|
On April 13 2015 03:46 blade55555 wrote:
Darkness your post is kind of lol. Protoss can deal with mutalisks just fine or in HOTS they would be struggling versus zergs (hint they don't). Protoss can deal with mutas by making Phoenixes. It's their ONLY option against them, which is dumb.
I mean, if the Zerg player is transitioning to Mutas and is vulnerable, then killing them is the other option, but there is no long term solution to Mutas except Phoenixes. Terran has marines, Zerg Spore crawlers 3 shot the Mutas with a fast attack rate so mutas will pretty much always die if they try to poke in for harass near static defense.
Cannon DPS is much lower than the static AA of the other races, and they can't be repaired/transfused so Mutas have more time to deal damage and/or can kill the cannons without significant risk.
Stalkers don't have the DPS to deter them once the Muta count gets reasonably high.
Storms are easy to avoid and can't kill mutas.
Archons can't get in range to hit the mutas.
Aside from that, Protoss need a gateway "core" unit that deals high dps, particularly vs Light units, and is mobile, so it can actually deter Mutas and so they can deal with ling run-bys and defend constructing bases from relatively small numbers of units without committing significantly more than the attacker.
|
On April 15 2015 06:09 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2015 01:31 DinoMight wrote:
Yeah honestly I think Protoss's weakness comes from an inability to deal with mass Speedlings until frickin Colossus or Disruptors are out, now that forcefields can be killed...
Perhaps making the ravager ability a researched thing that takes a long time would be better?
Time it so that it can hold off an Sentry allin if scouted and researched at the right time. Sems that this fix would delay the Ravager cheese we're seeing and allow Protoss to get their 3rd at a reasonable time and get Colos to deal with Speedlings. I think it would be just better if Protoss had more capable mapcontrol units against speedlings instead of hiding behind walls and forcefields until the midgame. This has been a major point of critique with the PvZ matchup since 3gate sentry expands died. There is little interaction between the races for so long. The ravager with its ability is one way to punish a Protoss relying too heavily only on walls+forcefields, granted of course that it gets balanced. The current situation is also a huge limit for mapdesign. Protoss against Zerg without rushed out walls would allow for a much bigger variety of natural base layouts. The contra-point to ravagers punishing overreliance on walls instead of units early would be units that force the zerg into units instead of drones early. Basically more early game dynamics for both races.
Maybe zealots should two-shot zerglings?
|
On April 15 2015 10:07 Asamu2 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2015 03:46 blade55555 wrote:
Darkness your post is kind of lol. Protoss can deal with mutalisks just fine or in HOTS they would be struggling versus zergs (hint they don't). Protoss can deal with mutas by making Phoenixes. It's their ONLY option against them, which is dumb.
3base blink is just fine, unless you are stupid and go into something like double robo Colossus behind. If anything, 3base blink is a hardcounter vs mutalisks that gets a freewin if the zerg even tries.
On April 15 2015 19:11 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2015 06:09 Big J wrote:On April 15 2015 01:31 DinoMight wrote:
Yeah honestly I think Protoss's weakness comes from an inability to deal with mass Speedlings until frickin Colossus or Disruptors are out, now that forcefields can be killed...
Perhaps making the ravager ability a researched thing that takes a long time would be better?
Time it so that it can hold off an Sentry allin if scouted and researched at the right time. Sems that this fix would delay the Ravager cheese we're seeing and allow Protoss to get their 3rd at a reasonable time and get Colos to deal with Speedlings. I think it would be just better if Protoss had more capable mapcontrol units against speedlings instead of hiding behind walls and forcefields until the midgame. This has been a major point of critique with the PvZ matchup since 3gate sentry expands died. There is little interaction between the races for so long. The ravager with its ability is one way to punish a Protoss relying too heavily only on walls+forcefields, granted of course that it gets balanced. The current situation is also a huge limit for mapdesign. Protoss against Zerg without rushed out walls would allow for a much bigger variety of natural base layouts. The contra-point to ravagers punishing overreliance on walls instead of units early would be units that force the zerg into units instead of drones early. Basically more early game dynamics for both races. Maybe zealots should two-shot zerglings?
