|
You didn't think this completely through.
There are 2! Not 1, advantage to warp ins:
1. Distance, which you heavily emphasized and I agree.
2. 5 second warp in time! yes that is 5 seconds for minerals to turn into a unit.
2 advantage means not only are you behind beacuse they can warp in close to you, but also means Protoss production cycle spends money first, unit, wait, instead of money, wait, unit.
So, 4 Warpgates producing 4 zealots vs 2 Reactor Barracks producing 4 marines. If both players start at the same time, the Protoss will actually always be 1 production cycle ahead! BEFORE CHRONOBOOST!
first 5 seconds, 4 zealots pop, leaves 21 before marines pop out of the barracks, 8 seconds after the marines pop, 4 more zealots are active, total of 8 so its 8 on 4 for 17 seconds before its 8 on 8! Remember with warpgate these new 4 zealots dont even have to walk!
Now lets take a practical example of how this concept affects Starcraft 2.Look at PvP and 3 Gate Robo vs 4 Gate. As the Robo player defends his ramp, he sees he has 250 100, yay an Immo. Meanwhile the 4 gate says oh 250 100, yay 2 stalkers.
Normal game, it would take the 2 stalkers 30 ish seconds to build, then walk from the gateway to the ramp. Meanwhile the Immortal takes its 55 seconds(no chrono) to build, little to walk to the ramp.
However, these two stalkers hit the field a full 50 seconds before the Immortal. Guess what, suddenly you can only use warpgate in PvP because it spends the money you have NOW NOW, not 35 seconds from NOW. PLUS its PROXIED!
TL;DR Not only walk time, also build time. 5 seconds to spend your money with gate vs 35. This means if both people are constantly spending their money NOW warpgates make units FASTER AND PROXIED.
|
I always thought that PvP needs the combo Shield Battery + Immortal for a safe expand. We'll see in HOTS. 
|
On September 09 2011 09:51 Kajarn wrote:+ Show Spoiler +You didn't think this completely through.
There are 2! Not 1, advantage to warp ins:
1. Distance, which you heavily emphasized and I agree.
2. 5 second warp in time! yes that is 5 seconds for minerals to turn into a unit.
2 advantage means not only are you behind beacuse they can warp in close to you, but also means Protoss production cycle spends money first, unit, wait, instead of money, wait, unit.
So, 4 Warpgates producing 4 zealots vs 2 Reactor Barracks producing 4 marines. If both players start at the same time, the Protoss will actually always be 1 production cycle ahead! BEFORE CHRONOBOOST!
first 5 seconds, 4 zealots pop, leaves 21 before marines pop out of the barracks, 8 seconds after the marines pop, 4 more zealots are active, total of 8 so its 8 on 4 for 17 seconds before its 8 on 8! Remember with warpgate these new 4 zealots dont even have to walk!
Now lets take a practical example of how this concept affects Starcraft 2.Look at PvP and 3 Gate Robo vs 4 Gate. As the Robo player defends his ramp, he sees he has 250 100, yay an Immo. Meanwhile the 4 gate says oh 250 100, yay 2 stalkers.
Normal game, it would take the 2 stalkers 30 ish seconds to build, then walk from the gateway to the ramp. Meanwhile the Immortal takes its 55 seconds(no chrono) to build, little to walk to the ramp.
However, these two stalkers hit the field a full 50 seconds before the Immortal. Guess what, suddenly you can only use warpgate in PvP because it spends the money you have NOW NOW, not 35 seconds from NOW. PLUS its PROXIED!
TL;DR Not only walk time, also build time. 5 seconds to spend your money with gate vs 35. This means if both people are constantly spending their money NOW warpgates make units FASTER AND PROXIED.
Please dont theory craft there is a lot more going on such as:
Pound for pound the immortal is worth a lot more than 2 stalkers
and other factors that even i dont know about.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 09 2011 10:03 hobosrus wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:51 Kajarn wrote:+ Show Spoiler +You didn't think this completely through.
