EPTPvP is going to change in the next Patch ! - Page 43
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
dusthoof
279 Posts
| ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 23 2011 23:09 Esel wrote: got the feeling this will make 4gate in P v T totally useless and very hard in P v Z Which would be bad how exactly? | ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
| ||
|
Knutzi
Norway664 Posts
| ||
|
Shooks
Australia256 Posts
| ||
|
TrainFX
United States469 Posts
| ||
|
ReaperX
Hong Kong1758 Posts
| ||
|
loklok
Germany161 Posts
On April 23 2011 23:02 Obscura.304 wrote: One thing that makes sense to me, and I've never seen mentioned (which could mean it's a bad idea for reasons I don't see): Increase the morph time from gateway -> warpgate to something like 35 seconds instead of the roughly 2 seconds it takes now. A big part of the power of the 4-gate is that warpgates put you a production cycle ahead; making warpgate morph take longer would effectively get rid of the "front loaded" advantage that warpgates have. I'm thinking of early 1 base roach agression which is hardly to stop with the current warp tech timing. You have to decrease production timing if you increase any delay on warptech. That is a logical conclusion because PvZ PvT are pretty well balanced in the early and the goal is not to nerf 4 Gate agression in these match ups. The other point is that the influence on these match ups will be huge. I'm thinking of better possibilities defending early expansions (skip warp tech and have a stronger army) or be able to tech faster. | ||
|
Fancy.
Germany58 Posts
On April 23 2011 23:02 Obscura.304 wrote: One thing that makes sense to me, and I've never seen mentioned (which could mean it's a bad idea for reasons I don't see): Increase the morph time from gateway -> warpgate to something like 35 seconds instead of the roughly 2 seconds it takes now. A big part of the power of the 4-gate is that warpgates put you a production cycle ahead; making warpgate morph take longer would effectively get rid of the "front loaded" advantage that warpgates have. Actually the best idea in the whole Thread, in PvP the Defender would get his Advantage, because he got either 1 Cycle more units, or his enemy has to walk through the whole map. In other Matchups it wouldn't change that much. If you want to play defensive, just pump units out of gateways, if you want to be aggressive with some sort of WG rush, sacrifice one cycle. The productiontime of WG and GW should be tweaked to be the same, in that scenario. | ||
|
dusthoof
279 Posts
| ||
|
MarcH
United Kingdom362 Posts
Part 1 This change should only effect a super fast 4gate (around 6 mins) and none of the other versions that are delayed and often involve tec.The 4gate Blizz want to change here is the 6min one and not the others. Also in the OP the linked quote says something like this is one of the areas were lookig at so this may well not happen and be an example of the sort of changes blizz could implement. The problem with the 6min 4gate is that whilst their are ways to beat it that arent a defensive 4gate they are hit and miss such as sentry delay if you dont FF correctly your done and the robo based defence is also knife edge thin as your second imortal is generally only around half way ish finished as the 4 gate hits and your army is smaller so if you cant kill the stalkers fast enough and keep your immortal alive you die. Thats where this change comes in it will delay the super aggresive 4gate enough to make some of the non 4gate defences more viable as they will have more units etc but still leave the 4gate viable if you play better than your opponent you should still win with a fast 4 gate but it will be harder and the rest of the 4 gate variations are stil lviable as they were delayed anyway. Part 2 This effects the other matchups as atm warpgates produce units faster than normal gates so if they speed up the production of units from warpgates then you will be a bit ahead with units to begin with and the increased time to get WG wont be an issue as your units build faster so you have more. This could be an issue if they increase the build time of Zelots as 2 gate proxy would be more viable again but if they left zelots as they are and instead decreased the build time of sentries and stalkers (what i think blizz would do if they implemented this change) you can still produce enough units to defend against T & Z. The big thing about this change is that they dont have to mess with any of the mechanics that are already in the game. Onlu minimal adjustments will be required by players rather than completly overhalling the Warp mechanic with moving where/when you can warp in units and train WG itself. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5219 Posts
This is really going mess to with all the matchups a lot, and also all the early game timings for Protoss players. Who knows what this will create. I also think people are just starting to understand how to stop the 4 gate, and while still very powerful on maps with wide ramps or no ramp, people are stopping the 4 gate without going 4 gate on maps with normal ramps. Also, any aggressive early opening for any race is going to be good in a mirror match on maps without a normal ramp, because if you have more units, and your units are exactly the same, you're likely to win in a battle. That is just common sense. | ||
|
Grrrr
United States1 Post
1. Give Protoss the ability to detect warp-ins (red dot on mini-map) 2. Give Protoss the ability to detect Psi field sources (pylons and "phasing mode") Options for mechanics: a. Just give it to them, all the time, no pre-requisites b. Connect it to the Cybernetics core (lose your core[s], lose the detection) c. Add a new building (kinda like the Terran Sensor tower is a separate building) Lore Justification (for those who care): Warping something in could easily create a psionic wave that is not usable energy, but is easily detectable -- like Radio is not usable electrical energy, but it's easily detectable. A heavily psionic race like the Protoss would either "sense" the waves, or they would develop tech that could sense them. (Attaching the detection to the cyber core would be a rationalization for why the Zerg can't also detect it: they might know it's in the area, but not have the tech to pin down a useful location.) This sort of ability achieves the goal of affecting PvP without affecting other matchups. It should have an effect on 4 warpgate pushes (because it would give detection of the forward pylon), but only time would show how much it changed the game dynamics for PvP. | ||
|
haitike
Spain2724 Posts
On April 23 2011 22:51 Fym wrote: what sucks in PvP is the fact that forge first fast expo is not viable like it was in sc1 so they have to do something in SC1 forge fist fast expo want viable in PvP, dragons were too powerfull for that. | ||
|
shaman6ix
Greece212 Posts
On April 23 2011 15:44 Integra wrote: No, I doubt you will admitt protoss being easier to play, regardless of what I tell you so I won't spend time on it. What a narrow-minded prick you are.. the guy is trying to be helpful and to offer to the conversation but you re still in full denial. Protoss is not OP or ''easier to play'' and the game IS balanced. But i hope that you, i suppose as a bitter zerg player who chooses to whine all the time instead of improving his play, continue to believe that toss is OP, so you stay in the same stalemate situation you are now and i can continue to stomp you in the ladder. Whiners.. arent you tired of whining all the time about a game? | ||
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
This is very good for the game in general, because it forces the player to make choices. Both possible ways to produce Units have advantages and disadvantages. Its the players Choice again, not like before where going Warpgate with all unit is a must have and it would just make no sense to get. I dont want to talk balance here, since every really big change is nearly impossible to judge, because the metagame has to evolve around it. I do Like that very much and I hope PvP gets more interesting in this way! | ||
|
Disciple7
United States198 Posts
| ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
| ||
|
Darkyshor
Romania4 Posts
| ||
|
HaXXspetten
Sweden15718 Posts
On April 24 2011 01:45 Disciple7 wrote: I always thought it would be cool to just have opposing pylon fields cancel each other out so the offensive toss couldn't warp up onto the ramp. I'm kinda disappointed though, as PvP was my best MU =(. That would be genius btw... | ||
| ||
