The Effect of the 60-Shield Zealot in PvZ

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 07:06 GMT

So with Warpgate weakened by warp-in time and 200% damage dealt, it would only make sense for the Protoss core to be strengthened in compensation. That way, the Protoss loses some offensive capability since proxy pylons lose their strength, but can still defend adequately. Being more familiar with PvZ, I wanted to investigate this matchup first, but I can do a similar look into the PvT matchup at a later date.

Early on in SC2, the Zealot's shields were lowered to 50 from 60 due to the increased strength from offensive and hidden warps. With those losing some strength in LotV, I decided to see how a 60 SP zealot would fare compared to a 50 SP one. In addition, I found another idea in this thread about having charge available earlier, perhaps at cybercore tech, as the weakness in Zealots is the fact that they can't close into their target.

Another reason I chose to try out the 10 SP is that the extra time each Zealot stays alive adds to its damage output (since it can swipe once more), leading to more Zerg casualties, which allow more Zealots to survive, etc. This would be a good example of a change that doesn't change the initial units much, but does allow for a bigger superiority midgame. Unlike the earlier charge, it also doesn't interfere with builds in itself, only in the strategies Protoss and Zerg choose to enact as a result of stronger Zealots.

I decided to try out both ideas to some extent, and my tests thus ended up amounting to:

Comparing Zealot vs. Zergling engagements (various sizes and upgrades)
Adding charge for one of these engagements
Comparing Zealot walls (various upgrades)
Comparing Zealot vs. Roach engagements (various sizes upgrades)
Adding charge early on, say at Protoss 1/0 and Zerg 0/0
Comparing Zealot vs. Roach/Hydra engagements (various upgrades)
Adding charge early on, say at Protoss 1/0 and Zerg 0/0

I ran a total of 48 scenarios, 24 for each Zealot, for 10 tests each. The two forces, Protoss and Zerg, a-move each other with no micro on either side. In the case of Roach/Hydra, I manually position the Roaches in front as they would be in a standard attack. In this summary, the range is the boundary between the second-best and second-worst outcome for Protoss (or Zerg, since it's symmetric), and the average is the mean result of this same range (so not accounting for the two outliers). After each set of data I give my thoughts on the results.

So here's how everything stacked up. A link to all of my test results is at the bottom of this post.

Scenario I. 1 Zealot vs. 4 Zerglings

+ Show Spoiler +

A small engagement, I added this one in to see whether early-game was particularly damaged by the addition.

Case A: 0-0 upgrades on both sides
Range for HotS Zealot: 2 Lings, 1 at full health, 1 at 4-20 HP
Range for New Zealot: 2 Lings, 1 at full health, 1 at 4-12 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 2 Lings, 1 at full health, 1 at 13 HP
Average for New Zealot: 2 Lings, 1 at full health, 1 at 5 HP
Overall: About a half-swipe of improvement, and not relevant for scouting Zerglings, as they will just retreat and regenerate anyway. No real change.

Case B: 1-0 Zealot, 0-0 Speedlings
Range for HotS Zealot: 1 Zealot at 28-36 HP
Range for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 32-40 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 1 Zealot at 32 HP
Average for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 35 HP
Overall: One Zergling attack's worth of improvement (since Zerglings do 4 damage to Zealots at 0-0 vs. 1 armor, realistically the 35 rounds to 36). Also not very impressive by itself. We shall see how this adds up in the future, however.

Case D: 3-3 on both sides, Charge and crack researched
Range for HotS Zealot: 2 Lings at full HP, all 8 (and all 10) test cases
Range for New Zealot: 2 Lings, 1 at full health, 1 at 20-35 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 2 Lings at full HP
Average for New Zealot: 2 Lings, one at 30 HP
Overall: As before, cracklings are far more cost effective than Zealots, as they should be. They are far weaker to AoE, meaning that Protoss can't rely on Zealots alone to deter them, but as before, we'll see how the extra quarter-swipe adds up over time.

You'll notice I skipped case C. C is what I labeled my 1-0 chargelots (same as B, but with the charge upgrade researched), and is what I used to simulate the protoss player chronoing out charge right after warp gate, but before 1/1 kicked in or any other upgrades. An early charge, basically. In small numbers of lings vs. lots, charge plays a negligible impact. This will become more relevant later, and I will insert case C where it starts to play a difference.