There are 2! Not 1, advantage to warp ins:
1. Distance, which you heavily emphasized and I agree.
2. 5 second warp in time! yes that is 5 seconds for minerals to turn into a unit.
2 advantage means not only are you behind beacuse they can warp in close to you, but also means Protoss production cycle spends money first, unit, wait, instead of money, wait, unit.
So, 4 Warpgates producing 4 zealots vs 2 Reactor Barracks producing 4 marines. If both players start at the same time, the Protoss will actually always be 1 production cycle ahead! BEFORE CHRONOBOOST!
first 5 seconds, 4 zealots pop, leaves 21 before marines pop out of the barracks, 8 seconds after the marines pop, 4 more zealots are active, total of 8 so its 8 on 4 for 17 seconds before its 8 on 8! Remember with warpgate these new 4 zealots dont even have to walk!
Now lets take a practical example of how this concept affects Starcraft 2.Look at PvP and 3 Gate Robo vs 4 Gate. As the Robo player defends his ramp, he sees he has 250 100, yay an Immo. Meanwhile the 4 gate says oh 250 100, yay 2 stalkers.
Normal game, it would take the 2 stalkers 30 ish seconds to build, then walk from the gateway to the ramp. Meanwhile the Immortal takes its 55 seconds(no chrono) to build, little to walk to the ramp.
However, these two stalkers hit the field a full 50 seconds before the Immortal. Guess what, suddenly you can only use warpgate in PvP because it spends the money you have NOW NOW, not 35 seconds from NOW. PLUS its PROXIED!
TL;DR Not only walk time, also build time. 5 seconds to spend your money with gate vs 35. This means if both people are constantly spending their money NOW warpgates make units FASTER AND PROXIED. Please dont theory craft there is a lot more going on such as: Pound for pound the immortal is worth a lot more than 2 stalkers and other factors that even i dont know about.
I'd rather have 2 blink stalkers than an immortal in most situations, unless I'm fighting mass roach or mass marauder or some really heavy armor composition.
|
On September 09 2011 09:50 Belisarius wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:17 roymarthyup wrote:On September 09 2011 09:14 Belisarius wrote:
That doesn't make any sense at all. +1 and -1 relative to what?
Defender's advantage by army numbers is very simple. Attacker is at -1 round compared to the defender because his reinforcements are still walking across the map, while the defender's are where they need to be. Defender's advantage is relative to the attacker only.
So T and Z are both -1 when attacking. Protoss, however, is not. Protoss with forward warpins has a defender's advantage in the other guy's base. That's the power of warpin, and why toss gateway is crap cost-for-cost against the other races.
But defender's advantage is not just about unit counts. Creep for Z, static defenses for Z and T, and FF for toss all contribute to defender's advantage. Toss is stronger on the attack by raw round count, but Z and T in particular don't rely solely on numbers, and their units are more cost-efficient.
But, as long as it's still possible to warp-in over forcefields, toss does not have such secondary measures against another protoss, which is why PvP and PvP alone is aggressively broken at the warpgate timing. relative to the fact that zerg/terran have the option to press a button that says "i will have more units and i will be stronger, but i can only defend" protoss doesnt have that option as a result, protoss has a weaker defenders advantage. i guess i shouldnt say its zero, but the fact is protoss does not have a option to press that button. zerg/terran do based on pure logic, protoss has less of a defenders advantage, based on pure logic of unit numbers and where they can be at a certain time. terran "as a race" has more of a defenders advantage than protoss purely based off the fact that they can choose to only defend and it gives them a larger army ...what the heck button are you talking about? There's absolutely nothing in the terran arsenal that gives them a larger army but forces them to defend with it. Literally nothing. Terran have bunkers (which are amazing) and units which are more cost-effective (which is also amazing). But those have nothing to do with having a larger army, nor do they lock him into defending. The terran can take his cost efficient army right the hell up to your nat whenever he likes; he can even build bunkers and siege up tanks there. It's conceivably possible to say Z have such a button with their larvae mechanic, but that's balanced by their needing larvae for drones as well as military. Zerg's defender's advantage early game comes from creep speed, spine crawlers, queens, and their ability to rapidly create reactive compositions. I agree that protoss have the least defender's advantage once they've expanded past their ramp. But it's really not for the reasons you're stating.
