|
United States15275 Posts
On October 12 2011 05:34 xlava wrote:
I honestly can't believe that this ridiculous thread got resurrected. Let it die. Not all races are equal in all regards, we should seriously stop discussing it because as it stands now, Protoss is the weakest race anyway, and the game itself is balanced for all intents and purposes.
So a weakest race can exist yet the game itself is balanced? I can't take someone seriously when they contradict themselves in one sentence.
|
I have a feeling that the Shield Battery may very likely be added in an expansion.
|
To be honest i find the protoss v terran or zerg to be relitively balanced and defending to be fine on that front but i think oddly enough the most imbalanced thing about protoss is in its mirror match up. However, i dont think its really all to do with the warpgate mechanic because i think protoss has gained more form warpgates than lost over all (also you dont have to use them if you are really opposed to it).
I just find the protoss v protoss match up to basically consist of nothing but all ins or come down to one major fight and that end the entire game. Partly this is warpgate related also because as protoss we tend to warp units closer into combat and have them enter the fight right away, where as terran and zerg macro back at home and if their forward army is defeated they have a secondary army to defend with allowing them to macro up a new army and still be in the game.
-Ardure
|
On September 08 2011 19:07 MCMXVI wrote:
Good read, and I agree. Not only is it easier for terran to macro than for protoss and zerg (warp in and larva injects instead of queue queue queue), but to your question; how should they make offensive warp-ins weaker? Units spawn with less shields or armor or something?
So you haven't noticed a button called "W" on ur screen? Its a button only toss has. Generally macro as toss is considered easiest.
|
Consider that: (maybe it has allready been mentionnend)
- Warp technology directly on Gateways. Warp cooldown to be adjusted accordingly to balance.
- Gateways have a "warp power" radius around them.
- Shorter Cooldown resercheable at Cybercore.
- Pylon "warp power" resercheable at Forge (or at shiel battery? :p ) .
|
Shield Battery won't change ghosts effect in PvT, maybe more likely in PvZ and PvP.
Regarding the mothership in my eyes you shouldn't be able to neutral parasite it, fungal it or emp it. It's a hero unit.
|
Move warpgate tech to twilight council. Buff gateway units.
|
I've been wondering about this.
What you say is true, but couldn't Warpgates be adapted to be a factor of territorial control? Like Siege Tanks in other match-ups. I imagine, if Gateway units were balanced defensively rather than offensively, so that they would be fine in defence but too powerful in offence, then the game would be about preventing the Protoss from getting his army with Pylon support into your territory. I figure this could lead to Pylon-pushes.
'Course, there are a few things that would need to happen for that, I think. First off, Warp Gate tech would need to be pushed to higher tech (say, Twilight Council or Templar Archives), since players may not have the map control early game to deny Pylon rushes, but normal Gateway production time would be brought back down to normal.
And Warp-ins need to be more vulnerable. Right now if a unit dies during Warp-in, it gives a full refund and resets the cooldown. That should be inverted so that once the warp-in begins, the unit is already bought, for good or ill. No refund at all. Warping-in directly to the battlefield should be riskier than back home.
Also, Khaydarin Amulet. Templar with Storm are extremely powerful defensively, but very slow and vulnerable on the offence. This would also reinforce the territorial control aspect of Pylon pushes.
Anyway, that's how it sounds to me in theorycraft, I'd like to know the thoughts of better players on this concept.
|
mmm i still like warpgates and i think toss has enough defenders advantages. (i mean you get 10 second build time units when switching from gate to warp). The biggest is probably the stalker being able to outrun everything so you can basically siege the opponent from the start. The Other is force fields and shield regeneration. I like that the defenders advantage is so different from the other races  . (not a static one)
But they could add a research to the core turning the nexus into a shield battery, would help defending and delay offensive as it delays the warp gate. Also 2 nexus 2 batteries . What i would find interesting is a small chronoboost that works on units in the energy grid that would activate shield regeneration asap, but would of course stop if the unit gets hit. But that would probably be to imbalanced late game hehe.
|
On October 12 2011 06:29 eYeball wrote:
Shield Battery won't change ghosts effect in PvT, maybe more likely in PvZ and PvP.