I thought about this too. I'm not sure. Zealots with +1 do this, and similar to hellbats it just makes it so that zerg cannot ever engage with zerglings. It's the opposite of combating for mapcontrol, you give the Protoss a stronger deathball and timing tool, but zealots cannot really be on the map. Though with warpins of course the can harass.
As I said, I'm not sure. And it could be a problem for balance. Not that it is balanced right now, but zealots that two-shot zerglings without +1 could make for some very fast early game cheeses, timings and proxies.
|
On April 15 2015 19:47 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2015 10:07 Asamu2 wrote:On April 13 2015 03:46 blade55555 wrote:
Darkness your post is kind of lol. Protoss can deal with mutalisks just fine or in HOTS they would be struggling versus zergs (hint they don't). Protoss can deal with mutas by making Phoenixes. It's their ONLY option against them, which is dumb. 3base blink is just fine, unless you are stupid and go into something like double robo Colossus behind. If anything, 3base blink is a hardcounter vs mutalisks that gets a freewin if the zerg even tries. Show nested quote +On April 15 2015 19:11 Grumbels wrote:On April 15 2015 06:09 Big J wrote:On April 15 2015 01:31 DinoMight wrote:
Yeah honestly I think Protoss's weakness comes from an inability to deal with mass Speedlings until frickin Colossus or Disruptors are out, now that forcefields can be killed...
Perhaps making the ravager ability a researched thing that takes a long time would be better?
Time it so that it can hold off an Sentry allin if scouted and researched at the right time. Sems that this fix would delay the Ravager cheese we're seeing and allow Protoss to get their 3rd at a reasonable time and get Colos to deal with Speedlings. I think it would be just better if Protoss had more capable mapcontrol units against speedlings instead of hiding behind walls and forcefields until the midgame. This has been a major point of critique with the PvZ matchup since 3gate sentry expands died. There is little interaction between the races for so long. The ravager with its ability is one way to punish a Protoss relying too heavily only on walls+forcefields, granted of course that it gets balanced. The current situation is also a huge limit for mapdesign. Protoss against Zerg without rushed out walls would allow for a much bigger variety of natural base layouts. The contra-point to ravagers punishing overreliance on walls instead of units early would be units that force the zerg into units instead of drones early. Basically more early game dynamics for both races. Maybe zealots should two-shot zerglings? I thought about this too. I'm not sure. Zealots with +1 do this, and similar to hellbats it just makes it so that zerg cannot ever engage with zerglings. It's the opposite of combating for mapcontrol, you give the Protoss a stronger deathball and timing tool, but zealots cannot really be on the map. Though with warpins of course the can harass. As I said, I'm not sure. And it could be a problem for balance. Not that it is balanced right now, but zealots that two-shot zerglings without +1 could make for some very fast early game cheeses, timings and proxies.
With the adept buff protoss might have a good answer to early speedlings without a wall. I guess the problem then is that adepts seem to be really weak against roaches and ravagers.
|
what if warped in units start with no shield?
|
Italy12246 Posts
On April 15 2015 20:35 StalkerFang wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2015 19:47 Big J wrote:On April 15 2015 10:07 Asamu2 wrote:On April 13 2015 03:46 blade55555 wrote:
Darkness your post is kind of lol. Protoss can deal with mutalisks just fine or in HOTS they would be struggling versus zergs (hint they don't). Protoss can deal with mutas by making Phoenixes. It's their ONLY option against them, which is dumb. 3base blink is just fine, unless you are stupid and go into something like double robo Colossus behind. If anything, 3base blink is a hardcounter vs mutalisks that gets a freewin if the zerg even tries. On April 15 2015 19:11 Grumbels wrote:On April 15 2015 06:09 Big J wrote:On April 15 2015 01:31 DinoMight wrote:
Yeah honestly I think Protoss's weakness comes from an inability to deal with mass Speedlings until frickin Colossus or Disruptors are out, now that forcefields can be killed...