the thing in the terran arsenal that gives him a larger army but forces him to defend with it is the fact that gameplay mechanics create a scenario for the terran that allows him to have a larger more powerful army in the field of combat but if the terran is not defending he will lose such an advantage.
the terran is not "forced" to defend with it, however he is forced to defend if he wants to keep the advantage. by attacking, the terran loses his defenders advantage
if a terran chooses to defend and his enemy attacks him, the terrans army is large and more powerful in the field of combat (his base) compared to how large the terrans WOULD BE if the terran was attacking at that moment
this is defenders advantage
by choosing to defend, the terran is deciding to use gameplay mechanics to his advantage which dictate that the terrans army will be more powerful but only if he is defending. if the terran decides to attack the field of combat is at the enemies base and thus new units will need to walk longer to reinforce and thus the terrans army will not be as strong where the combat is taking place
|
On September 09 2011 08:22 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 08:15 HypertonicHydroponic wrote: TLDR #2 -- Blizz please make the Shield Equalizer happen (so the rest of the stuff can be fixed)! If you want to but don't have the time, hire me, and I'll do it.  Your equalizer would make any timing attack impossible vs Protoss early on. The amount of shields regened simply from the nexus (375) is insane, plus having like 2 pylons up there and you can effectively churn out 575 hp instantly.
I think there is a misunderstanding with how this would work. As I mentioned shields would not start to regenerate from any unit that has had shields redistributed for the same amount of time it takes for shield regeneration to start after a unit has been attacked (so 10 seconds). So in my example, the zealot is actually attacked, but the gateway/cyber/pylon/Shield Equalizer would all also not be regenerating shields right away because they are in essence attacked as well. While the individual unit survives the barrage, the group is weakened. After the 100 energy of the Shield Equalizer is spent redistributing the shields, everything in that group is one volley closer to the three roaches killing it. This is the tradeoff that parodies the tradeoff of repair (lose mining time and resources) and transfuse (lose potential larva/creep, maybe minerals/supply from extra queens). Sure the energy will regenerate, but the rate could be made slow, and the building itself could cost something like 150 minerals. Five 3x roach volleys of mitigation I don't think is as game breaking as you make it out to be.
Let's try another example: Two Blue flame hellions are dropped in the back of your base and you don't notice at first. They line up an awesome shot and roast 8 probes. However, you have a pylon, a Shield Equalizer, the nexus, and 8 other probes within the Equalizer's vicinity. So here's what would happen -- the total damage taken would be 19 x 2 x 8 = 304. If the equalizer were not there the probes would have 2 hp and everything else mentioned would be full hp/shield. However the equalizer would essentially divert a large portion of that damage to the other 11 units (I can think of at least two different ways this work mathematically (all units draw from each other or attacked units draw from unattacked units, but I'll stick to the one I'm thinking of). If the total damage were to be equalized among the 19 units/buildings, then each unit would take 16 damage. For the 11 non-attacked units/buildings to take 16 damage from the 8 attacked units, a total of 176 shield damage would need to be redistributed, which means 88 energy would be drained from the shield equalizer to accomplish this. That means only 12 energy is left to redistribute shields on the next volley of attacks, which means only 24 shields can be soaked up from other units/buildings, which means the next shot would be almost full damage to the probes. At 20hp and 4 shields, that means that they would wind up at something like 7hp on the next volley. So it give the probes another volley to kill and actually makes the rest of the probes easier to kill as well (and well as weakening the shields of the structures slightly). I do not see how that is so completely overpowered.
