EPTPvP is going to change in the next Patch ! - Page 55
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Kira761
United States62 Posts
| ||
|
KazeHydra
Japan2788 Posts
On April 26 2011 12:01 Nazeron wrote: as a zerg player i feel that reducing the effectiveness of 4 gate is good but reduce the time of tier 1 units on toss i feel is a little risk. ive been 2 gate proxy gated before and its fairly hard to hold off, not impossible but hard. decreasing the zealot build time i could see a lot more people 2 gate proxying, hopefully blizzard implements something to decrease the 4 gate effectiveness but not increase the amount of cheese on the ladder Exactly. Zealot build time was increased from 33 to 38 TWICE already both times because of too much proxy gate. Reducing stalker and sentry build time is logical if they're increasing warp gate research time, but there is no need to reduce zealot build time. Again. There will be an increased amount of proxy gates once again if Blizzard goes through with this. | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 27 2011 17:11 Big J wrote: 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... Haha, Mr. Hyperbole over here. Nothing tops Colossus and Storm, ever. Also, who counts DPS by supply? Do it by resource cost otherwise I'm assuming you're skewing the statistics to hide how mediocre its efficiency actually is. For something that's slow, unable to attack air, and lacks utility, it better do some damn good DPS. Roaches exhibit no such restriction to their DPS and come with more mobility; they can kite and surround, AND are at a lower, more spammable tech. Zerglings hardcounter Immortals pretty ridiculously. Going from 2 shot to 1 shot of spammable Zergling fodder actually makes Immortal openings against Zerg viable. Comparing Immortal DPS to Stalker DPS is dishonest, too. Stalkers aren't known for their good DPS, only reason Protoss use them is for air defense, mobility, and meat. Protoss still needs anti-air, so they'll always have a place. It honestly affects mostly PvP in allowing more Robo builds. It's much less destructive than nerfing Warpgate by 40s. But seriously, who has trouble with Immortals? When was the last time you saw an aggressive Robo opening in PvZ or PvT? Never. | ||
|
x6Paramore
Canada130 Posts
On April 28 2011 09:14 Cloak wrote: When was the last time you saw an aggressive Robo opening in PvZ or PvT? Never. mmm.. that would be Beta.. 3gate robo "push" was popular before terrans and zergs alike found out they could just make marines and spinecrawlers... guy's got a point... last time i went 1 gate robo, some terran (this is grandmaster level by the way) went fast expand 6 rax before gas marine stream... it hits your base before collosus and you don't have enough gateways to expand so you are basically behind if you open 1gate robo... also, if you try to 3gate robo 1-base all-in with collosus, they have vikings by then since they got a fast expansion with quad-gas if you turtle... bottom line: 1gate robo hurts ... 1gate robo star is even worse.. but if you are terran, 1rax fact star is a viable tool in your build arsenal for bo3/bo5 clan war matches... but hey if you want to lose some games on ladder, just build a robo before your 2nd nexus ^_^ unless your opponent went banshee (which by the way you can just delay the robo if you "think/see" its coming) | ||
|
Noak3
United States236 Posts
On April 27 2011 17:21 Kira761 wrote: T.T just do what I said earlier in this thread! Make Chronoboot have no effect on Warpgate Research. If they do that, it would be putting a weird limit on the types of builds that people can use and it would effect alot more than just the 4-gate, it'd have huge ramifications with other builds/matchups. It's also not a very elegant solution to the problem, it's weird to straight up just have one upgrade not able to be chronoboosted when all other upgrades can be | ||
|
Noak3
United States236 Posts
On April 28 2011 09:14 Cloak wrote: Haha, Mr. Hyperbole over here. Nothing tops Colossus and Storm, ever. Also, who counts DPS by supply? Do it by resource cost otherwise I'm assuming you're skewing the statistics to hide how mediocre its efficiency actually is. For something that's slow, unable to attack air, and lacks utility, it better do some damn good DPS. Roaches exhibit no such restriction to their DPS and come with more mobility; they can kite and surround, AND are at a lower, more spammable tech. Zerglings hardcounter Immortals pretty ridiculously. Going from 2 shot to 1 shot of spammable Zergling fodder actually makes Immortal openings against Zerg viable. Comparing Immortal DPS to Stalker DPS is dishonest, too. Stalkers aren't known for their good DPS, only reason Protoss use them is for air defense, mobility, and meat. Protoss still needs anti-air, so they'll always have a place. It honestly affects mostly PvP in allowing more Robo builds. It's much less destructive than nerfing Warpgate by 40s. But seriously, who has trouble with Immortals? When was the last time you saw an aggressive Robo opening in PvZ or PvT? Never. I agree with you that immortals need to be buffed, but a buff to the extent that you're talking about is pretty ridiculous. Regardless of how their cost efficiency is calculated, immortals that do the same damage to light as they currently do to armor would rape so indescribably hard it's not even funny. Yes they're slow, have 5 range, and can't shoot up; but a buff of that magnitude would turn immortals into the core of a standard army instead of gateway units and that's a pretty damn big change. | ||