Perhaps making the ravager ability a researched thing that takes a long time would be better?
Time it so that it can hold off an Sentry allin if scouted and researched at the right time. Sems that this fix would delay the Ravager cheese we're seeing and allow Protoss to get their 3rd at a reasonable time and get Colos to deal with Speedlings. I think it would be just better if Protoss had more capable mapcontrol units against speedlings instead of hiding behind walls and forcefields until the midgame. This has been a major point of critique with the PvZ matchup since 3gate sentry expands died. There is little interaction between the races for so long. The ravager with its ability is one way to punish a Protoss relying too heavily only on walls+forcefields, granted of course that it gets balanced. The current situation is also a huge limit for mapdesign. Protoss against Zerg without rushed out walls would allow for a much bigger variety of natural base layouts. The contra-point to ravagers punishing overreliance on walls instead of units early would be units that force the zerg into units instead of drones early. Basically more early game dynamics for both races. Maybe zealots should two-shot zerglings? I thought about this too. I'm not sure. Zealots with +1 do this, and similar to hellbats it just makes it so that zerg cannot ever engage with zerglings. It's the opposite of combating for mapcontrol, you give the Protoss a stronger deathball and timing tool, but zealots cannot really be on the map. Though with warpins of course the can harass. As I said, I'm not sure. And it could be a problem for balance. Not that it is balanced right now, but zealots that two-shot zerglings without +1 could make for some very fast early game cheeses, timings and proxies. With the adept buff protoss might have a good answer to early speedlings without a wall. I guess the problem then is that adepts seem to be really weak against roaches and ravagers.
That would be nice, but with their current stats (and likely post buff) adepts aren't capable of poking a zerg because slow lings and queens deal with them effectively. I suppose their design is to allow them to kill lings decently, but right now it's just not happening for a variety of reasons (mostly tied to the economy to be fair).
|
Give the adept an ability that allows them to be blinked to each other. Kind of like the Meepo poof from Dota. I think that would be fun. Obviously you'd have to balance it, maybe cap the range on it or something.
|
On April 13 2015 11:09 rpgalon wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2015 10:46 Honeybadger wrote:
But the thing is, protoss is not in a position with the current meta for that to be a huge problem. Protoss is already one of the most forgiving races for new players and still performs very well at the pro level. So this kind of comment is not very helpful. lol, forgiveness is exactly what protoss lacks, the race does not forgive mistakes from the opponent or from the protoss player, it's the race that only go big. The best way to avoid that is to play passive instead of trying to make stuff happen. Almost every action you decide to take with protoss you either win big time or get rekt. The Disruptor is like the the best example of the race as a whole. and of course I'm exaggerating a bit, sometimes disruptor trades evenly or slightly (un)favorable, but it lacks the ability to do that consistently just like the protoss race. This problem is far harder to solve than the inability of the race to grab new bases in LOTV.
I'm not sure how I feel about Disruptor. Ground only AoE, requires a lot of babysitting, is designed to be sacrificed on 1st attempt for the average encounter, and 150/300/4; compared to a lower tier Widow Mine, 75/25/2, can hit both air and ground, and does basically the same thing from a distance. You can mess with tons of variables but what I find most important is that Disruptor should have some sort of escape mechanism (or less of a committal dynamic) to make it less cheesy and more stable of a unit. You could desync the detonation with the speed/invuln buffs, making them two active buttons that need to be timed If it's going to require a lot of screen time, it should give Protoss more leeway for showing skill. You might have to nerf the damage for giving Protoss more control over the detonation, but it also let's those who plan ahead get to keep their units more frequently.
The Adept needs to fill the role of going toe to toe with MM, Speedlings, Mutas, and Stalkers. Super bad version of Blink for an ability is not going to cut it. Generalist, slow hitting, anti-light with bounce (active or passive) seems to be the most direct design that fulfills that role, even against armored Stalker because you can beat them by just being a good fighting unit.
Sentry needs to be cheaper or needs to fight better.
