| Forum Index > Closed |
|
KevinIX
United States2472 Posts
Gateway units are NOT weak. Especially upgraded gateway units with charge and blink. When supported with forcefields and good positioning, I think the Protoss Gateway composition is better than Zerg of equal tech, and only slightly worse than the Terran Bioball. 4 gate is balanced not by making Gateway units weaker, but giving other races strong defensive capabilities. Creep, spines, and larva inject are powerful defensive advantages that zergs have. Same with bunkers and repairs for Terran. | ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On September 08 2011 22:18 vOdToasT wrote: Shield batteries would make PvP much better if they were strong enough. I seriously think they should add shield batteries in HotS. They should be quite cheap - 75 - 200 minerals. The huge problem with shield batteries would be in other match ups... where you could have an immortal tanking siege hit for a veritable eternit.... NVM I want shield batteries! 1-1-1 Here's to your DEATH! | ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:28 KevinIX wrote: I don't understand why you think an even protoss army is weaker than an even terran or zerg army. I find this to be untrue. It's not that Toss doesn't have a defenders advantage. We have it even when attacking. Gateway units are NOT weak. Especially upgraded gateway units with charge and blink. When supported with forcefields and good positioning, I think the Protoss Gateway composition is better than Zerg of equal tech, and only slightly worse than the Terran Bioball. 4 gate is balanced not by making Gateway units weaker, but giving other races strong defensive capabilities. Creep, spines, and larva inject are powerful defensive advantages that zergs have. Same with bunkers and repairs for Terran. Blizzard has openly stated on multiple occasions that Gateways units are SUPPOSED to be more mechanically inefficient for cost than their Terran and Zerg counter parts because of the innate mobility that the warp in mechanic has given them.... which is why equal supply armies of purely hatch tech/barracks tech/cyber tech armies should always coincide with a non-protoss victory... if it did, then Protoss really WOULD be imbalanced... | ||
|
mastergriggy
United States1312 Posts
I'm not sure what the issue is, I mean even after reading this, it seems like the whole implication of the argument you are making is, "If I don't scout/react properly to my opponent and they come kill me, I shouldn't be punished for it." So I'm gonna assume the argument you are trying to make is that there is little to no defender's advantage in PvP, which I would disagree with. Aside from the obvious, (proxy pylons are still farther away from attacker than defender), a perfectly executed defensive 4 gate beats a perfectly executed offensive 4 gate. I just use that example because it was the opening you mentioned, but in other openings from the opponent, if you scout you should be fine. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
It's a good question though. 150 mineral shield battery at the nat would make FE Protoss a very scary and viable thing. I think that would probably be imba for current PvZ though. Put Hydras back down to hatch-tech, with adequate adjustments to make them useful, and I think we're talking. | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
In short though, Protoss also has a attacking disadvantage because the opponent still gets relatively shorter rally times and does have time to respond. You still have to move out of your base as Protoss so the faster reinforcement doesnt matter at all for how much time the opponent has to respond. The respond time is only dependant on the time it takes for a unit to walk between the bases.. Protoss warp is mechanic is a great invention imo and really makes the races even more unique then they were in sc1. There really is no problem as a result of the warp-ins. At the moment protoss timing pushes are not that hard to stop at all, in fact they are probably the easiest to stop. Timing pushes in general are just quite strong in sc2 because many maps are relatively small and scouting is quite hard. In sc1 scouting is easier because you can't prevent it so easily, in sc2 the cost of scouting is rather high which leads to lots of very hard to stop timing pushes as you don't see them in time often. | ||
|
ProxyKnoxy
United Kingdom2576 Posts
| ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:36 mastergriggy wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I got from reading this is that Protoss have an advantage creating units against Terran and Zerg, but not against Protoss. Last time I checked, a defensive 4 gate executed perfectly beats an offensive 4 gate executed perfectly. Actually I take that back, 4 gate isn't really the most popular opening in PvP right now. I'm not sure what the issue is, I mean even after reading this, it seems like the whole implication of the argument you are making is, "If I don't scout/react properly to my opponent and they come kill me, I shouldn't be punished for it." So I'm gonna assume the argument you are trying to make is that there is little to no defender's advantage in PvP, which I would disagree with. Aside from the obvious, (proxy pylons are still farther away from attacker than defender), a perfectly executed defensive 4 gate beats a perfectly executed offensive 4 gate. I just use that example because it was the opening you mentioned, but in other openings from the opponent, if you scout you should be fine. You completely ignored the fact that the OP states that chokes are another part of the defender's advantage... There's a reason why everyone 4 gates on Tal'darim. If there were no ramp and an open main offensive 4 gate would smash a defensive 4 gate to shreds, only an offensive 4 gate would fight another offensive 4 gate to a standstill.... | ||
