| Forum Index > Closed |
|
hitman133
United States1425 Posts
On April 26 2011 06:51 Blacklizard wrote: Zerg all-ins are extremely hard for Protoss to deal with. Diamond players knew this half a year ago. The pros are finally catching up, strangely enough. Yea, 2 bases of endless roaches or hydras/lings hit right after 3 gates expo kick in is extremely hard to stop. | ||
|
checo
Mexico1364 Posts
On April 26 2011 05:02 Juanald wrote: the main problem i have with this is i pioneared an agressive build on xel naga where u put pylon low ground and 2 gateways on high ground for PvT... i dont think the threat of gateways in you're main should be nerfed with love ~Juanald That kind of play has existed since BW lol, if u wanna gateway your oponent main do as everyone else and place the pylon in too XD | ||
|
jinorazi
Korea (South)4948 Posts
-Warpgate technology removed. -Warp Prism now Battery Prism (when stationed, it can be used to charge shields). -Khaydarin Amulet re-added. yay~~ | ||
|
aksfjh
United States4853 Posts
On April 26 2011 06:12 AnalThermometer wrote: It may work for dealing with 4gate, but by doing this is you remove a lot of interesting builds which use warp in over cliffs such as voidray/zealot and dark templar warp ins with hallucinated air units. You'd have to make a Robo for a Warp Prism just to go up cliffs which would kill the viability of these builds. You act as if Protoss has some sort of lack of openings. Every other race has to deal with going through a choke to get into the main. Even running up a ramp against zerg is EXTREMELY dangerous. Early aggression shouldn't reliably be able to forgo that defensive barrier. Right now, Protoss has to have a small investment in other tech to do so (void rays, hallucination, or observers). There are no 3 medivacs you have to tech and buy, or burrow+movement. You get sight on the high ground, and you circumvent defensive positions outright while having very little vulnerability. | ||
|
TrickyGilligan
United States641 Posts
Did I get a different stream than everyone else? I saw blink stalkers, proxy gates, robo play, and phoenix harass. 4 gate was almost a non-issue in the games. This is the same impression I'm getting from both ladder and other tournaments, it's still effective, but people are starting to move away from it. What I do not see a lot in PvP though are long games. Normally whoever expands first loses instantly, or at the very most, it will be 2 base vs 2 base. To me, this is the real problem with PvP, and it's something that has nothing to do with the 4 gate and everything to do with the build order wins that exist within the matchup. Stargate is good against robo, which is good against blink, which is good against stargate. I wish this is what Blizzard was looking into, and hopefully making small tweaks to. Changing something as fundamental as warp gate research at this point in the game just seems like trouble, especially when the "problem" is being solved by pros already. | ||
|
Heavenly
2172 Posts
On April 26 2011 05:20 opiemonster wrote: Perfect Patch: To deal with 4-gate: Warp-gate tech built at twilight council Stalkers can only be built at warp-gates Zealot build time reduced by 3s (gateway) Sentry build time reduced by 5s (gateway) To deal with colossus: Colossus damage 12(+3 light), Thermal lance has 1 less range. immortal +1 range upgrade restored Possible variations: Stalkers build time +10-20s (replace -- Stalkers can only be built at warp-gates) warp-gate tech build time increase +20-40s (replace -- Warp-gate tech built at twilight council) Colossus damage: 10(+5 light) (replace -- all colossus changes) Pros: In PvP, epic sentry zealot battles Immortals will counter colossi way better Stargate units will be more effective in PvP Less dice roll 4gate/colossus battles. Zerg can deal with colossus better. Cons: More effective zealot rush all-ins (larger maps negate earlier experiences) banshees more effective (Unless stalker variation used) roach rushing more effective (Unless stalker variation used and warpgate variation used) (roach range could be reverted by 1) immortals will be more powerful in other zerg/terran (unless colossus variation used) (could be used to deal with roach rushes. this con could help colossus nerf) Terran Bio more powerful against toss (Immortal con could help with colossus nerf) _________________________________________________ CONCLUSION: Warp-gate tech +40s Stalkers can only be built at warp-gates Zealot build time reduced by 3s (gateway) Sentry build time reduced by 5s (gateway) Colossus damage: 10(+5 light) I assume you're trolling? Stalkers only built at warpgates and take 20 seconds longer, and you cant get them until twilight council? Have colossi do 33% less damage and have less range, and to counteract this you make immortals have +1 range? Wow, it really baffles me that people take times to write out things like this and think it's actually a good idea. Maybe try playing ONE game as protoss instead of considering how, as terran or zerg, you could win 100% of your games without trouble. This thread is getting ridiculous. | ||