Zealots need to move faster, either pushing their upg to cybercore, making a new upgrade for cybercore, or just basal buffs to their speed. Where does the Zealot fit in the world of Cyclones, Helbats, and Ravagers? Where does the Zealot fit when MsC can't photon charge 5 bases at once? Zealots are good at a-moving with Warp Prism and hoping nobody pays attention to the hatch snipe.
Colossus needs to be scaled down, can't just cut 20% off of something even if it is broken and it's yucky for PvP. Pseudo removing Collo from the game and hoping the Disruptor does everything better was not the best strategy. Roach gonna get a 20% pay cut too? They are yucky for ZvZ and don't deserve all that DPS-tankiness, but they need it for the broken MMM ball and apparently Protoss can go eff themselves when the MM ball or Ravager + Roach/Ling comes knocking, all the while trying to take an earlier third.
Blizzard needs to learn to design weakness into Terran units. Can't have range, health, damage, cost, versatility, and speed like the Cyclone or Warhound. Usually just 1 or 2 is your strength, the other 2-4 are your weaknesses or you're average. The opposite with Protoss, can't be gimp at 5 of the parameters for a new unit and just have a lot of HP, like the Adept. Open up the box here. Speed and range are the most powerful parameters and thus should come with heavy detriment for being fast or high range or, contrapositively, heavy benefit for being slow and blind.
|
On April 13 2015 01:07 [Phantom] wrote:
There is a problem with this though, that goes way back to the time the Colossus way unveiled.
When Blizzard showed the colossus, and people got to play it, one of its main "features" was that it could be targeted by both Air, and ground. One of the problems with this though, is that if you were playing with Colossi, and then for some reason wanted to switch to, Carriers for example, the opponent already had the unit it needed to counter it in the game.
This problem not only still exist in LotV, but it is amplified. In TvP for example, if the game starts as Bio, and when you got your Disruptors and Colossi, and the Terran is forced to Switch into mech, and So, you switch to Stargate, well, if they didn't suicide their Vikings, they already have a counter to your Air army. This can be tweaked with numbers of course, to make it fairly balanced, however, the design problem is there.
But what happens with the Disruptor? Well, if you don't want it to be a glorified baneling, you need some way to make it survive after the explosion. The way to save it right now is either to kill everything, or use a warp prism. Now, think about that for a second. What unit counters the warp prism? The same units that counters the tier 3 of both the Robo, and the Stargate.
This is alleviated a little by the increased pick up range, but again, it is a problem that's bound to have consequences sooner or later.
This is a very good point. Right now 3 out of 4 lategame Protoss units (Colossus, Disruptor, Carrier, HT) are hard-countered by air-to-air. (Vikes and Corrs)
Given how expensive and fragile the Disruptor is, the current design only works if you have a Warp Prism ready to pick it up. That does make for some cool micro, but it pigeonholes the Disruptor quite a bit. (and makes it really risky against Vikings, you can lose 400 gas in a couple of missile salvos)
Would it be worth testing a version of the Disruptor that, for example, gets a 5-second Shield buff after exploding but cannot be picked up by Void Prisms during this time?
|
On April 16 2015 10:34 Piousflea84 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 13 2015 01:07 [Phantom] wrote:
There is a problem with this though, that goes way back to the time the Colossus way unveiled.
When Blizzard showed the colossus, and people got to play it, one of its main "features" was that it could be targeted by both Air, and ground. One of the problems with this though, is that if you were playing with Colossi, and then for some reason wanted to switch to, Carriers for example, the opponent already had the unit it needed to counter it in the game.
This problem not only still exist in LotV, but it is amplified. In TvP for example, if the game starts as Bio, and when you got your Disruptors and Colossi, and the Terran is forced to Switch into mech, and So, you switch to Stargate, well, if they didn't suicide their Vikings, they already have a counter to your Air army. This can be tweaked with numbers of course, to make it fairly balanced, however, the design problem is there.