|
shaman6ix
Greece212 Posts
| ||
|
iSTime
1579 Posts
| ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
Haha, Mr. Hyperbole over here. Nothing tops Colossus and Storm, ever. Also, who counts DPS by supply? Who counts army strenght in supply? Like EVERYBODY! There are way more factors than dps to make a unit strong and there are way more factors than supply or cost to measure those. But with everybody just looking at supplies and talking about who is ahead by that it makes sense to rawly measure in supply, for everything else you would need to talk about whole builds and unit compositions. Roaches exhibit no such restriction to their DPS and come with more mobility; they can kite and surround, AND are at a lower, more spammable tech. Roaches can kite units that have less range, which are melee units. and roaches are not just able to surround, and spammable: they have to be spammed and have to surround to be effective. Double roaches damage and life... I would love that! You could just 1a instead micro around to surround, you wouldnt need to distribute all your larvae to roaches but meanwhile build drones or maybe even extra zerglings... Finally Protoss players would need immortals to counter roaches and not just go like... "hm, zerg builds units. better dont care what he builds and build colossi because the rape every ground unit except for ultras which he cant afford for 10more min" Zerglings hardcounter Immortals pretty ridiculously. Going from 2 shot to 1 shot of spammable Zergling fodder actually makes Immortal openings against Zerg viable. yeah if you would have played zerg just once, you might have noticed that zerglings are not zergling fodder but kind of precious units (while I agree a lot of zergs dont use them like that) which cost so much larvae to make in those numbers you need to engage opponents with them, that you completly block all other production... And yes, they hardcounter immortals which is great because guess what: SC2 has been designed to make units counter other units... Especially the thing the PvZ MU really doesnt need is another Protoss aggro opening added to strong 4gate, zealot/sentry 4gate, dts, blink stalker, Void Ray, phoenix ... + the cheeses: proxy gateways, canon rush... Comparing Immortal DPS to Stalker DPS is dishonest, too. Stalkers aren't known for their good DPS, only reason Protoss use them is for air defense, mobility, and meat. Protoss still needs anti-air, so they'll always have a place. didnt do that. Just said that you would build immortals instead of stalkers, and I said that because immortals kind of block stalker production with their gas costs, and therefore would overtake the part of the stalker as meatshielded ranged (anti roach) unit in a standard Protoss unit composition. [/QUOTE]It honestly affects mostly PvP in allowing more Robo builds. It's much less destructive than nerfing Warpgate by 40s. But seriously, who has trouble with Immortals? When was the last time you saw an aggressive Robo opening in PvZ or PvT? Never. [/QUOTE] Yeah, thats kind of the problem with a unit that is designed to counter certain other more tech heavy units (roaches, ultralisks, marauder, tanks, thor): they are not needed and therefore for any rush you might consider units that actually are good vs their standard units (marines, zerglings) | ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
On April 28 2011 16:57 Noak3 wrote: I agree with you that immortals need to be buffed, but a buff to the extent that you're talking about is pretty ridiculous. Regardless of how their cost efficiency is calculated, immortals that do the same damage to light as they currently do to armor would rape so indescribably hard it's not even funny. Yes they're slow, have 5 range, and can't shoot up; but a buff of that magnitude would turn immortals into the core of a standard army instead of gateway units and that's a pretty damn big change. I honestly don't understand what's so ridiculous about it. I feel like Immortals have a great potential for a bridging gap in tech right now. People bitch about how top heavy Protoss is (Colossus rape, Storm brokeness, etc.) so if we were to make a Colossus nerf viable, the strength of the intermediates needs to be graded appropriately. Right now Immortals are lackluster. Maybe in the Silver games they're kicking butt and taking names, but as far as tournament play goes, come on, really? Their only use is for Zergs that spam Roach and forget there's a Zergling button. If Zerg