|
Mercury-
Great Britain804 Posts
On April 26 2011 06:03 Reborn8u wrote: I really hope whatever they do it doesn't screw with other matchups. Ever since the roach buff which was intended to help zvt and the forge and zealot build time nerf, which was intended to weaken toss cheese. I've had a lot of trouble with zerg all ins. After the zerg gets 2 or 4 lings and kills my scouting probe it's hard to know if they are saturating their natural or making tons of roach/ling. With an ov for spotting the high ground to let roaches hit your wall in. It's hard to set up to win a macro game and deal with this surprise aggression. I think a nerf to protoss early game could be problematic, and really its protoss's late game or deathball that I've heard the most complaints about. I've been having moderate success in pvp with placing my gateways and cyber to block any high ground warp ins, while going 3 gate robo and pumping immortals with crono. Once the 3rd immoral is out you can usually win as long as you held of any 4 gate aggression without pulling probes. The 4 gater is in a dire situation because they know that you have the potential to go colossus so they rush to get their tech going and the 3 immortal/gateway push rolls them. I doubt this would be viable in high masters though, because the 4 gates are so much cleaner. If they buffed the immortal build time it would probably solve this and provide for a macro game in pvp. As it stands right now, in pvt or pvz immortals are okay early/mid game but colossus are so much better for the cost and production time, they really step on each others role imo. See, the problem is that it's also hard to win an eco game for T/Z when they have to prepare for the countless warpgate allins/pushes. Took fast third in response to Protoss fast expansion? You lose to 6gate. | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On April 26 2011 08:08 Mercury- wrote: See, the problem is that it's also hard to win an eco game for T/Z when they have to prepare for the countless warpgate allins/pushes. Took fast third in response to Protoss fast expansion? You lose to 6gate. That's how it should be though? Why is the correct response to a fast expanding protoss to get another free base? The protoss mind used to work as such.. 'he went hatch before pool? How do I crush him for it on one base' Then protoss learned how to defend their early expos and zerg responded by taking a fast third. From here, the protoss mind switched to 'this motherfuckers trying to get a big eco lead just because I expanded? Lets find a way to punish him with a 2 base timing.' That has been the ebb and flow. Zerg tries to push the greed limit, protoss tries to punish. To be honest, the safest thing for a zerg is probably to concentrate on denying the protoss third while SAFELY taking their own. | ||
|
Mercury-
Great Britain804 Posts
On April 26 2011 08:17 Jayrod wrote: Because if you just take a 'safe' third it wont pay off by the time a 2 base push hits which will crush you. P with a fe is extremely scary.That's how it should be though? Why is the correct response to a fast expanding protoss to get another free base? The protoss mind used to work as such.. 'he went hatch before pool? How do I crush him for it on one base' Then protoss learned how to defend their early expos and zerg responded by taking a fast third. From here, the protoss mind switched to 'this motherfuckers trying to get a big eco lead just because I expanded? Lets find a way to punish him with a 2 base timing.' That has been the ebb and flow. Zerg tries to push the greed limit, protoss tries to punish. To be honest, the safest thing for a zerg is probably to concentrate on denying the protoss third while SAFELY taking their own. | ||
|
Starshaped
Sweden575 Posts
On April 26 2011 08:21 Mercury- wrote: Because if you just take a 'safe' third it wont pay off by the time a 2 base push hits which will crush you. P with a fe is extremely scary. Protoss is always scary. | ||
|
Nazeron
Canada1046 Posts
| ||
|
ePBuckets
Canada207 Posts