Plus instead of just free energy per 150 minerals or whatever like with the normal shield battery, there is an actual downside like there is with repair and transfuse. The idea may need work, but imba it is not.
|
On September 09 2011 09:48 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On September 09 2011 09:19 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 09 2011 09:16 PPTouch wrote:On September 09 2011 09:14 roymarthyup wrote:On September 09 2011 09:11 PPTouch wrote:
zealot sentry stalker doesnt beat mm with stim efficiently
thats why protosses get colossus and HT it does, in equal foods, as long as the terran has no ghosts or thors or tanks or medivacs naw terran t1 is snowball once they get past 35 supply of army and know how to kite terran t1 will trump protoss t1 so long as the terran isnt retarded and runs into range of sentries to cast ffsff range is pretty low and sentries are pretty slow Only if Terran has stim, combat shields, and conc though, while Toss having no upgrades. A 1/1 toss T1 army can compete. Only comparable thing to measure really since Charge/Blink are so much further ahead. Stim is enough. In fact, if the Protoss doesn't get any aoe, you don't actually need Marauders for anything, past a certain supply threshold. There's a point, around 30 supply, where the synergy between Zealots and Sentries is the strongest, and then Gateway armies can trade efficiently with Bio. But if you go significantly above that, you will lose, no matter tha upgrades. Take it from someone who plays Tyler's build on ladder fairly often - I've had games where 70 supply of Zealot/Stalker/Sentry at 2/2 got rolled by 70 supply of Bio at 1/0. Like, it wasn't even close, Terran didn't even need to kite, just spread his stuff into an arc during the battle. Once they kill the Zealots, you lose instantly.
I highly question that. In that situation you should have max 16 supply in stalkers, the rest zealot/sentry still. You need to do multiple rows of forcefields so that bio in the back can't fire. 70 supply bio, no medivacs?
Regardless, there might be a small window where you're vulnerable in that situation, but if you have charge (which isn't exactly unusual when you alright have a twilight from 2/2), a gateway army 2/2 would trash a bio army.
|
I assume this has been said various times, but do remember that warpgate, although it's main feature is shortening attack distances, does also lower build times. There a push coming at you? Morph in four units. Chrono and more warps mid battle. Regardless of the lack of defensive options, you can make units quickly to defend.
|
United States7483 Posts
On September 09 2011 09:51 Kajarn wrote:
You didn't think this completely through.
There are 2! Not 1, advantage to warp ins:
1. Distance, which you heavily emphasized and I agree.
2. 5 second warp in time! yes that is 5 seconds for minerals to turn into a unit.
2 advantage means not only are you behind beacuse they can warp in close to you, but also means Protoss production cycle spends money first, unit, wait, instead of money, wait, unit.
So, 4 Warpgates producing 4 zealots vs 2 Reactor Barracks producing 4 marines. If both players start at the same time, the Protoss will actually always be 1 production cycle ahead! BEFORE CHRONOBOOST!
first 5 seconds, 4 zealots pop, leaves 21 before marines pop out of the barracks, 8 seconds after the marines pop, 4 more zealots are active, total of 8 so its 8 on 4 for 17 seconds before its 8 on 8! Remember with warpgate these new 4 zealots dont even have to walk!
Now lets take a practical example of how this concept affects Starcraft 2.Look at PvP and 3 Gate Robo vs 4 Gate. As the Robo player defends his ramp, he sees he has 250 100, yay an Immo. Meanwhile the 4 gate says oh 250 100, yay 2 stalkers.
Normal game, it would take the 2 stalkers 30 ish seconds to build, then walk from the gateway to the ramp. Meanwhile the Immortal takes its 55 seconds(no chrono) to build, little to walk to the ramp.
However, these two stalkers hit the field a full 50 seconds before the Immortal. Guess what, suddenly you can only use warpgate in PvP because it spends the money you have NOW NOW, not 35 seconds from NOW. PLUS its PROXIED!
