Note: This is not a beta key, it is simply access to Vs. AI and a Unit Tester. I have no idea how cool with this Blizzard is or is not, use at your own risk.
On March 31 2015 15:55 Isualin wrote: I did not like adept at all It looks like a mix between marauder and stalker which are both boring units. Active ability might be cool strategically though
Stalker is far from a boring unit. It is one of the better unit designs out of SC2.
Nice joke. Except that anti-air unit is weak against mutalisks.
No, it's just not a hard-counter, thus it's not something we all hate here and it is actually well designed, basic unit, with strategic and interesting ability.
Stalker is a rly boring unit. The blink is a one-sided-micro fest. No micro vs micro with the stalker involved. I actually liked the dragoon from broodwar alot more since it had pretty good interactions but no special abilities.
Why put a blink on a unit like this. I seriously dont understand it. Maybe its not the blinks fault tho, hard to say. Without blink it would get better stats i get and therefore it might play vs marauders better etc. Marauders slow are another thing that isnt good for gameplay imo.
Years complaining about A-move units, and you're demanding stronger A-moves like Marauders and Dragoons... Stalkers are very good, decently strong, very mobile and really really interesting micro-wise. Stalkers have also good interactions, being able to face armies of light units like marines and Hydralisks with enough micro. PartinG is a master of that. They are very versatile, but less A-move and a bit weaker on direct engagements. They are designed to have very good synergy with other units instead of "mass this".
Also they would be really better in TvP LotV since Marauder is getting a nerf which Protoss can exploit with Guardian shield, absorbing a bit more of damage. That's why I think that Adepts are getting some nerfs, first reworking the damage to go 3-shot instead of 2-shot in early and a nerf on their upgrade, decresing the Split damage to 50%, which makes a lot of sense to me.
On March 31 2015 15:55 Isualin wrote: I did not like adept at all It looks like a mix between marauder and stalker which are both boring units. Active ability might be cool strategically though
Stalker is far from a boring unit. It is one of the better unit designs out of SC2.
Nice joke. Except that anti-air unit is weak against mutalisks.
No, it's just not a hard-counter, thus it's not something we all hate here and it is actually well designed, basic unit, with strategic and interesting ability.
And that is why Blizzard needs to either make stalkers better against mutalisks or let adept counter mutalisks. If mutalisks get out of hand, nothing but phoenixes stop them. Protoss is supposed to have at least one ground unit which can do the job. It used to be called dragoon. What is it going to be for LotV?
Stalkers do the job fairly well. If it happens that Mutalisks get out of hand, it is only reasonable to come up with appropriate answer (like Phoenixes). From Terran's perspective, I'd also like to have a ground unit that can deal well with large number of Mutalisks well. Thors are "supposed" to do the job, but guess what, they don't cut it as well and you need static defense. This, or you could stim to death and chase Mutas flying around with Marines forever.
Or... you have mines. I'm sure if you place a few, at least some of them will fire.
Mines, while good in theory, don't do well in reality. They are 2 supply and you need reactor on your factory. And if you happen to run into a Zerg player with decent micro, they will just pick them one by one with flock of Mutas + Overseer. It happense here and there that you get this "money" mine hit, but in the long run, mines are not very reliable, in my opinion.
edit: I can't remember the last time I saw someone try to deal with Mutas via Mines in professional game, save cases where you slow push across the map obviously.
Well blink has good and bad sides. We see mostly the bad sides. Two things about blink are very very one sides and utterly boring, that is blink vs zerg and blink vs Vikings.
On March 31 2015 15:55 Isualin wrote: I did not like adept at all It looks like a mix between marauder and stalker which are both boring units. Active ability might be cool strategically though
Stalker is far from a boring unit. It is one of the better unit designs out of SC2.
Nice joke. Except that anti-air unit is weak against mutalisks.
No, it's just not a hard-counter, thus it's not something we all hate here and it is actually well designed, basic unit, with strategic and interesting ability.
And that is why Blizzard needs to either make stalkers better against mutalisks or let adept counter mutalisks. If mutalisks get out of hand, nothing but phoenixes stop them. Protoss is supposed to have at least one ground unit which can do the job. It used to be called dragoon. What is it going to be for LotV?
Stalkers do the job fairly well. If it happens that Mutalisks get out of hand, it is only reasonable to come up with appropriate answer (like Phoenixes). From Terran's perspective, I'd also like to have a ground unit that can deal well with large number of Mutalisks well. Thors are "supposed" to do the job, but guess what, they don't cut it as well and you need static defense. This, or you could stim to death and chase Mutas flying around with Marines forever.
Or... you have mines. I'm sure if you place a few, at least some of them will fire.