1) Pylon Rage: obviously to deal with the warping in on high grounds during a 4wg, now to do this the pylon must become an easy target; i dont mind this at all. 2) Warpgate Research time +40sec: i dont mind this at all because the number crunching shows we get the same amount of units at the same time (not to mention chrono boost) and if there are 4wg rushes its 40 seconds later, which will happen so whatever. 3) Decrease in Tier 1/1.5 build time @ gateways: first off i cannot wait to pretend its beta again and proxy 2 gate chronoing zealots and adding forge and cannons lol. but seriously they made pro toss strong in early game, 2 gate expos might be viable. 4) warp in times still the same: this means no matter what people will still be going for warpgate tech because warping is still faster than regular gateways. therefore 4wg "rush" (rush is used loosely) will still have just 40sec later when the research time is done (which is still roughly the same # of units because 40 seconds = 1 more set of tier 1/1.5 unit each gateway) i don't think our timings will be THAT off anymore, the number crunching shows that the amount of units we'll get will be there so that's good (timings will just be 40 seconds later), and these nerfs are actually buffs in my eyes (atleast to protoss early game) only thing i'm worried about is the ghost 200/100 change, that means they'll be super duper easy to get off 1 base, which will be absurdly strong against protoss/infestors at that. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 25 2011 19:07 Toxi78 wrote: and who cares ? 4 gate should never work, no matter scouted or not. do you see terrans 3 raxing to the win vs protoss if not scouted? no, warp in sentries and hold it. Im not a 4gate fan (as zerg player) and I think it's WAY overused, but it's the only real 1base all-in protoss can do, and YES, if you watch ProTournaments terrans 3rax allin and terrans 4rax allin vs Protoss and terrans do tech 1base allins too (banshee/tank/marine, like marineking did against MC). Yeah I think the game dies a little bit everytime a player does a 1base allin, but if there is no 4gate possibility you pretty much take away the only build you have to play really safe against after FE vs Protoss. (you can do other stuff, like this void ray builds, but they get supported by 3 or 4gates so those get weakend to) But maybe Im overthinking this, maybe it won't have that much of an impact and protoss might be able to do something like: 1gate-->core-->1gate: produce some units of 2 gates-->2gates = 4gate a little later (6:30-6:45 instead of 6min) but a little stronger and with continous stalker production(+2stalker+2probes+1gas) | ||
|
Knickknack
United States1187 Posts
Why exactly is 4gate not fine as is, when many high level players say the numbers vs 4gate is fine here? This leads one to believe blizzard is mainly looking at the culture of starcraft, where many complain about pvp being just 4gate vs 4gate. Thus catering to the masses, which admittedly has some benefit. The argument by numbers to not change would be along the lines of these changes destroying the offensive of 4gate, which is a good option that should be kept (including vs the other races). The 30seconds later attack and pylon change is huge and means a 2-3gate tech player should be able to win most of the time on normal ramp vs 4gate, rather than it being close. So basically game play now seems: look out for zealot rush, and if no rush, greedy tech. But that should throw expo into the mix, which should throw 4gate into the mix again. Thus I may make the argument that the role 4gate plays atm is providing some baseline stability into the pvp matchup by doing away with fast expo, and limiting options. Expect more variance in builds after scouting probe post patch, which may make people complain about coinflip even more. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
With 5 (or so) chrono boosts on warpgate research, your 4-gate can still hit at the same time and with the same units. Yes, you can still have 4 warpgates before 6 minutes. Gateway at 13/18 (with 5 seconds of idle time, and 1 chrono boost happens before 7*17 + 5 - 10 = 114 seconds). Let say 105 seconds we build our gateway. At 165 seconds, it is complete and we start our core. At 215 seconds, our core is complete. We still have 145 seconds to complete warpgate research (which takes 180 seconds to complete, with every CB reducing this amount by 10 seconds, up to 6 CBs are possible). With 5 CBs, our warpgate is done at 345 seconds - 5:45, which is the exact same time a standard warpgate build hits now. 4 warpgate isn't dead unless you need to warp units into the high ground. The kind that punishes early expansions and doesn't need to worry about forcefields is still very much alive. | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