Regarding the mothership in my eyes you shouldn't be able to neutral parasite it, fungal it or emp it. It's a hero unit.
the mothership shouldn't exist in multiplayer. it's a joke unit. just make protoss not be terrible and one dimensional and remove the gd mothership.
|
On October 12 2011 06:46 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
I've been wondering about this.
What you say is true, but couldn't Warpgates be adapted to be a factor of territorial control? Like Siege Tanks in other match-ups. I imagine, if Gateway units were balanced defensively rather than offensively, so that they would be fine in defence but too powerful in offence, then the game would be about preventing the Protoss from getting his army with Pylon support into your territory. I figure this could lead to Pylon-pushes.
'Course, there are a few things that would need to happen for that, I think. First off, Warp Gate tech would need to be pushed to higher tech (say, Twilight Council or Templar Archives), since players may not have the map control early game to deny Pylon rushes, but normal Gateway production time would be brought back down to normal.
And Warp-ins need to be more vulnerable. Right now if a unit dies during Warp-in, it gives a full refund and resets the cooldown. That should be inverted so that once the warp-in begins, the unit is already bought, for good or ill. No refund at all. Warping-in directly to the battlefield should be riskier than back home.
Also, Khaydarin Amulet. Templar with Storm are extremely powerful defensively, but very slow and vulnerable on the offence. This would also reinforce the territorial control aspect of Pylon pushes.
Anyway, that's how it sounds to me in theorycraft, I'd like to know the thoughts of better players on this concept.
please don't spread misinformation, Protoss does not get a refund if a unit dies during warp.
they only get a refund if the warp-in pylon dies before that or if you change the prism mode during warp.
|
You make valid points but I still think that it's mainly impossible to attack a protoss at his base if he has sentries. Just by the layout he knows exactly where to place those forcefields and his army is already positioned to immediately throw the FF down and maximize the efficiency of his units. Even without a ramp all maps have somewhat narrow chokes and a well positioned protoss army with good forcefield can be ridiculously cost-effective. The problem IMO is that this is also an attacking advantage on some maps, which is why protoss has such strong timings. There is indeed a design flaw in my opinion but I doubt that's going to change. PvP is really broken because of this, too.
IMO they need to rethink this. Either push warpgate to higher tech, or make it so that normal gateways have slightly faster build times. This way warpgate would have the advantage of warp-in at any location but slower units whereas normal gateways would rally but come out faster. A lot are going to complain about drops and mutalisk but I mean they figured out a way to deal with those in BW and protoss wasn't really more mobile than they are now =/
|
On October 12 2011 06:58 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:46 Fanatic-Templar wrote:
I've been wondering about this.
What you say is true, but couldn't Warpgates be adapted to be a factor of territorial control? Like Siege Tanks in other match-ups. I imagine, if Gateway units were balanced defensively rather than offensively, so that they would be fine in defence but too powerful in offence, then the game would be about preventing the Protoss from getting his army with Pylon support into your territory. I figure this could lead to Pylon-pushes.
'Course, there are a few things that would need to happen for that, I think. First off, Warp Gate tech would need to be pushed to higher tech (say, Twilight Council or Templar Archives), since players may not have the map control early game to deny Pylon rushes, but normal Gateway production time would be brought back down to normal.
And Warp-ins need to be more vulnerable. Right now if a unit dies during Warp-in, it gives a full refund and resets the cooldown. That should be inverted so that once the warp-in begins, the unit is already bought, for good or ill. No refund at all. Warping-in directly to the battlefield should be riskier than back home.
Also, Khaydarin Amulet. Templar with Storm are extremely powerful defensively, but very slow and vulnerable on the offence. This would also reinforce the territorial control aspect of Pylon pushes.