But what happens with the Disruptor? Well, if you don't want it to be a glorified baneling, you need some way to make it survive after the explosion. The way to save it right now is either to kill everything, or use a warp prism. Now, think about that for a second. What unit counters the warp prism? The same units that counters the tier 3 of both the Robo, and the Stargate.
This is alleviated a little by the increased pick up range, but again, it is a problem that's bound to have consequences sooner or later. This is a very good point. Right now 3 out of 4 lategame Protoss units (Colossus, Disruptor, Carrier, HT) are hard-countered by air-to-air. (Vikes and Corrs) Given how expensive and fragile the Disruptor is, the current design only works if you have a Warp Prism ready to pick it up. That does make for some cool micro, but it pigeonholes the Disruptor quite a bit. (and makes it really risky against Vikings, you can lose 400 gas in a couple of missile salvos) Would it be worth testing a version of the Disruptor that, for example, gets a 5-second Shield buff after exploding but cannot be picked up by Void Prisms during this time?
You could change the disruptor in the following way:
- increase the radius of the explosion by a small amount
- change the damage so that it does more damage at the center and less damage at the edges, just like the siege tank
- add an effect to the explosion which gives a short stun, disorient, curse or slow to give the disruptor some room to try to escape
Just an idea of course.
|
On April 17 2015 05:18 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On April 16 2015 10:34 Piousflea84 wrote:On April 13 2015 01:07 [Phantom] wrote:
There is a problem with this though, that goes way back to the time the Colossus way unveiled.
When Blizzard showed the colossus, and people got to play it, one of its main "features" was that it could be targeted by both Air, and ground. One of the problems with this though, is that if you were playing with Colossi, and then for some reason wanted to switch to, Carriers for example, the opponent already had the unit it needed to counter it in the game.
This problem not only still exist in LotV, but it is amplified. In TvP for example, if the game starts as Bio, and when you got your Disruptors and Colossi, and the Terran is forced to Switch into mech, and So, you switch to Stargate, well, if they didn't suicide their Vikings, they already have a counter to your Air army. This can be tweaked with numbers of course, to make it fairly balanced, however, the design problem is there.
But what happens with the Disruptor? Well, if you don't want it to be a glorified baneling, you need some way to make it survive after the explosion. The way to save it right now is either to kill everything, or use a warp prism. Now, think about that for a second. What unit counters the warp prism? The same units that counters the tier 3 of both the Robo, and the Stargate.
This is alleviated a little by the increased pick up range, but again, it is a problem that's bound to have consequences sooner or later. This is a very good point. Right now 3 out of 4 lategame Protoss units (Colossus, Disruptor, Carrier, HT) are hard-countered by air-to-air. (Vikes and Corrs) Given how expensive and fragile the Disruptor is, the current design only works if you have a Warp Prism ready to pick it up. That does make for some cool micro, but it pigeonholes the Disruptor quite a bit. (and makes it really risky against Vikings, you can lose 400 gas in a couple of missile salvos) Would it be worth testing a version of the Disruptor that, for example, gets a 5-second Shield buff after exploding but cannot be picked up by Void Prisms during this time? You could change the disruptor in the following way: - increase the radius of the explosion by a small amount - change the damage so that it does more damage at the center and less damage at the edges, just like the siege tank - add an effect to the explosion which gives a short stun, disorient, curse or slow to give the disruptor some room to try to escape Just an idea of course.
I feel like a stun on disruptor is a little bit.... useless since it's such a hit or miss unit. If it hits then everything dies and it can run away. If the enemy splits then it hits nothing and it dies (or gets picked up by a Warp Prism). You'd never have a situation in which you're able to retreat because you stunned the units that were going to kill it.
|
On April 17 2015 05:36 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2015 05:18 Grumbels wrote:On April 16 2015 10:34 Piousflea84 wrote:On April 13 2015 01:07 [Phantom] wrote:
There is a problem with this though, that goes way back to the time the Colossus way unveiled.
When Blizzard showed the colossus, and people got to play it, one of its main "features" was that it could be targeted by both Air, and ground. One of the problems with this though, is that if you were playing with Colossi, and then for some reason wanted to switch to, Carriers for example, the opponent already had the unit it needed to counter it in the game.
