| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
TT1
Canada10096 Posts
On April 04 2015 05:21 Grumbels wrote: http://www.mediafire.com/download/k5ynkqc80mx9amk/UnitsTester_LotV.SC2Map This was linked in the other thread, don't know if it works properly. ty | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
On April 04 2015 03:43 Grumbels wrote: It might be difficult to qualify several of those statements. I don't know if the introduction of the ravager is more significant for offensive or defensive use of the sentry. A similar question exists for the new parameters of warp-in. Time warp is used virtually exclusively offensively, mothership core energy being reserved for photon overcharge for defensive applications. So the potential is at least there for protoss to be much weaker offensively than defensively compared to before. My personal judgment is that this is, in fact, the case, but it would be nice to hear from pro-gamers. Well I think we have seen that the Ravager is pretty good along with timing attacks. Moreover, it's skillshot also makes it a bit hard to attack into as you can fire it off and move back without taking damage against an enemy army attacking into you. So the Ravager is a unit that works fine offensively and defensively. | ||
|
Cheren
United States2911 Posts
Disruptor: This seems to be the most controversial unit, due to being too fast while invincible to split, and not having any options to counter it other than splitting. I think only one of those should be addressed for now, and Blizzard should either: a) Lower the speed while invincible. Baneling vs Marine is fun to watch because how fast the Baneling is depends on whether it's on creep, leading to positional play involving spreading/destroying creep. There is no creep equivalent for protoss, so the easiest nerf is to make it easier to split by lowering speed or increasing charge-up time. b) Remove invincibility entirely. Replace by giving it 10 armor while charging up to explode. This makes any sort of spell a potential counter to disruptors while keeping the disruptor strong against basic units. This also means that mech Terran can counter disruptors with mines instead of having to pick up their siege tanks with medivacs. c) Give it the old immortal Hardened Shield while it's in charge-up mode. This works similarly to (b) while also making disruptors vulnerable to EMP. Ravager: It just attacks too fast. It should be a caster/positional/anti-FF unit first, and a fighter second. The auto-attacks are just too strong and too fast and make it an a-move unit rather than a strategic unit. Also the casted projectile doesn't land fast enough, making it too easy to dodge and too ineffective vs forcefields. Cyclone/Possible New Terran Unit: I don't think Terran needs new units. SC2 has been a constant story of TvZ being fast and exciting (with the exception of infestor/broodlord), TvP being a story where Terran has a strong midgame and Protoss a strong lategame, and PvZ being pretty much outright broken. Blizzard is focusing on taking what makes TvZ fun (the baneling/marine dynamic) and giving it to PvZ. So what should they do with Terran? They've already addressed the late-game weakness of bio by buffing battlecruisers and banshees to allow for a skyterran transition, and they've made mech more viable against protoss by removing hardened shield on immortals. There are about a billion suggestions for different barracks units that would support a mech army, and any one of them would address the biggest weakness of bio: it's too hard to transition into mech. In BW TvZ went from mostly bio all game, to bio with a lot of tanks in the late game, to bio with a total mech transition pioneered by Fantasy. LotV should focus on making the mech transition possible for terran, not in adding new units to the most complete race. edit: reading over this I know I said Terran doesn't need new units and then suggested one. I'm only for adding a new unit if it's a barracks unit that supports mech armies, since that's the only hole in what's otherwise the most well-designed race in SC2. | ||
ZeromuS
Canada13427 Posts
On April 02 2015 08:12 Loccstana wrote: I wish blizzard to do something with the supply cap. It really needs to be raised to 250 with all these 3 and 4 supply units. I always feel that maxed out armys are too small, especially on the the larger maps. You dont need to increase the supply cap. I think there is a really elegant solution to this as a function of economy that we will be covering in an upcoming article. Now how receptive blizzard is to this is another issue altogether  | ||
|
cythaze
830 Posts
nice | ||
|
Magnifico
1958 Posts
On April 04 2015 03:09 NonY wrote: not entirely true because the most popular opening build by far for all three matchups is to use energy on chronoboosts for probe production. i think a more accurate way to explain the disadvantage protoss incurs is by comparing with terran and showing that it takes us longer to get a worker lead now and when we do it's less significant. by the time terran builds an orbital, which halts scv production, the missing scv production is less impactful. whereas protoss loses an opportunity to get a significant worker lead through chronoboosts. we used to have 13+ probes when terran had 12 scv's but now it's 12 and 12. and terran lost mining time from using scv's to make buildings (first supply depot and rax) was a bigger hit to their economy when they started with only 6 because they were building those things when they had fewer scv's. so there are several ways that protoss comes out behind. im sure blizzard is at least somewhat aware that these things would happen and didn't bother to make any direct adjustments, but rather planned to make balancing changes based on what's best for design, not to make things more parallel. but for people who are finding protoss to be somewhat mysteriously (as well as obviously) shit in this patch, these things provide some understanding I'm feeling the dumbest person on earth for ignoring this consequence (until now). | ||