TL;DR Not only walk time, also build time. 5 seconds to spend your money with gate vs 35. This means if both people are constantly spending their money NOW warpgates make units FASTER AND PROXIED.
This is true for the first production cycle of the game. Later ones this doesn't apply, considering the weakness of gateway units, this is not a big advantage in PvT or PvZ, it merely compensates for a huge weakness. I'd rather not have this advantage but have strong gateway units.
|
On September 09 2011 09:51 Kajarn wrote:
You didn't think this completely through.
There are 2! Not 1, advantage to warp ins:
1. Distance, which you heavily emphasized and I agree.
2. 5 second warp in time! yes that is 5 seconds for minerals to turn into a unit.
2 advantage means not only are you behind beacuse they can warp in close to you, but also means Protoss production cycle spends money first, unit, wait, instead of money, wait, unit.
So, 4 Warpgates producing 4 zealots vs 2 Reactor Barracks producing 4 marines. If both players start at the same time, the Protoss will actually always be 1 production cycle ahead! BEFORE CHRONOBOOST!
first 5 seconds, 4 zealots pop, leaves 21 before marines pop out of the barracks, 8 seconds after the marines pop, 4 more zealots are active, total of 8 so its 8 on 4 for 17 seconds before its 8 on 8! Remember with warpgate these new 4 zealots dont even have to walk!
Now lets take a practical example of how this concept affects Starcraft 2.Look at PvP and 3 Gate Robo vs 4 Gate. As the Robo player defends his ramp, he sees he has 250 100, yay an Immo. Meanwhile the 4 gate says oh 250 100, yay 2 stalkers.
Normal game, it would take the 2 stalkers 30 ish seconds to build, then walk from the gateway to the ramp. Meanwhile the Immortal takes its 55 seconds(no chrono) to build, little to walk to the ramp.
However, these two stalkers hit the field a full 50 seconds before the Immortal. Guess what, suddenly you can only use warpgate in PvP because it spends the money you have NOW NOW, not 35 seconds from NOW. PLUS its PROXIED!
TL;DR Not only walk time, also build time. 5 seconds to spend your money with gate vs 35. This means if both people are constantly spending their money NOW warpgates make units FASTER AND PROXIED.
Your math is cute and all but youre missing an argument... like where is the argument in all that? Warpgates are good, the units that come out of them are lacking because warpgates are good. That's the premise of the OP: refute or agree... thats pretty much the format.
|
lol you still have the rally advantage.
you see an army moving out, you have time to prepare for it, and they cant reinforce as fast as you can.
and this crap about not having a defending advantage cause your units suck is complete garbage.
go watch huk 1 gate expand is the majority of his pvts and alot of his pvzs. he holds off larger MM forces repeatedly with A) sentries B) rally advantage.
|
On September 09 2011 11:26 danson wrote:
lol you still have the rally advantage.
you see an army moving out, you have time to prepare for it, and they cant reinforce as fast as you can.
and this crap about not having a defending advantage cause your units suck is complete garbage.
go watch huk 1 gate expand is the majority of his pvts and alot of his pvzs. he holds off larger MM forces repeatedly with A) sentries B) rally advantage.
Just to comment, being able to hold something off is meaningless, has nothing to do with it really.
|
As a protoss, warp gate makes protoss really weak early game, due to their units being weaker but makes them even stronger late game due to "instant" reproduction of units. I do not have a problem with the concept coming from Blizzard's perspective, it is a cool idea, but the problem is, just as the OP stated, the removal of defender's advantage early game (late game too but not as extensively). The ability to create units in 5 seconds anywhere on the map you have pylon power should not arrive 6 minutes into the game. I would love to see Blizzard make warp gate a late game tech choice instead of a requirement to survive. Plus if they get rid of warp gate early game, they can then buff gateway units (and get rid of forcefield for fuck's sake) and have the early game balanced around fights using the defender's advantage from either side. In order to compensate for the appropriately buffed gateway units, they could add a cost to make each gateway a warp gate and/or make the cooldown longer, it takes more time overall to create a unit on the other side of the map than it does to have it spawn in your base.