This problem not only still exist in LotV, but it is amplified. In TvP for example, if the game starts as Bio, and when you got your Disruptors and Colossi, and the Terran is forced to Switch into mech, and So, you switch to Stargate, well, if they didn't suicide their Vikings, they already have a counter to your Air army. This can be tweaked with numbers of course, to make it fairly balanced, however, the design problem is there.
But what happens with the Disruptor? Well, if you don't want it to be a glorified baneling, you need some way to make it survive after the explosion. The way to save it right now is either to kill everything, or use a warp prism. Now, think about that for a second. What unit counters the warp prism? The same units that counters the tier 3 of both the Robo, and the Stargate.
This is alleviated a little by the increased pick up range, but again, it is a problem that's bound to have consequences sooner or later. This is a very good point. Right now 3 out of 4 lategame Protoss units (Colossus, Disruptor, Carrier, HT) are hard-countered by air-to-air. (Vikes and Corrs) Given how expensive and fragile the Disruptor is, the current design only works if you have a Warp Prism ready to pick it up. That does make for some cool micro, but it pigeonholes the Disruptor quite a bit. (and makes it really risky against Vikings, you can lose 400 gas in a couple of missile salvos) Would it be worth testing a version of the Disruptor that, for example, gets a 5-second Shield buff after exploding but cannot be picked up by Void Prisms during this time? You could change the disruptor in the following way: - increase the radius of the explosion by a small amount - change the damage so that it does more damage at the center and less damage at the edges, just like the siege tank - add an effect to the explosion which gives a short stun, disorient, curse or slow to give the disruptor some room to try to escape Just an idea of course. I feel like a stun on disruptor is a little bit.... useless since it's such a hit or miss unit. If it hits then everything dies and it can run away. If the enemy splits then it hits nothing and it dies (or gets picked up by a Warp Prism). You'd never have a situation in which you're able to retreat because you stunned the units that were going to kill it.
Well, the main idea is that you increase the range while adding damage gradient so that it's equally powerful as it is now. But then you add a new effect on top of this, which has a lot more range than the current incarnation mind you, to help them escape. So it affects a lot more units than it would have before, even if the opponent splits. So he would split to avoid the damage, but if he splits to avoid the disorient effect the disruptor would have free space to run away anyhow.
You don't even need to add the spell debuff effect, which is probably overdoing it and adding unintended behaviors. But the idea of a damage gradient (more damage at the center, less at the edges) I think is really nice because it gives your opponent a choice: keep some units inside the blast radius so that they can pick off the disruptor or move them out of the blast radius completely but then risk the disruptor escaping more easily.
A second solution is to make the disruptor cheaper so that it being hit-or-miss is less important. 300 gas is sooo much, honestly I don't know what Blizzard is thinking with it.
|
On April 17 2015 05:54 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On April 17 2015 05:36 DinoMight wrote:On April 17 2015 05:18 Grumbels wrote:On April 16 2015 10:34 Piousflea84 wrote:On April 13 2015 01:07 [Phantom] wrote:
There is a problem with this though, that goes way back to the time the Colossus way unveiled.
When Blizzard showed the colossus, and people got to play it, one of its main "features" was that it could be targeted by both Air, and ground. One of the problems with this though, is that if you were playing with Colossi, and then for some reason wanted to switch to, Carriers for example, the opponent already had the unit it needed to counter it in the game.
This problem not only still exist in LotV, but it is amplified. In TvP for example, if the game starts as Bio, and when you got your Disruptors and Colossi, and the Terran is forced to Switch into mech, and So, you switch to Stargate, well, if they didn't suicide their Vikings, they already have a counter to your Air army. This can be tweaked with numbers of course, to make it fairly balanced, however, the design problem is there.
But what happens with the Disruptor? Well, if you don't want it to be a glorified baneling, you need some way to make it survive after the explosion. The way to save it right now is either to kill everything, or use a warp prism. Now, think about that for a second. What unit counters the warp prism? The same units that counters the tier 3 of both the Robo, and the Stargate.
