal build times C) Create a mechanism for 'in-house' warpin (I like pylon chaining) | ||
|
Icx
Belgium853 Posts
Let's take a favourable map for defending a 4 gate. Why is it that 3 gate robo isn't a reliable counter to it? (well I guess it isn't because you don't see it a lot, or it isn't seen as "the" build to counter 4gates, people seem to actually prefer the stalker rush, etc) Because even outside of TL there is a lot of discussion going on about it, and I was just wondering about that. | ||
|
Gooey
United States944 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:32 travis wrote: Really though PVP in sc2 is no more retarded than zvz in bw. It's just a fact of life. You win the matchup through unit control or by taking a big risk. Same as zvz in bw. PVP in bw actually felt like there was just as much luck involvement as in sc2. (though it was more fun since expansions were more likely to be involved) That is exactly how I feel about PvP in SC2, and that it really is not that big of a deal to me. Having a matchup where things like this occur is healthy for the game. It adds spectator flare, and it's a way to show off your unit control as a player. I don't think that PvP should at all play out like a zvz or tvt, where you can expect to have a chance at getting your expansion up. They are mirror matches, yes, but they are not PvP. PvP is a unique matchup in sc2, and I like it that way. We protoss players like to show off our control a great deal, and pvp is a great time to show who the better player is in terms of unit control. I like it the way it is. | ||
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:54 Icx wrote: Quick question for the higher-level players here: Let's take a favourable map for defending a 4 gate. Why is it that 3 gate robo isn't a reliable counter to it? (well I guess it isn't because you don't see it a lot, or it isn't seen as "the" build to counter 4gates, people seem to actually prefer the stalker rush, etc) Because even outside of TL there is a lot of discussion going on about it, and I was just wondering about that. It is a completely fine counter to it, but most people execute incorrectly because it takes finesse and proper timing, and then they complain that all you can do is 4gate or else you lose. | ||
|
DreamSailor
Canada433 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:54 Icx wrote: Quick question for the higher-level players here: Let's take a favourable map for defending a 4 gate. Why is it that 3 gate robo isn't a reliable counter to it? (well I guess it isn't because you don't see it a lot, or it isn't seen as "the" build to counter 4gates, people seem to actually prefer the stalker rush, etc) Because even outside of TL there is a lot of discussion going on about it, and I was just wondering about that. If you see Immortals out, you just warp in a round of zealots and focus fire the immortal down. Zealots destroy Immortals pretty hardcore. 1 immortal is exactly the cost of 2 stalkers. | ||
|
Double Letters
United States58 Posts
| ||
|
Brief.Starcraft
United States35 Posts
| ||
|
kNightLite
United States408 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:49 travis wrote: This alone doesn't help anything, because in pvp both players will have to do that same thing. So the attackers warp gates are slightly later? So are the defenders. It basically leads to the same situation. No, not really, because the defender could choose not to convert to warpgates in order to gain 1 round of production advantage over a 4-warpgate opponent. Plus the 50/50 and chronoboost. Sure later on in the game the defender will probably be converting his own gateways which will nullify that production advantage, but the point is to weaken the 4-warpgate as an offensive tool in PvP. Making the 4-warpgate easier to defend with gateways will do that. Because converting a gateway into a warpgate doesn't cost any resources other than time, I don't think it would disrupt mid-late game very much. | ||
|
Fungal Growth
United States434 Posts
On April 23 2011 06:54 Icx wrote: Not one of those players but the answer is simple...you need a critical mass of immortals to flatten out the joint cost of the robo facility and this takes too long against say a 6 minute 4gate. RF takes about a minute to construct and cost 200/100...this is too much dead time and dead resources not defending attacking stalkers and zealots. Factor in the build time of immortals is about a minute per unit and the math just doesn't add up. Plus immortals aren't THAT much better than stalkers... They cost about 2x the stalker and probably are 4x the stalker in battle but when you factor in their joint cost/build time/slow speed/dps wasted on overkill/inability to hit air...they're tough to justify in PvP (or any other matchup for that matter).Quick question for the higher-level players here: Let's take a favourable map for defending a 4 gate. Why is it that 3 gate robo isn't a reliable counter to it? (well I guess it isn't because you don't see it a lot, or it isn't seen as "the" build to counter 4gates, people seem to actually prefer the stalker rush, etc) Because even outside of TL there is a lot of discussion going on about it, and I was just wondering about that. | ||
| ||