Mines, while good in theory, don't do well in reality. They are 2 supply and you need reactor on your factory. And if you happen to run into a Zerg player with decent micro, they will just pick them one by one with flock of Mutas + Overseer. It happense here and there that you get this "money" mine hit, but in the long run, mines are not very reliable, in my opinion.
edit: I can't remember the last time I saw someone try to deal with Mutas via Mines in professional game, save cases where you slow push across the map obviously.
The stalker is a good unit. Of course it is not a hard counter to mutalisks, however you still need a higher amount of resources (particularly gas) in mutalisks than stalkers for the mutalisks to be able to actually beat stalkers.
Mutalisks are part of some of the more interesting and entertaining games. Buying time to get phoenix out is part of the strategy. Tech switching into mass mutalisks can be devastating if they catch the opponent off guard, without the resources or infrastructure to combat them.
It is the resources and infrastructure that are more important. For example zerg go mass mutas, force a lot phoenix, then switch into ultralisks making the phoenix dead supply.Likewise if you go ultralisks and force immortals making them dead supply against the subsequent muta switch all the while both sides need to keep taking bases and denying their opponents bases to have the resources to keep producing units.
With the swarm host change along with everything else. I am looking forward to the mass economy large tech switching zvp games that seem to be few and far between. A ground based hard counter to the mutalisk is not required and i do not think it would be good for the game.
On March 31 2015 17:42 ETisME wrote: Stalker is an amazing unit. The difference between top pro and lower skilled one is huge. parting and hero make so much value over stalkers and it is impressive to watch.
Firstly, we're not parting or hero. And it's unrealistic for Blizzard to expect it that way. Even with micro, I'm sure that 30 stalkers are hardly a challenge for their mutalisks equivalent, e.g. 30. I'm ok even if stalkers have to be supported with something like storm, but no noob zerg will get hit with storm more than once or twice. Why are you so stubborn to acknowledge that stalkers are terrible vs mutalisks? Are you really happy to have phoenixes (and then waiting for fleet beacon) to counter mutalisks?
That is ok, but timing is sometimes important. If you have a good core ground unit from gateways, you can always mass it faster.
Zergs don't aknowledge that stalkers are bad vs mutas, because we play against stalkers every day and not a single sane zerg will go mutas when they see a Protoss playing the most common build these days, aka 3base blink/sentry.
It's true, mutas are strong. They shit all over plain robo openings and force Protoss to either open SG or blink. But they do get countered by stalkers. Not hard, but soft. a dedicated stalker build will shit all over a muta build. Dedicated muta builds only become playable when the Protoss invests a great amount of money into stuff that isn't Stalkers, e.g. Colossi.
If you don't like that, you might as well just remove the mutalisk from the match up. Given how universal stalkers are - again, I'm referring you to 3base blink/sentry builds which don't really have any good counter play from zerg that would just shut it down - it is only reasonable that they aren't a hardcounter to mutas.
On March 31 2015 18:17 JCoto wrote: Years complaining about A-move units, and you're demanding stronger A-moves like Marauders and Dragoons... Stalkers are very good, decently strong, very mobile and really really interesting micro-wise. Stalkers have also good interactions, being able to face armies of light units like marines and Hydralisks with enough micro. PartinG is a master of that. They are very versatile, but less A-move and a bit weaker on direct engagements. They are designed to have very good synergy with other units instead of "mass this".
Also they would be really better in TvP LotV since Marauder is getting a nerf which Protoss can exploit with Guardian shield, absorbing a bit more of damage. That's why I think that Adepts are getting some nerfs, first reworking the damage to go 3-shot instead of 2-shot in early and a nerf on their upgrade, decresing the Split damage to 50%, which makes a lot of sense to me.
I agree with you generally, except for the bolded part which made me genuinely giggle in real-life. People around are giving me weird looks now, shame on you.
Just no. Would be better if you mentioned Immortals and Colossus.
Well blink has good and bad sides. We see mostly the bad sides. Two things about blink are very very one sides and utterly boring, that is blink vs zerg and blink vs Vikings.
My theory is that the enemy absolutely needs a "hard counter" against the Blink Stalkers to keep them in check. It's kinda why blink stalkers aren't an issue in the midgame vs terran as they can get Maurauders there, but in the early game and vs zerg they can be quite lame.
On March 31 2015 18:41 Hider wrote: My theory is that the enemy absolutely needs a "hard counter" against the Blink Stalkers to keep them in check. It's kinda why blink stalkers aren't an issue in the midgame vs terran as they can get Maurauders there, but in the early game and vs zerg they can be quite lame.
I believe this is true for many units and/or strategies within SC2.