This is alleviated a little by the increased pick up range, but again, it is a problem that's bound to have consequences sooner or later. This is a very good point. Right now 3 out of 4 lategame Protoss units (Colossus, Disruptor, Carrier, HT) are hard-countered by air-to-air. (Vikes and Corrs) Given how expensive and fragile the Disruptor is, the current design only works if you have a Warp Prism ready to pick it up. That does make for some cool micro, but it pigeonholes the Disruptor quite a bit. (and makes it really risky against Vikings, you can lose 400 gas in a couple of missile salvos) Would it be worth testing a version of the Disruptor that, for example, gets a 5-second Shield buff after exploding but cannot be picked up by Void Prisms during this time? You could change the disruptor in the following way: - increase the radius of the explosion by a small amount - change the damage so that it does more damage at the center and less damage at the edges, just like the siege tank - add an effect to the explosion which gives a short stun, disorient, curse or slow to give the disruptor some room to try to escape Just an idea of course. I feel like a stun on disruptor is a little bit.... useless since it's such a hit or miss unit. If it hits then everything dies and it can run away. If the enemy splits then it hits nothing and it dies (or gets picked up by a Warp Prism). You'd never have a situation in which you're able to retreat because you stunned the units that were going to kill it. Well, the main idea is that you increase the range while adding damage gradient so that it's equally powerful as it is now. But then you add a new effect on top of this, which has a lot more range than the current incarnation mind you, to help them escape. So it affects a lot more units than it would have before, even if the opponent splits. So he would split to avoid the damage, but if he splits to avoid the disorient effect the disruptor would have free space to run away anyhow. You don't even need to add the spell debuff effect, which is probably overdoing it and adding unintended behaviors. But the idea of a damage gradient (more damage at the center, less at the edges) I think is really nice because it gives your opponent a choice: keep some units inside the blast radius so that they can pick off the disruptor or move them out of the blast radius completely but then risk the disruptor escaping more easily. A second solution is to make the disruptor cheaper so that it being hit-or-miss is less important. 300 gas is sooo much, honestly I don't know what Blizzard is thinking with it.
The idea goal would be to make the Disruptor less binary in end result. It really doesn't matter how. And seeing the ideas which I think can be built upon, what about this? In an attempt to make the simplest changes possible but to achieve a few goals of making the Disruptor self-suffice (without the need of Warp prism) and create a less binary result:
- Increase Disruptor health to 100 hit/350shield from 100hit/100shield.
- Purification Nova damage now does less the further away from the center, damage ranges from 160 to 40
- Let them move through units at all times, instead of just when using Purification Nova.
Because I doubt Blizzard will make this unit cheap after pricing it so high and trying their hardest to make it powerful. So instead, why not just make it a tank with a shield that can regenerate, which just works with their style of play.
|
I'm pretty much only watching SC2 (and playing LoL) these days but since I was a brotoss at some point I wanted to add a few ideas which I think might be cool to see in the game. Keep in mind that this is more or less from a spectator's viewpoint so I don't really claim anything in terms of viability (or, balancedness) ; )
- Nexus
Add shield battery (as in SC1/BW) and recall (with a unit limit) to the nexus.
This adds some more value to expansions while also adding additional defense and offensive options to the protoss. It should mix in well with the new fast expand economy.
Personally, I never liked the Mothership Core and with this change I think it may be safely removed (including the "nexus canon"). With the shield battery defense against rushes should be manageable and stasis wards on the oracle basically make time warp superfluous.
- Adept
Give it a semi spammable damage debuff (meaning that the Adept casts this on any enemy unit and any friendly units -- including the adept itself -- receives a damage increase against that unit).
This will make the adept a semi-support unit which can also be used to harrass (more or less an offensive sentry). The damage debuff is an ability which rewards heavy micro (spamming the ability on different adepts/ targets and focus firing) in the early game but would be largely negligible in the late game (since spamming the debuff on enemy units probably is not the smartest use of APM in large army battles; except maybe on massive units).