used Ultras more, I guess they'd be more useful but I can't remember a game where they came out. DPS/Supply is only useful for two things. Factoring in additional supply costs, and maxed army strength. Surprise, 95% of the game is controlled by sub-max armies, so resources is the determining factor. Even at max, resources is still the dominant force. I have no problem talking about DPS/Supply, but DPS/Cost is the real variable here. What's the alternative to a slight reworking of Immortals? Massive changes in Gateway timings and a 40s delay on a macro mechanic that's pretty much integral to everything Protoss does. Which do you think has a more likely chance of upsetting balance? It's Occam's Razoring that shit. Is my reasoning flawed? Let's say Immortals did too much DPS, maybe you nerf the base damage because we know they already do enough Armored DPS. | ||
|
CodECleaR
United States395 Posts
| ||
|
Kira761
United States62 Posts
On April 28 2011 16:52 Noak3 wrote: If they do that, it would be putting a weird limit on the types of builds that people can use and it would effect alot more than just the 4-gate, it'd have huge ramifications with other builds/matchups. It's also not a very elegant solution to the problem, it's weird to straight up just have one upgrade not able to be chronoboosted when all other upgrades can be The only builds it would effect are the ones that are trying to do a warpgate timing attack with the best "oomph"(4 gate or 2 gate pressure)... whereas increasing the time it takes to research warpgate affects every protoss build. | ||
|
SDnNs
United States24 Posts
| ||
|
Mailing
United States3087 Posts
On May 15 2011 18:56 SDnNs wrote: honestly, we have already seen on the ladder that it hasnt done much to the matchup, pushes are just delayed by 15-20 seconds, its a worthless change, they should just leave it be Blame protoss players. They could make warpgates take +100 seconds and they would still try 4gating -.- | ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
| ||
|
Ruscour
5233 Posts
On May 15 2011 18:56 SDnNs wrote: honestly, we have already seen on the ladder that it hasnt done much to the matchup, pushes are just delayed by 15-20 seconds, its a worthless change, they should just leave it be nice necro :-/ | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On May 15 2011 19:08 Cyber_Cheese wrote: warpgate is such a strong research, there should be some sort of tradeoff choosing to use it over normal gates No there shouldn't, the race is balanced around it. | ||
|
Arachne
South Africa426 Posts
On May 15 2011 19:08 Cyber_Cheese wrote: warpgate is such a strong research, there should be some sort of tradeoff choosing to use it over normal gates There is. You can't queue units... That means you have to keep track of the units summoned in and the individual cool-downs to have enough resources to warp in every cycle. I have actually been toying with using non warp gate gateways to see if I can get it to work, as then you could queue, but cant solve that problem yet in theory. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On April 29 2011 07:34 Cloak wrote: I honestly don't understand what's so ridiculous about it. I feel like Immortals have a great potential for a bridging gap in tech right now. People bitch about how top heavy Protoss is (Colossus rape, Storm brokeness, etc.) so if we were to make a Colossus nerf viable, the strength of the intermediates needs to be graded appropriately. Right now Immortals are lackluster. Maybe in the Silver games they're kicking butt and taking names, but as far as tournament play goes, come on, really? Their only use is for Zergs that spam Roach and forget there's a Zergling button. If Zerg used Ultras more, I guess they'd be more useful but I can't remember a game where they came out. DPS/Supply is only useful for two things. Factoring in additional supply costs, and maxed army strength. Surprise, 95% of the game is controlled by sub-max armies, so resources is the determining factor. Even at max, resources is still the dominant force. I have no problem talking about DPS/Supply, but DPS/Cost is the real variable here. What's the alternative to a slight reworking of Immortals? Massive changes in Gateway timings and a 40s delay on a macro mechanic that's pretty much integral to everything Protoss does. Which do you think has a more likely chance of upsetting balance? It's Occam's Razoring that shit. Is my reasoning flawed? Let's say Immortals did too much DPS, maybe you nerf the base damage because we know they already do enough Armored DPS. Seriously, how can you continue to post that kind of bullshit? Do you understand how ridiculously imba that kind of immortal would be? One shot marine, two shots hydras, one shot ling, hell 3 shot zealots ? Making immortal do the same amount of damage against light than armored would be like virtually hitting starcraft 2 in the head with a giant hammer and laugh at her (because SC2 is a girl) ugly new face. | ||
|
TheAwesomeAll
Netherlands1609 Posts
| ||
| ||