If they aren't willing to change warpgate, which I'm sure they won't, and see how its hurting the protoss race, at least give a means for defenders advantage that aren't antimicro, a la shield battery (since cannons after gateway would be too good).
|
On September 09 2011 09:50 Belisarius wrote:
...what the heck button are you talking about? There's absolutely nothing in the terran arsenal that gives them a larger army but forces them to defend with it. Literally nothing.
Terran has the army advantage midgame if both sides macro equally due to design.
much shorter buildtimes (Early game) and still shorter build times after warpgates are up.
and everything little additional tech strengthes m&m&m play.
And since gateway army loses lots of it's value midgame the investment into techunits further reduces the size of protoss army in general.
|
I've always hated the warpgate as a zerg player. Theres a reason that 4 gate is standard against Zerg early game.
It allows you to create units that are more powerful in mass than zerg units, and it allows you to put them on the map anywhere, instantly reinforcing. Not only that but its frontloaded as opposed to rear loaded. So units come out before the end of the production cycle, not after. This makes it hugely in favor of protoss.
Why do you think KA was removed? Because of the underlying flaw of the core mechanic that was tied to what made KA so bad to have.
Warp gates are PURE win.
Quicker build time? Check.
Build anywhere on map? Check.
load units in front of the cycle instaed of at end? check.
Only costs 50/50? Check.
There is no drawback to having warpgates or going for them. theres no reason to have gateways instead of warpgates, even for the queuing procedure. Is Queue better than having your units pop out instantly anywhere on map?
its a nydus worm tied to your production facilities at 50/50 cost. and that nydus worm also speeds up production, even before chronoboost.
Protoss can zerg Zergs far more effectively, if they efficiently trade army with zerg and then hit their base right after, because I see more and more protoss CHOOSING to have 10+ warp gates by 18 minutes.
Why have that many? Because warp gate units are inefficent and you need to make up for that with greater throughput?
Hmm, doesn't that sound exactly like a ZERG mechanic?
So what you have is one race that has great survivability in blink stalkers and such, that can army trade and remax faster than a zerg, with chronos applied.
Makes sense right?
I remember in Brood war, Warp gate units were strong and the main for of P, supplemented by carriers or reavers.
|
On September 08 2011 20:02 susySquark wrote:Show nested quote +On September 08 2011 19:54 FuRong wrote:
I still don't see why bringing back shield batteries isn't an answer to this.
They add nothing to attacking armies (although I suppose technically Protoss could use them offensively as part of a push) and provide the missing defender's advantage. Thats why I offered them as a possible solution? I'd love to see them. Who said they wouldn't help?
I loved and miss shield batts from brood war as well, but lets not kid ourselves. its abusable as shit.
Mass blink stalkers. 4 proxy pylons outside enemy base. attack, blink micro, kill 90% of their army, fall back and regen shields full, repeat before they rebuild army.
Not gonna happen. not on my watch, no fucking way.
there's another issue.
Zealot warpgate = 28 seconds
Stalker warpgate = 32
Zergling = 24 + larva. so zergling = 24+10 per injected larva or 24 + 14 per hatchery larva.
Roach = 27 (not including larva time)
hydra = 33 (not including larva time)
You might say "but.. but Zerg gets 4 units out at once!".
This is true. It gets 4 units out in what what you could average to be 10-12 seconds. However in realistic terms, those units come out in (build time + larva build time) seconds.
So sure, you might be able to get 16 lings at once from 2 hatches, but does protoss ever have only 1 warpgate? No. Lets take the standard 4 gate.
28 seconds/4 = an average of 7 seconds per stalker. Thats less average seconds than a zerg making units, because a Zergling is 24/4 = 6 + 2 for the injected larva or 4 for the hatch larva = 8 or 10 seconds average!