I suggest keeping the shade ability as an escape/ engage tool. It should be cancelable to allow for escape trickery.
- Immortal
Make the shield ability completely negate the next attack the immortal receives (with toggle auto-cast). The cooldown should be relatively low. To balance this the immortal's range should be lowered and damage against armored should be reduced.
The immortal currently is used mostly for its DPS against armored units and structures but it always seemed to me that its tanking role is undervalued (or underdeveloped). The immortal for me should be a strong pushing unit which you mainly build when you attack an enemy base. It should be in the front soaking up damage, while at the same time razing defense structures (and armored units).
[With this change the immortal would again do very well against tanks in siege mode; while tanks in in non-siege mode would do much better (because of the faster attack rate). For that reason I don't think it would turn back the clock on mech viability versus protoss.]
- Tempest
I think this unit should fill a supplementing damage role in a protoss air army. Personally I'd give it two attacks: (1) high damage versus structures (2) an attack against air and ground units with high range and a low radius splash damage.
This change makes the Tempest a flying siege tank both in terms of offense and defense. With the low radius splash damage against units the Tempest can add some very reliable AoE. I think it would be especially useful in defending bases against muta balls in ZvP.
- Oracle
Give it a decent air to ground attack for harrass and remove the death-ray. It should also have an (energy based or passive) cloaking field ability (with a lower radius than the Mothership; multiple oracle's to cover the whole army). The revelation/ detection spell is very good and should stay on the oracle.
I think this unit to some degree should fit a role similar to the Arbiter in SC1/BW. The addition of stasis was a really good move in my opinion. With the addition of the cloaking field the Mothership can be removed (it's borderline useless in its current state anyway).
- Disruptor
Remove this unit.
The gameplay of Protoss in SC2 is unique in the way that it revolves around the idea of divide and conquer (i.e. controlling the enemy army and picking your fights) and outlasting the enemy army. Protoss armies typically cannot simply outgun a terran or zerg army in a straight up battle and this is a good thing.
The disruptor doesn't really fit into this gameplay. It's essentially a scarab that builds in the robo bay; or rather, a really expensive baneling. A fire and forget unit. I don't think a unit like that suits the SC2 protoss style very well.
Hope you like some of these ideas. I might have some more at a later point in time. Any feedback is welcome! : )
|
Protoss is broken design-wise at its core since the SC2 came out. First of all it's a build order race. Win hard or lose hard.
I'd say remove protoss entirely, make a shiny metallic yellow skin for Terran and name it Protoss  then there would be 3 good designed races in the game.
|
Has anyone tested the marauder change versus guardian shield? I imagine this would make MMM a lot weaker versus protoss.
|
Do Disruptors take damage from banelings if it kills them?
|
What about making disruptors get the increased speed when activated, but deal DOT? They can then deal partial damage and run away, or fully commit.
|
On April 20 2015 13:49 lpunatic wrote:
What about making disruptors get the increased speed when activated, but deal DOT? They can then deal partial damage and run away, or fully commit.
This is actually pretty much what I was going to suggest. You could maybe even take it one step further and make it so that they ALWAYS deal damage over time, but the ability lets them go invulnerable and speed up for a bit. Would make it even more important when you activate the ability. Also, doing this means that if the AoE damage doesn't stack, it would force the protoss player to spread out the disruptor even more. Could lead to some really interesting micro.
|
On April 20 2015 15:22 StalkerFang wrote:Show nested quote +On April 20 2015 13:49 lpunatic wrote:
What about making disruptors get the increased speed when activated, but deal DOT? They can then deal partial damage and run away, or fully commit. This is actually pretty much what I was going to suggest. You could maybe even take it one step further and make it so that they ALWAYS deal damage over time, but the ability lets them go invulnerable and speed up for a bit. Would make it even more important when you activate the ability. Also, doing this means that if the AoE damage doesn't stack, it would force the protoss player to spread out the disruptor even more. Could lead to some really interesting micro.
I could imagine some fun times if they kept friendly fire :p
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