We're going to try out two more scenarios with doubled numbers. Since 4 lings beat out zealots with even upgrades, Scenario II will be 2 vs. 7, while III will be the full 2 vs. 8.

Scenario II. 2 Zealots vs. 7 Zerglings

+ Show Spoiler +

We're going to have some larger variety, so outliers will be decided on quantity of units, then HP. So in case A, 2 lings with 4 HP is better for Zerg than 1 with 20 HP, so I'm throwing out the 2-ling test case as it was the best outcome for Zerg. Biracial averages (between Zerg survivors and Protoss survivors) in this section will be done by adding total HP. Zealot survivors will be an average of the higher-HP zealot, and an average of the lower HP zealot.

Case A: 0-0 upgrades on both sides
Range for HotS Zealot: 1 Ling with 20 HP - 1 Zealot with 20 HP
Range for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 32-48 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 1 Zealot at 8 HP
Average for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 39 HP
Overall: Note that shield regen makes this difference bigger. We have a barely living zealot with a total of 58 life, mostly unarmored (only 8 of it is armored), compared to a slightly better zealot with a total of 99 life with over a third of it armored. Now we see a considerable difference in the life of our surviving zealot. With proper micro, even both zealots might survive (as happened in one of the micro-less outlier cases).

Case B: 1-0 Zealots, 0-0 Speedlings
Range for HotS Zealot: 2 Zealot at combined 112-128 HP
Range for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at combined 120-136 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 1 Zealot at 92 HP, 1 Zealot at 30 HP
Average for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 93 HP, 1 Zealot at 40 HP
Overall: Not as big a difference here. So either case A was a fluke, or simply, Zealots are better than before without the +1 upgrade. In either case, an extra 20 shields and an extra 10 HP on one zealot allow for more hits against future Zerglings. Very good.

At this point, I'm going to stop measuring HP due to the number of units, other than case 3B (2 vs. 8 with +1 Zealots)

Case D: 3-3 on both sides, Charge and crack researched
Range for HotS Zealot: 2-4 Lings
Range for New Zealot: 1-3 Lings
Average for HotS Zealot: 3 Lings survive
Average for New Zealot: 2 Lings survive
Overall: HP stops mattering as much since lings regenerate anyway, as do Protoss shields (and if this ever extends into PvT, medivac/repair). But with 10 SP we've managed to cost the Zerg a whole zergling! Not much, but remember that the 3/3 case is more relevant to bigger armies (we'll see a small sampler in Scenario IV), so every 2-7 is that much stronger, with of course the AoE behind it compounding the added damage. Also in one of the outliers for the new Zealot, one of the Zealots actually survived with 4 HP!

Now let's add in the Zergling and see how well we do. Note that in unlike Scenario I, a 2v8 lets the Zealots stand "back-to-back", i.e. there is less surface area to attack. This makes any advantage the Zealots have that much more effective since the fighting is more even, and as we saw, the 2v7 was relatively even.

Scenario III. 2 Zealots vs. 8 Zerglings

+ Show Spoiler +

Case A: 0-0 upgrades on both sides
Range for HotS Zealot: 3-4 Lings
Range for New Zealot: 2-4 Lings
Average for HotS Zealot: 4 Lings survive
Average for New Zealot: 3 Lings survive
Overall: Again, we drop by one ling.

Case B: 1-0 Zealots, 0-0 Speedlings
Range for HotS Zealot: 2 Zealot at combined 80-88 HP
Range for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at combined 80-96 HP
Average for HotS Zealot: 1 Zealot at 57 HP, 1 Zealot at 27 HP
Average for New Zealot: 1 Zealot at 74 HP, 1 Zealot at 17 HP
Overall: On average, 7 HP is gained (and of course 20 regenerating shields), but again the difference isn't as big compared to the 0-0 case. This is the last time I'll talk about HP.

Case D: 3-3 on both sides, Charge and crack researched
Range for HotS Zealot: 4-5 Lings
Range for New Zealot: 4-5 Lings
Average for HotS Zealot: 5 Lings survive
Average for New Zealot: 5 Lings survive
Overall: This wasn't even that big of a difference! Not rounding to the nearest ling, we get 4.625 before and 4.5 after, which might actually be within some margin of error. If you want to stick the outliers back in it's only a 0.1 ling difference.