People seem to forget that the only thing that made goons themselves more micro intensive than stalkers is that goons were fucking buggy morons. Early game micro vs marines isn't all that different than with stalkers, what does change between bw and sc2 is the presence of vultures/tanks to micro against rather than goons themselves
Just no. Would be better if you mentioned Immortals and Colossus.
Please, Look at the nested quote, the guy I was replying to was demanding more "simplified units" for the basic army, and talking about Marauders and Dragoons saying that Stalkers are boring and bad from a micro prespective, demanding to have Dragoons back instead of Stalkers because stronger A-move units are easier and better in stats.
IMAO there are plenty of A-Move units in the game, more tan enough, so we don't need to replace them with even more A-Moves into our actual game. Immortals, Colossi, Hydralisks, Ultras, Hellbats, Thors... And much more units that are A-move to a certain point (they benefit alot from added micro), like most Zerg units or bio.
Well, most units in an RTS game are simply basic attackers with different attributes and different damages, countering each other differently, so in fact we have lots of A-moves into the game, because that is what they are for. We mostly need to refine the values that define how responsive they are, and try to bring in abilities that tweak their interactions and reward proper micro.
That's why I think that the Adept is very very interesting, as its stats and the ability are designed to take advantage of micro a lot, while I think that Zealot Charge is really lame.
On March 31 2015 15:55 Isualin wrote: I did not like adept at all It looks like a mix between marauder and stalker which are both boring units. Active ability might be cool strategically though
Stalker is far from a boring unit. It is one of the better unit designs out of SC2.
Nice joke. Except that anti-air unit is weak against mutalisks.
No, it's just not a hard-counter, thus it's not something we all hate here and it is actually well designed, basic unit, with strategic and interesting ability.
sentry blobs are actually more effective against mutas, but when you're giving up the speed and blink from stalkers and throwing away that much gas anyway, it's better to build an archon/storm blob instead
stalkers are very good vs muta in etc 10v10 - but the higher the counts get the better the mutas scale, but also become more vulnerable to AOE
On March 31 2015 18:41 Hider wrote: My theory is that the enemy absolutely needs a "hard counter" against the Blink Stalkers to keep them in check. It's kinda why blink stalkers aren't an issue in the midgame vs terran as they can get Maurauders there, but in the early game and vs zerg they can be quite lame.
I believe this is true for many units and/or strategies within SC2.
Only for units that has some type of extreme snowball-tendency. Bio units definitely fits into that category as well due to Medivac healing (which makes low DPS units useless against them). However, the issue with blink stalkers is that it doesn't really create any counter micro opportunites. All you can do is to just amove against them. It really would have made more sense if blink was on a meele unit and stalkers instead had the mobility and responsiveness to be pulled back if target fired.
Please, Look at the nested quote, the guy I was replying to was demanding more "simplified units" for the basic army, and talking about Marauders and Dragoons saying that Stalkers are boring and bad from a micro prespective, demanding to have Dragoons back instead of Stalkers because stronger A-move units are easier and better in stats.
The problem is that you must be careful about adding microabilites without any counterplay opportunites. It's very important that mobility goes hand in hand with some other type of mobilityform for the enemy. Blink has some good sides, but is also very flawed in different ways. There are much better ways to add more micro into the game than adding blink to ranged units.
Well, most units in an RTS game are simply basic attackers with different attributes and different damages, countering each other differently, so in fact we have lots of A-moves into the game, because that is what they are for.
Not really. It's not particilarly challenging to actually create microinteractions in the game where amove is very inferior. The issue is that everyone has been so used to Blizzard's way of thinking about micro in Sc2 that they have forgotten that the basic stuff such as focus-fire and pulling back injured units actaully is some of the most enjoyable micro type. Immortals and Colossus could easily be such a type of micro, and meele units should instead be the real units with high mobility.
For LOTV beta, I would test out stuff for meele units such as:
- Chargelots having insane (manual) mobility abilites with slightly weaker core stats/lower dps. - Ultralisks have burrow charge or just straight up much higher movement speed. I would go for between 3.5-4 movement speed off creep while slightly worse core stats (+ reduce the model size as well). - DT movemement speed increased to 3.5-4 as well with weaker core stats (consider making this an upgrade and/or giving toss and terran ealier access to detection so DT isn't about early game cheese but about mid/late game harass).
Ranged units
- 0 damage point as default rule - Increase movement speed of slowest ranged units (Immortals/Sentries) and balance the game around that. - Mobility abilities then won't be necceasry to add micro into the game as you can actually micro the ranged units normally.
I hope the 2nd Betawave, with real people is next week. Will be fun for people like TB to play Ladder in LotV against mostly the same people who are way better than him.