On April 27 2011 04:43 Treehead wrote: With 5 (or so) chrono boosts on warpgate research, your 4-gate can still hit at the same time and with the same units. Yes, you can still have 4 warpgates before 6 minutes. Gateway at 13/18 (with 5 seconds of idle time, and 1 chrono boost happens before 7*17 + 5 - 10 = 114 seconds). Let say 105 seconds we build our gateway. At 165 seconds, it is complete and we start our core. At 215 seconds, our core is complete. We still have 145 seconds to complete warpgate research (which takes 180 seconds to complete, with every CB reducing this amount by 10 seconds, up to 6 CBs are possible). With 5 CBs, our warpgate is done at 345 seconds - 5:45, which is the exact same time a standard warpgate build hits now. 4 warpgate isn't dead unless you need to warp units into the high ground. The kind that punishes early expansions and doesn't need to worry about forcefields is still very much alive. As you said a standard warpgate research for 4G finishes at 5:40. If you add 30s to that (1 chrono on those 40s added by patch) it hits at 6:10. Even if you spend the chronoboost supposed to be the 2nd on probes you still only go to 6:00. I'm not sure how you got a WG finishing at the same time as now with 40s on top of it and with a 13gate (where normal its a 12gate), you must have done some error. With a WG finishing at 6mins, the other player just needs to go 3G, chronoboost units instead of WG and proceed to win. Remember the 3 stalker build? Add a couple more. | ||
|
Treehead
999 Posts
On April 27 2011 05:45 Apolo wrote: As you said a standard warpgate research for 4G finishes at 5:40. If you add 30s to that (1 chrono on those 40s added by patch) it hits at 6:10. Even if you spend the chronoboost supposed to be the 2nd on probes you still only go to 6:00. I'm not sure how you got a WG finishing at the same time as now with 40s on top of it and with a 13gate (where normal its a 12gate), you must have done some error. With a WG finishing at 6mins, the other player just needs to go 3G, chronoboost units instead of WG and proceed to win. Remember the 3 stalker build? Add a couple more. I do the 3-stalker build, and I intend on continuing to do it, perhaps forgoing the 3rd gate if patch "fixes" 4 warpgate. If you try to get constant chrono boost on warpgate research, warpgate will finish while your gateways are still warping in. This is why things like the korean 4 warpgate come so much earlier. If you pool Nexus energy as though you were going for a korean 4-warpgate, your WG will be done around the time of a standard 4-warpgate now. That's what I was saying. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Why exactly is 4gate not fine as is, when many high level players say the numbers vs 4gate is fine here? This leads one to believe blizzard is mainly looking at the culture of starcraft, where many complain about pvp being just 4gate vs 4gate. Thus catering to the masses, which admittedly has some benefit. Well, look at the other matchups, there is way more dynamic and still noone talks about coinflipping. In PvP 4gate is so dominating that you can do like 3-4 builds that usually all come down to very small micro factors, with 4gate being the kind of bruteforce build in between and therefore being able to win against any other build if you micro good enough. the only other possibilitys I can think of and that actually work on high level would be: 3stalker rush defensive 4gate and maybe blink rush, though I think it comes down to 3stalker rush into blink I guess it wouldn't be so much of an issue, if PvP was something like colossus vs colossus fights of 2-3 bases but I dont really see the beauty of a matchup if your only options are 1base all-ins... Im really thrilled to see the new PvP, because on high level the PvP macro game has never been really thought through. Protoss just has sooo many possibilitys and though it seems the colossus dominates, I just want to throw in another unit: phoenix (ever seen what mutalisks do to Protoss? think about an even more mobile air unit that enters the battlefield way erlier) | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On April 27 2011 10:35 Cloak wrote: The answer's pretty obvious actually. They need to buff Immortals. That has much less of an effect on matchups than nerfing Protoss' main macro mechanic. Immortals should do equal damage to Light and Armored to handle Zealots/Sentries better. Robo would guarantee safety but sacrifice map control, while 4 Gate gives you temporary control but stifled tech. There's pros and cons to both choices. lol, making immortals do the same damage vs light as they do against armored would give them the third highest dps in the game 33.8dps = 8.45/supply (=3rd behind cracklings and stimmed marines) with the best shield mechanics and high life. I guess everybody would just abandon stalkers and would go immortals instead. I guess noone would ever use colossus again, because immortals would just rock so hard. There are nearly no combat units that do full damage against them in the whole game. in PvZ there would be 2units you could build against them to do full damage: mutas and zerglings but unless right now they would oneshot zerglings. this would be sooo ridiculous strong in every MU. The only reason why immortals are not played in masses is that colossi ARE already so ridicolous strong... | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
WardiTV Winter Champion…
Replay Cast
WardiTV Winter Champion…
The PondCast
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo Complete
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