So overall, while we might scratch a ling here or there, or Zealots end up with more HP (because they started with more HP), the differences here are minute, and at higher levels, the offset can still be made up with some micro or positioning (the Zealots would have lived longer against a wall). This is good news because it doesn't shake up the early game too much. The very very small difference against cracklings also seem to suggest the lategame isn't affected much, but with these small numbers it's hard to tell. Let's see what the midgame looks like in lings vs. lots. We'll look at 8 vs. 32 now.

Scenario IV. 8 Zealots vs. 32 Zerglings

In all scenarios starting with this one, average survivors in a biracial range will be counted by resources. 4 Lings = 1 Zealot, 1 Zealot = 1 Roach, 3 Zealots = 2 Hydras.

+ Show Spoiler +

Case A: 0-0 upgrades on both sides
Range for HotS Zealot: 4-9 Lings
Range for New Zealot: 6 Lings-5 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 7 Lings survive
Average for New Zealot: 1 Zealot survive
Overall: Or to be specific, 1.03125 Zealots. Now we see the full effect of the 10 shields. The zealots, on average, overcome the zerglings, but not by much. The fight is still anyone's, and can be decided by more damage dealing units like hydras, stalkers, and the like. But it's not a fight won entirely by zerg anymore. Which bodes good news for midgame Protoss... who engages with 8 Zealots, apparently.

Case B: 1-0 Zealots, 0-0 Speedlings
Range for HotS Zealot: 5-6 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 6-8 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 5 (in all but one of the 8 cases) survive
Average for New Zealot: 7 Zealots survive
Overall: 2 whole Zealots live! That's 25% more of our army! In fact on average only one of our guys dies, and in 3 of 8 cases the whole army lives. So we now see a sizable strength bonus in the midgame.

So let's introduce Case C, since now it's applicable! This is the same setup as Case B, except now the Zealots have charge. This is to try out the suggestion for earlier charge. Let's see what happens...

Case C: 1-0 Chargelots, 0-0 Speedlings
Range for HotS Zealot: 6-7 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 5-8 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 7 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 6 Zealots survive
Overall: What ho? It seems that Charge has actually made the New Zealot weaker than its 50 SP counterpart? The real difference was 1/8 of a point (6.5 vs. 6.375), but also has to do with Charge itself. In case B, the zealots formed a convex, a parabola facing the lings. This meant it took the zerglings more time to surround the zealots as they had to go all the way around the parabola to surround. Forming a concave (manually) would be even more effective. With charge, the Zealots all race at the wave of lings, creating more surface area to attack, and losing more of their numbers. Without charge, the difference is more pronounced, however.

All we basically proved with 4C is that Charge is actually harmful up until Zerg gets ranged units. Which actually accounts for some of the losses against the cracklings in 4D.

Case D: 3-3 on both sides, Charge and crack researched
Range for HotS Zealot: 13-17 Lings
Range for New Zealot: 12-15 Lings
Average for HotS Zealot: 15 Lings survive
Average for New Zealot: 13 Lings survive
Overall: 2 Lings die. So in the lategame, not a big difference either. Great! So the big differences lie in the territory before Zerg gets the attack upgrade, as Zealots seem to beat out Speedlings a lot better now.

Zealots seem to be doing a lot better before Zerglings get their crack upgrade, where their 10 HP is instantly eroded and counts for nil. Which is nice.

Scenario V: One Zealot at the Wall vs. Infinite Zerglings

+ Show Spoiler +

This was actually really boring. The Zealot attacks lings one at a time in this case so the 10 HP just allowed two extra hits on the Zealot before he fell. The differences here are negligible, and the full results can be seen in the spreadsheet at the bottom of the page.

So let's move on to the big complaint with Zealot (and core) weakness. How do Zealots with earlier charge and more HP fight against ranged units? We have two scenarios here: Zealots going toe to toe against Roaches (without micro), where they do surprisingly well. In this case I do 16 vs 16, but the more roaches (since they are ranged and can attack in rows), the bigger the advantage. It isn't much, surprisingly, and I can actually post a given case (probably G) for different number of Zealots and roaches. The second case is 24 Zealots vs. 12 Roaches and 12 Hydras. Supply even, but Protoss is more cost efficient. This is a bit weird to simulate without stalker support, but even looking at zealots alone, we find some interesting results.