Anyway, that's how it sounds to me in theorycraft, I'd like to know the thoughts of better players on this concept. please don't spread misinformation, Protoss does not get a refund if a unit dies during warp. they only get a refund if the warp-in pylon dies before that or if you change the prism mode during warp.
Oh, there are two separate types of warp-in cancellations? Did not know that. But I still believe the cost should apply if the power source is removed.
|
On October 12 2011 06:52 crms wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:29 eYeball wrote:
Shield Battery won't change ghosts effect in PvT, maybe more likely in PvZ and PvP.
Regarding the mothership in my eyes you shouldn't be able to neutral parasite it, fungal it or emp it. It's a hero unit. the mothership shouldn't exist in multiplayer. it's a joke unit. just make protoss not be terrible and one dimensional and remove the gd mothership.
Mothership is the only way to win lategame PvZ
|
On October 12 2011 07:02 MattBarry wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 06:52 crms wrote:On October 12 2011 06:29 eYeball wrote:
Shield Battery won't change ghosts effect in PvT, maybe more likely in PvZ and PvP.
Regarding the mothership in my eyes you shouldn't be able to neutral parasite it, fungal it or emp it. It's a hero unit. the mothership shouldn't exist in multiplayer. it's a joke unit. just make protoss not be terrible and one dimensional and remove the gd mothership. Mothership is the only way to win lategame PvZ
Assuming you are significantly behind upon arriving at this lategame.
|
I already posted my solution to this in another forum post (designated balance discussion)
In my eyes the problem could be at least decreased by doubling the warp in time ( +5 sec) and buffing protoss units (sentry 8 dps stalker attack 12(+4) ) and making protoss tech slightly less expensive ( charge 150/150, storm also includes +15 mana) I think then the matchup would be slightly more balanced
|
by doubling the warp in time protoss units are no more "instant" so the opponent has more time to prepare. on the flipside protoss can expand behind pressure because their units are now stronger
|
On October 12 2011 07:07 Brainiak wrote:
I already posted my solution to this in another forum post (designated balance discussion)
In my eyes the problem could be at least decreased by doubling the warp in time ( +5 sec) and buffing protoss units (sentry 8 dps stalker attack 12(+4) ) and making protoss tech slightly less expensive ( charge 150/150, storm also includes +15 mana) I think then the matchup would be slightly more balanced
I couldn't disagree more. Protoss units are devastating in the late game and Zerg/Terran has to get units SPECIFICALLY to counter tier 3 protoss units whereas protoss just generally has good units... I can't imagine getting a spire any earlier to counter that 2 base colossus push that Ace used repeatedly to win IEM. Now it's figured out, but it's so tight. This change is too much IMO.
|
One crazy question :
If cannons were available after gateway, would that break the game? I mean cannon rushes are easily defended by protoss who go forge themselves? and terrans obviously have no problem defending cannon rushes, and zergs always go for pool first so that is not a problem
|
On October 12 2011 07:11 Steel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2011 07:07 Brainiak wrote:
I already posted my solution to this in another forum post (designated balance discussion)
In my eyes the problem could be at least decreased by doubling the warp in time ( +5 sec) and buffing protoss units (sentry 8 dps stalker attack 12(+4) ) and making protoss tech slightly less expensive ( charge 150/150, storm also includes +15 mana) I think then the matchup would be slightly more balanced I couldn't disagree more. Protoss units are devastating in the late game and Zerg/Terran has to get units SPECIFICALLY to counter tier 3 protoss units whereas protoss just generally has good units... I can't imagine getting a spire any earlier to counter that 2 base colossus push that Ace used repeatedly to win IEM. Now it's figured out, but it's so tight. This change is too much IMO.
What are u saying? I dont buff protoss tier 3 just the main gateway units, you can deal with gateway pushes just as easily as their next wave comes later then usual.Moreover these changes are slight changes
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