|
Musketeer
142 Posts
I don't think gateway units are weak because of warp in. Gateway units are weak because the game would be terrible if every P matchup had to be played like T has to be played in TvP. It's not a fun game and it's boring to watch when you just max out on tier 1 units then attack. | ||
|
ProxyKnoxy
United Kingdom2576 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:36 Jermstuddog wrote: The OP took way too long to say "what happened to the shield battery?" It's a good question though. 150 mineral shield battery at the nat would make FE Protoss a very scary and viable thing. I think that would probably be imba for current PvZ though. Put Hydras back down to hatch-tech, with adequate adjustments to make them useful, and I think we're talking. Hydras at hatch tech would make FFE really hard.. or any type of expansion for that matter. Fast 3rd macro hatch after expo and you have yourself a really tough timing to hold off | ||
|
arsenic
United States163 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:28 KevinIX wrote: I don't understand why you think an even protoss army is weaker than an even terran or zerg army. I find this to be untrue. It's not that Toss doesn't have a defenders advantage. We have it even when attacking. Gateway units are NOT weak. Especially upgraded gateway units with charge and blink. When supported with forcefields and good positioning, I think the Protoss Gateway composition is better than Zerg of equal tech, and only slightly worse than the Terran Bioball. 4 gate is balanced not by making Gateway units weaker, but giving other races strong defensive capabilities. Creep, spines, and larva inject are powerful defensive advantages that zergs have. Same with bunkers and repairs for Terran. I agree. I think that it's a misconception to say that Protoss Gateway units are inherently less cost efficient or weaker than Zerg/Terran units because of the strength of Warp-In. In practice, I have found that this is hardly the case, especially if Protoss uses their Force Fields well and even moreso if they use Blink well. In fact, with Force Fields + Blink, I think their army is more often than not more cost efficient than Zerg (not sure about Terran). Also, once you get to Robo Tech, you get units that are generally super cost efficient. 4 gate and early timing attacks are indeed balanced around giving other races strong defensive structures, not by weakening Protoss units. Personally, I think that WG research needs to come later in the game as a way of getting units to expansions for defense or for harass offense (warping in from hidden pylon to attack Zerg's third base while making a move towards their army). It shouldn't be available as an offensive tactic so early in the game. Moving it farther up the tech tree would probably shake up PvP considerably as well, making for a far more interesting matchup (hopefully anyways). | ||
|
ShatterZer0
United States1843 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:37 Markwerf wrote: There are so many logic flaws in this post I can't even start to summarize them. In short though, Protoss also has a attacking disadvantage because the opponent still gets relatively shorter rally times and does have time to respond. You still have to move out of your base as Protoss so the faster reinforcement doesnt matter at all for how much time the opponent has to respond. The respond time is only dependant on the time it takes for a unit to walk between the bases.. Protoss warp is mechanic is a great invention imo and really makes the races even more unique then they were in sc1. There really is no problem as a result of the warp-ins. At the moment protoss timing pushes are not that hard to stop at all, in fact they are probably the easiest to stop. Timing pushes in general are just quite strong in sc2 because many maps are relatively small and scouting is quite hard. In sc1 scouting is easier because you can't prevent it so easily, in sc2 the cost of scouting is rather high which leads to lots of very hard to stop timing pushes as you don't see them in time often. That's a flawed way of thinking, even in broodwar it was never the absolute speed of a push that made it brilliant, but the control of relative speeds that let it do brilliant damage. With Chronoboost Protoss has the most malleable timing attack windows, allowing for timing attacks to come at significantly customize-able times and strengths. Warp-ins only exacerbate this with the ability to create an instant vanguard for your main army, allowing you to engage longer, and perhaps indefinitely with little to no map-crossing reinforce time... | ||
|
imPermanenCe
Netherlands595 Posts
I think warpin is a really cool and unique ability, but we pay the price of having weaker gateway units, which must be compromised with having AoE in the mid-late game. Still, this makes protoss greatly differ from the other 2 races, which is good too. | ||