We also need some new cases because our original ones leave some gaps in the midgame, and having a 0/0 case isn't really too practical for roach/hydra.
Case E: (1/0) Zealot, (0/0) ranged Zerg. Our case B from before, and mainly focused on the roach scenario.
Case F: (1/0) Chargelot, (0/0) ranged Zerg. This is where we'll see how much early charge impacts the game. This could also be repeated with new test cases E' and F', where roaches have speed.
Case G: (2/0/2) Chargelot (0 shield), (2/2) ranged Zerg, Hydra range, Roach speed. Seeing how your average midgame on two forges does with the new Zealot.
Case H: (3/3/3) Chargelot, (3/3) ranged Zerg, Hydra range+speed, Roach speed. This one (and somewhat case G) is made redundant with the addition of the ravager/adept and a shifting meta, but we're just focusing on the improvement of the Protoss core. And thus we'll test it against it against the Zerg core that we know, and worry about the Ravager later (or let Blizzard worry about it). Besides, we're not even accounting for stalkers. This is purely a numbers test.

Scenario VI: 16 Zealots vs. 16 Roaches

We can pretend this is some early midgame poke-turned-allin (I was originally going to do 8v8, but the Zealots won that too handily without Roach range coming into much effect). Roaches win this one with kiting, but we can pretend we backed them into a wall or separated with forcefields the hydras.

+ Show Spoiler +

Case E
Range for HotS Zealot: 1-6 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 7-10 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 5 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 8 Zealots survive
Overall: Three more zealots survive, and now on average half the army makes it! A decent advantage for midgame toss compared to previously. The Roaches won in one of the HotS outliers.

Case F
Range for HotS Zealot: 8-10 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 9-12 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 9 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 11 Zealots survive
Overall: We need to look at this in tandem with Case E. So with charge alone, about 4 more zealots survive to reach the roaches (5 vs 9). With the SP alone, about 3 more zealots reach the roaches (5 vs 8). Both give the Protoss Zealots significant advantage, although the shield advantage is slightly more modest.

Case G
Range for HotS Zealot: 2 Roaches-6 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 2-7 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 3 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 5 Zealots survive
Overall: We've eliminated any possibility of Roaches surviving this particular engagement. Again, a gain of 2 Zealots, in concord with our prior addition of 2-3 in Cases E and F. Let's see if this holds a fourth time.

Case H
Range for HotS Zealot: 5-8 Zealots
Range for New Zealot: 4-9 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 5 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 7 Zealots survive
Overall: Bigger range (possibly because of fuckups with Charge), but again, 2 Zealots end up surviving this encounter with the bonus shield. A total of 160 SP for 1 new Zealots' worth of health saves two lives!

In all four cases, the shield boost gets two additional Zealots to survive the encounter. The charge bonus gives slightly more of an edge, with 3-4 Zealots saved instead instead of 2-3.

Scenario VII: 24 Zealots vs. 12 Roach 12 Hydra

+ Show Spoiler +

Case E
Range for HotS Zealot: 0-5 Roach, 3-5 Hydra
Range for New Zealot: 1 Zealot - 2 Roach 7 Hydra
Average for HotS Zealot: 3 Roaches, 4 Hydralisks survive
Average for New Zealot: 2 Roaches, 4 Hydralisks survive
Overall: It kills a Roach. Bigger spread, though, with more potential to have a Zealot survive. Also note the ratio of surviving Roaches to Hydralisks in all the situations. We'll get to that in a moment.

Case F
Range for HotS Zealot: 4 Zealot - 1 Roach 1 Hydra
Range for New Zealot: 6-10 Zealots
Average for HotS Zealot: 2 Zealots survive
Average for New Zealot: 8 Zealots survive
Overall: So we can see here that a big change comes from having both charge and from having the shields. The 10 SP now nets a bonus of 6 Zealots instead of 1. I guess charge gets you to the target, and then once you're there, you're meatier. Points for an earlier charge upgrade, I guess.

Case G
Range for HotS Zealot: 2-5 Roach, 2-6 Hydra
Range for New Zealot: 4 Zealot - 3 Roach 7 Hydra
Average for HotS Zealot: 4 Roaches, 4 Hydralisks survive
Average for New Zealot: 1 Roach, 3 Hydralisks survive
Overall: Big improvement here. 3 Roaches and 1 Hydralisk down. Again, the pattern of having more hydralisks than roaches, and in some cases on the spreadsheet only hydras remain.