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
On April 04 2015 08:11 Tiaraju9 wrote: I'm feeling the dumbest person on earth for ignoring this consequence (until now). Don't, it's something I really doubt most people (including myself!) would have ever considered. Nitty gritty details like that just aren't on the minds of most of us who play the game, trying not to supply block ourselves every 20 seconds Still, it is an interesting topic, and from the arguments/examples presented it seems to be quite relevant to top tier play. | ||
|
TT1
Canada10096 Posts
- remove its invulnerability mode and give it a strong shield instead - reduce its base damage (not sure by how much tho) and give it an air attack aswell, that way protoss has a decent counter to both ground and air units w/ robo tech - lower its gas cost to 200-250'ish Right now the disruptor overlaps way too much with the colossus, they both basically have the same role (strong/aoe ground dmg dealer). Given the option protoss would never make a colossus over a disruptor. Blizzard can fix this issue by giving the disruptor a different role and making it an anti air unit aswell, its an interesting direction to take the unit in. Toss has never had an anti air robo unit, it would sorta be like the protoss version of a Thor. I also think that blizzard needs to rethink the warpgate nerf (duration + increased dmg), its way too severe. Cant say anything about adepts or stasis atm cus i haven't experimented enough with them. | ||
|
ZeromuS
Canada13427 Posts
On April 04 2015 08:28 KrazyTrumpet wrote: Don't, it's something I really doubt most people (including myself!) would have ever considered. Nitty gritty details like that just aren't on the minds of most of us who play the game, trying not to supply block ourselves every 20 seconds Still, it is an interesting topic, and from the arguments/examples presented it seems to be quite relevant to top tier play. Yeah dont feel stupid. A lot of pros dont think about it either. I had to tell a few of them that many of the LotV ladder maps don't have the correct minerals (1500/750). Also its really hard to discuss the impact of the 12 worker start without looking at the numbers closely and in detail. To start with yes the impact of protoss not having chronoboost on the early workers from 7-12 is something we need to look at critically (in detail and questioning the impacts, not necessarily saying its bad) | ||
|
FASSW
Sweden49 Posts
On April 04 2015 08:29 TT1 wrote: few adjustments i'd make in regards to the disruptor: - remove its invulnerability mode and give it a strong shield instead - reduce their base damage (not sure by how much tho) and give it an air attack instead, that way protoss has a decent counter to both ground and air units w/ robo tech - lower its gas cost to 200-250'ish Right now the disruptor overlaps way too much with the colossus, they both basically have the same role (strong/aoe ground dmg dealer). Given the option protoss would never make a colossus over a disruptor. Blizzard can fix that issue by giving the disruptor a different role and making it an anti air unit aswell, its an interesting direction to take the unit in. Toss has never had an anti air robo unit, it would sorta be like the protoss version of a Thor. I also think that blizzard needs to rethink the warpgate nerf (duration + increased dmg), its way too severe. Cant say anything about adepts or stasis atm cus i haven't experimented enough with them. I can't agree more. Disruptor needs a change | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
I think Disruptor needs a change too, but I disagree with changing its role hugely. If you find that there is too much overlap with the colossus, rework the colossus (or remove it to replace it with another unit ;D), if anything. Not sure about the disruptor being able to attack air. Maybe have 2 different modes of attack, one for ground only, similar to how it works currently, and another different one for air only. That way you create a decision when you activate your ability. For now I'm enjoying the unit way more than a colossus. And imo if you micro well enough you come out ahead. The problem is disruptor + warp prism. This combo comes out way too quickly and is way too strong. You basically need dedicated anti-air to counter it. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9448 Posts
Remove invincibility entirely. Replace by giving it 10 armor while charging up to explode. This makes any sort of spell a potential counter to disruptors while keeping the disruptor strong against basic units. This also means that mech Terran can counter disruptors with mines instead of having to pick up their siege tanks with medivacs. I think its important that the Disruptor cannot be killed easily so it is good against both a small army size or a large army size. That's what the invulnerability accomplishes and its why I am not a fan of replacing it with a shield. But you are on to something about giving it a weakness to certain units. Perhaps it could be vulnerable some type of splash/abilities. Like what if Storm/Fungal/Widow Mines could counter it? That would create a bit of a new dynamic while maintaining its role as anti-deathball in most situations. | ||
|
FASSW
Sweden49 Posts