Now add chronoboost on top. It lasts 25 seconds, so assuming 28 second build time, you're looking at 14 seconds for 4 stalkers, or 3.5 seconds per stalker.
Also, banelings take 20 second to morph. just in case anyone thinks banelings are so quick to get. Zerg has to make everything before a push comes, not during.
|
i really dont get the point of this discussion. All i see is how protoss have it easy because they can warp in units where they want, if they have pylon up, and how this deny defender advantage. This could be valid IF, and only IF, protoss would actually be winning each tournement like terrans are doing right now.
The whole thing about protoss can do that but not terran QQ is meaningless, terran is destroying everything everywhere, check all the last mlg, check the vast number of player that are able to qualify into code S, big majority are terran. Yeah sure protoss can warp in units, but this is way not OP as they really cant win atm.
This is like saying, well i find it annoying that i need active scouting and map awareness but any zerg that use creep correctly dont need that awareness because they see you come miles away. That is true they see you coming but that doesnt make it not fair. Zerg need that to survive as protoss need it to survive. whitout "abusing" warp in and sentry (forcefield), protoss units are extremelly weak, so to me this QQ about it is a big non sense.
|
On September 09 2011 15:03 Nders wrote:
i really dont get the point of this discussion. All i see is how protoss have it easy because they can warp in units where they want, if they have pylon up, and how this deny defender advantage. This could be valid IF, and only IF, protoss would actually be winning each tournement like terrans are doing right now.
The whole thing about protoss can do that but not terran QQ is meaningless, terran is destroying everything everywhere, check all the last mlg, check the vast number of player that are able to qualify into code S, big majority are terran. Yeah sure protoss can warp in units, but this is way not OP as they really cant win atm.
This is like saying, well i find it annoying that i need active scouting and map awareness but any zerg that use creep correctly dont need that awareness because they see you come miles away. That is true they see you coming but that doesnt make it not fair. Zerg need that to survive as protoss need it to survive. whitout "abusing" warp in and sentry (forcefield), protoss units are extremelly weak, so to me this QQ about it is a big non sense.
The argument in the OP was that protoss can use what is normally a defender's advantage, the close rally, for offense. If the Protoss offense is balanced so that it is not overpowered, then that leaves protoss without a defender's advantage if it is defending.
|
On September 09 2011 15:03 Nders wrote:
i really dont get the point of this discussion. All i see is how protoss have it easy because they can warp in units where they want, if they have pylon up, and how this deny defender advantage. This could be valid IF, and only IF, protoss would actually be winning each tournement like terrans are doing right now.
The whole thing about protoss can do that but not terran QQ is meaningless, terran is destroying everything everywhere, check all the last mlg, check the vast number of player that are able to qualify into code S, big majority are terran. Yeah sure protoss can warp in units, but this is way not OP as they really cant win atm.
This is like saying, well i find it annoying that i need active scouting and map awareness but any zerg that use creep correctly dont need that awareness because they see you come miles away. That is true they see you coming but that doesnt make it not fair. Zerg need that to survive as protoss need it to survive. whitout "abusing" warp in and sentry (forcefield), protoss units are extremelly weak, so to me this QQ about it is a big non sense.
when Protoss get wise enough to see that warp prism is the "poor man's" version of blink for throwing units up a cliff during an all out attack, we'll see TvP numbers shift to favor the all inning protoss again.
It mystifies me how an entire race can neglect to see the offensive power capabilities of warp prisms dropping units right on top of their heads. Zerg does this with bane bombs.
Of course, to be fair, Zerg avoided winning a lot of months by neglecting infestor.
|
The only way to really change this is add a protoss defensive structure after gateway. The timing pushes are already even. Without being able to warp-in after getting WG research then zergs can freely take a fast 3rd without having to worry about defending a sentry push or a possibility of a 4gate. A buffed shield battery would be very helpful. I haven't taken the time to think of a useful defensive structure for protoss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