|
UnderWorld_Dream
Canada219 Posts
I would love to see the return of Shield Batteries. That's probably for the protoss expansion (with the Reaver hopefully) | ||
|
Lorch
Germany3703 Posts
| ||
iHirO
United Kingdom1381 Posts
This way there would be no effects on other match ups and it would add a defenders advantage. | ||
|
Kaz_Coaching
United States83 Posts
This creates 2 effects. The zerg who lost units must replace them. If the protoss continues to produce units they can start a snowball effect and kill the zerg from mass units. This does of course have problems with infestors, who don't allow stalkers to blink out, so eventually the zerg may be able to tech quick enough to deal with the larger number of stalkers, but it's an easy way to end the game against a weak zerg. The 2nd effect is that it allows the protoss army to maintain it's size while the zerg replaces their own. This means that rather then dumping more money into units, the protoss can dump that money into expansions and tech, giving them the economical and technological advantage going into the late game. Now let's add a shield battery to that push. See any problems here? Blink stalker timing pushes are already very strong if executed and microed correctly. Add to that the ability to replenish shields faster and your going to have some real balance issues. I think a better solution would be to break the cannon into 2 buildings as all other races have. Give them one that shoots air and detects, requires forge tech to make, and give them one that shoots ground, has a 50 second build time and requires gateway. Maybe adjust prices of them to 125 minerals for each as they don't lose mining time or the probe while making them, but don't have the option to move them around as zerg does. I think overall this is a very simplistic thread and not enough options are being explored to really make any suggestions or conclusions. I also believe balance changes are best left in the hands of Blizzard. | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On September 09 2011 00:36 Jermstuddog wrote: The OP took way too long to say "what happened to the shield battery?" It's a good question though. 150 mineral shield battery at the nat would make FE Protoss a very scary and viable thing. I think that would probably be imba for current PvZ though. Put Hydras back down to hatch-tech, with adequate adjustments to make them useful, and I think we're talking. I really don't think the Shield Battery would help all that much. When I go through the situations where I have trouble defending an attack after expanding, I find that it really wouldn't matter all that much. Having a Shield Battery wouldn't help defend a 2 rax with 1 Gate FE, for instance, nor would it help against the 1/1/1. This isn't BW, the units are different, and engagements play out differently. On September 09 2011 00:37 Markwerf wrote: There are so many logic flaws in this post I can't even start to summarize them. In short though, Protoss also has a attacking disadvantage because the opponent still gets relatively shorter rally times and does have time to respond. You still have to move out of your base as Protoss so the faster reinforcement doesnt matter at all for how much time the opponent has to respond. The respond time is only dependant on the time it takes for a unit to walk between the bases.. Protoss warp is mechanic is a great invention imo and really makes the races even more unique then they were in sc1. There really is no problem as a result of the warp-ins. At the moment protoss timing pushes are not that hard to stop at all, in fact they are probably the easiest to stop. Timing pushes in general are just quite strong in sc2 because many maps are relatively small and scouting is quite hard. In sc1 scouting is easier because you can't prevent it so easily, in sc2 the cost of scouting is rather high which leads to lots of very hard to stop timing pushes as you don't see them in time often. Did you really read the opening post? If you did, I suggest reading it again. I honestly have no idea what you're arguing against... To digress a bit though, I do think that one of the reasons SC2 has so many problems, is that the designers wanted to make the races too unique. That's why Protoss and Zerg drops aren't that good, because Terran is supposed to be the race that drops, and that's part of their "uniqueness". A ton of gameplay and strategic variety was sacrificed to shoehorn the races into the straightjackets the designers thought up for them. | ||
|
Tuxedo
United States134 Posts
| ||
|
Beakyboo
United States485 Posts
Protoss really screws with this. Warp in negates travel time and blink can to a fair extent negate the effectiveness of static defense and ramps. Of course this hasn't really destroyed PvZ or PvT, so it's hard to really say why those matchups have evolved past 4 gate while PvP can't seem to. It seems to me that this is because toss needs sentries for gateway unit comps to handle zerg or terran with any sort of efficiency, which makes static defense more potent since blink is less viable with sentries. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Replay Cast
CrankTV Team League
OSC
OSC
Replay Cast
Escore
CrankTV Team League
OSC
Replay Cast
Afreeca Starleague
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