On April 04 2015 09:52 ZenithM wrote: I think Disruptor needs a change too, but I disagree with changing its role hugely. If you find that there is too much overlap with the colossus, rework the colossus (or remove it to replace it with another unit ;D), if anything. Not sure about the disruptor being able to attack air. Maybe have 2 different modes of attack, one for ground only, similar to how it works currently, and another different one for air only. That way you create a decision when you activate your ability. For now I'm enjoying the unit way more than a colossus. And imo if you micro well enough you come out ahead. The problem is disruptor + warp prism. This combo comes out way too quickly and is way too strong. You basically need dedicated anti-air to counter it. ya i totally agree, but I'm playing z/p and i rarely lose and disruptor/raveger is the reason | ||
|
TT1
Canada10096 Posts
On April 04 2015 09:52 ZenithM wrote: I think Disruptor needs a change too, but I disagree with changing its role hugely. If you find that there is too much overlap with the colossus, rework the colossus (or remove it to replace it with another unit ;D), if anything. Not sure about the disruptor being able to attack air. Maybe have 2 different modes of attack, one for ground only, similar to how it works currently, and another different one for air only. That way you create a decision when you activate your ability. For now I'm enjoying the unit way more than a colossus. And imo if you micro well enough you come out ahead. The problem is disruptor + warp prism. This combo comes out way too quickly and is way too strong. You basically need dedicated anti-air to counter it. its not a huge change to the unit tho, were just adding an air attack and reducing its damage. also the reason why disruptor + warpprism is strong is mostly because of the disruptors invincibility mode, once they remove that it'll be much weaker. | ||
|
ZenithM
France15952 Posts
On April 04 2015 11:23 TT1 wrote: its not a huge change to the unit tho, were just adding an air attack and reducing its damage. also the reason why disruptor + warpprism is strong is mostly because of the disruptors invincibility mode, once they remove that it'll be much weaker. Yeah, the removal of the invincibility mode was what interested me most in your suggestion. I think it could create more interesting micro scenarios that those already created by the current unit. But I feel like the unit could really quickly become worthless. Like, you basically can't send it alone anymore, because it'll get one shotted by any army of reasonable size before you have the time to do anything, regardless of how much shield you give it. Think of the DPS of a pack of bio units, any isolated unit just disappears instantly, regardless of its HP (unless you give it a really ridiculous value ;D). You can't really use the disruptor in combination with other units because it has friendly fire, so I don't really see how the unit would be practical. Maybe give it an enormous shield value just for the duration of the ability? Like, something you can't ever offset early game but in mid-game you can hope to kill it with your army before it reaches its explosion point if you target fire? | ||
|
TT1
Canada10096 Posts
On April 04 2015 13:22 ZenithM wrote: Yeah, the removal of the invincibility mode was what interested me most in your suggestion. I think it could create more interesting micro scenarios that those already created by the current unit. But I feel like the unit could really quickly become worthless. Like, you basically can't send it alone anymore, because it'll get one shotted by any army of reasonable size before you have the time to do anything, regardless of how much shield you give it. Think of the DPS of a pack of bio units, any isolated unit just disappears instantly, regardless of its HP (unless you give it a really ridiculous value ;D). You can't really use the disruptor in combination with other units because it has friendly fire, so I don't really see how the unit would be practical. Maybe give it an enormous shield value just for the duration of the ability? Like, something you can't ever offset early game but in mid-game you can hope to kill it with your army before it reaches its explosion point if you target fire? yea thats probably true. theyre already pretty weak if your opponent splits properly, after that he can just kills your disruptors once theyre out of invinc. mode. i usually only use disruptors w/ warpprism support so i can pick them up afterwards, basically as if they were bw reavers. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
| ||
|
KrazyTrumpet
United States2520 Posts
On April 04 2015 09:00 ZeromuS wrote: Yeah dont feel stupid. A lot of pros dont think about it either. I had to tell a few of them that many of the LotV ladder maps don't have the correct minerals (1500/750). Also its really hard to discuss the impact of the 12 worker start without looking at the numbers closely and in detail. To start with yes the impact of protoss not having chronoboost on the early workers from 7-12 is something we need to look at critically (in detail and questioning the impacts, not necessarily saying its bad) I think between the slight eco disadvantage, Forcefields being weaker in PvZ, and Colossus being weaker in PvT, and the Warp Gate nerf, that maybe it's finally time to buff Zealot/Stalker a bit. Or make that damn Adept a core unit like it was supposed to be way back when. | ||
|
babobbyj
636 Posts
| ||
|
TelecoM
United States10889 Posts
 | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Britney Dota 2  49540Calm  3370Shuttle 1953Jaedong 1305Bisu 919Horang2 625Stork 528firebathero  446Mini 434FanTaSy 388[ Show more ] Other Games singsing2570 B2W.Neo1530 hiko1212 olofmeister1167 Lowko380 crisheroes343 Liquid`VortiX190 Hui .56 QueenE45 ZerO(Twitch)11 |
|
Monday Night Weeklies
IntoTheTV X SOOP
PiGosaur Cup
The PondCast
Kung Fu Cup
IntoTheTV X SOOP
FEL
FEL
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Replay Cast
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