On March 31 2015 18:27 Startyr wrote: The stalker is a good unit. Of course it is not a hard counter to mutalisks, however you still need a higher amount of resources (particularly gas) in mutalisks than stalkers for the mutalisks to be able to actually beat stalkers.
Mutalisks are part of some of the more interesting and entertaining games. Buying time to get phoenix out is part of the strategy. Tech switching into mass mutalisks can be devastating if they catch the opponent off guard, without the resources or infrastructure to combat them.
It is the resources and infrastructure that are more important. For example zerg go mass mutas, force a lot phoenix, then switch into ultralisks making the phoenix dead supply.Likewise if you go ultralisks and force immortals making them dead supply against the subsequent muta switch all the while both sides need to keep taking bases and denying their opponents bases to have the resources to keep producing units.
With the swarm host change along with everything else. I am looking forward to the mass economy large tech switching zvp games that seem to be few and far between. A ground based hard counter to the mutalisk is not required and i do not think it would be good for the game.
While you do need more gas for mutas, zerg will generally have way more gas available than protoss due to a number of things, mainly having more bases than protoss and the fact that toss actually needs to split up its gas for units like sentries in order to defend vs non muta(mainly zerglings) while zergs that go muta generally don't have to spend gas on anything else other than mutas.
The Adept seems godly against bio and the Carrier special ability will be OP IMO.
The Ciclone is, i'm afraid, a Warhound 2.0. In the early game you use it's micro potential to compete and later in the game there seems to be little reason to build anything else. Hellbats + Ciclones with kiting deathball = Hellbats + Warhounds deathball. I hope i'm fantastically wrong but i feel the aspect of positional mech has once again passed Blizzard by.
@Hider It make sense for stalker because chargelot often pull their distance far and stalkers can blink to catchup. its better on a ranger unit (arguably) because it allows poke and run style. Plus it allows more micro, for example blinking small group onto low ground so it can support hit ground stalkers etc.
Plus it allows more micro, for example blinking small group onto low ground so it can support hit ground stalkers etc.
If you want high ground micro such a mechanic already exist in the game (see Colossus). That's not an argument for blink.
Instead, let's look at the opportunities for blink on a meele unit. Imagine a short-range 4 second CD blink on the Zealot: --> The enemy bio-units kite you --> You blink on the other side of his army to block kiting --> He turns around then and focus on your ranged units (Immortals/Colossus/Stalkers) --> You blink back to protect your front line.
Would infinitive blinks be imba? Perhaps, then maybe add a small cost to it (like -10/-15 shield/HP cost for each blink).
It would actually be possible to balance such a type of blink as there is counterplay to it. The enemy can react to the Zealots blinking and it doesn't create snowbally scenarios. On the other hand, the shorter CD on blink there is (regardless of casting range), the more snowbally the Stalker becomes.
And w/ such a change, Zealots would go from being amovish to having an extremely high skillcap. Stalkers? Add a new Twilight-upgrade that boosts it stats a bit, movement speed to 3.25, 0 damagepoint maybe also high ground walkover mechanic. That would still make it very powerful in terms of micro and mobility.
its better on a ranger unit (arguably) because it allows poke and run style.
It's more snowbally on a ranged unit because scenarios where the enemy can't do anything will be created. To keep those scenarios to a minimum, the Stalker needs to have weak core stats, which is part of the reason why this "weak core protoss" army exist.
The poke and run style can easily be added into the game if the unit is fast and responsive enough. You don't need abilities for ranged units to make this happen.
The point here is that it's very easy to make ranged units feel strong microwise, but Blizzard messed up by adding a damagepoint to almost all ranged units. This is unfortunately why so many people think Blink-abilites are needed for micro (there is only bio play to proove otherwise).
But meele units on the other hand will always feel much less powerful in terms of micro, and it's why I think giving them very high movement speed and/or mobility abilites is more important.
Yes, blink should stay in the game (it's too late to make big change here), but I would still recommend tweaks to blink and the Stalker.
On March 31 2015 19:35 Sapphire.lux wrote: The Adept seems godly against bio and the Carrier special ability will be OP IMO.
The Ciclone is, i'm afraid, a Warhound 2.0. In the early game you use it's micro potential to compete and later in the game there seems to be little reason to build anything else. Hellbats + Ciclones with kiting deathball = Hellbats + Warhounds deathball. I hope i'm fantastically wrong but i feel the aspect of positional mech has once again passed Blizzard by.
as far as i know cyclones dont shoot air?!?so you have a pretty good counter base at least lategame...
EPT
It looks like a mix between marauder and stalker which are both boring units. Active ability might be cool strategically though