Case H
Range for HotS Zealot: 1-6 Roach, 3-8 Hydra
Range for New Zealot: 4 Zealot - 2 Roach 6 Hydra
Average for HotS Zealot: 3 Roaches, 6 Hydralisks survive
Average for New Zealot: 3 Hydralisks survive
Overall: The biggest marked improvement of the four cases, with 3 of each Zerg unit disappearing on average.

The biggest thing to note is that chargelots start doing surprisingly well against the roaches. In other words, they're very good at breaking down the roach wall on their own, and they almost get to the creamy nougat of hydralisks, and in some cases mow that down easily. What the proportion of hydras to roaches in the surviving groups suggests is that a small tip of balance in either direction - in this case the 10 shield points with the pre-existing charge ability - enables the Protoss to do significantly better against the Zerg core. Furthermore, the addition of Ravagers also accelerates the demise of the frontline roaches, as their ability does friendly fire.

What Have We Learned?

Adding 10 SP to Zealots doesn't change much earlygame, but allows Zealots to hold their own against midgame speedlings (especially when they're an upgrade ahead), while returning them to a relatively normal level lategame. Against Roaches and especially Roach/Hydra, the SP bonus doesn't do much until combined with Charge, when it becomes a very, very powerful addition that can swing the balance of relatively even engagements (Scenario VI is cost-even, Scenario VII is supply-even) in the favor of the Protoss. Early Charge alone also holds promise against Roach/Hydra battles, although the SP bonus is more modest in this regard and also serves as a more universal buff allowing the Zealots to deal with more threats.

This collection of data is not meant to represent actual games. They are meant to simulate some common metrics with relatively little external variables. A normal engagement against Roach/Hydra would also, for example, feature Stalkers and Sentries, but for the purpose of this potential change we would like to see how Zealots alone fare with extra shielding or an earlier charge.

This also serves to show how even tiny changes can restore the power of the Protoss core while WG is nerfed and Force Fields can now be countered by Zerg.

And most importantly, I wanted to talk about how awesome this change is while also having the numbers to back it up. Enjoy!

Spreadsheet with Test Results: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1WTb2GoDzvGZnG8orZAT7GZrLWC-PFWy2vckgFakUzOs/edit?usp=sharing

Roadog

Canada1670 Posts

April 22 2015 08:19 GMT

I've always thought about setting Zealot shields back to 60 just for Brood War nostalgia, but it's nice that someone more dedicated than myself has actually made a case for it working in LotV. Good job!

Dav1oN

Ukraine3164 Posts

April 22 2015 08:43 GMT

It seems like that community cares more about sc2 than Blizzard, sadface

But still, great job done!

moofang

508 Posts

April 22 2015 08:46 GMT

Interesting results!

Would be interesting to see how this affects PvT battles involving widow mines, and whether it might make chargelot-based openers more workable in that matchup again.

-Kyo-

Japan1926 Posts

April 22 2015 12:45 GMT

Well, for anyone who has been playing protoss in lotv beta you know they actually nerfed the zealot rather than buffed it. Since the time value in the game has changed so have the stats such as speed since it is apparently based on time.

Basically in comparison to the zealot in hots the lotv zealot is like ~10-20% SLOWER. I asked via twitter if these values which affect stalkers and other important base units is intended but did not get a reply. There is also still the issue with acceleration and deceleration being different as well due to the time change, overall protoss mid game army control went from being all about micro and responsiveness to an even increased need for responsiveness but with worse feedback. It makes defending things like bio drops a huge huge pain in the ass, your units don't seem to listen to you half the time with all the commands @_@

Tl;Dr they should fix this issue and also see if the zealot needs any other sort of buff like this. I am hesitant on the SP change but would certainly back a different upgrade change. I absolutely hate zealots from sc2 compared to BW zealots. I'd like to control them late game instead of have it done for me... A speed buff like in BW would be a god send, speed lots in BW were basically speed lings~~

Big J

Austria16289 Posts

April 22 2015 13:23 GMT

On April 22 2015 21:45 -Kyo- wrote:
Well, for anyone who has been playing protoss in lotv beta you know they actually nerfed the zealot rather than buffed it. Since the time value in the game has changed so have the stats such as speed since it is apparently based on time.

Basically in comparison to the zealot in hots the lotv zealot is like ~10-20% SLOWER. I asked via twitter if these values which affect stalkers and other important base units is intended but did not get a reply. There is also still the issue with acceleration and deceleration being different as well due to the time change, overall protoss mid game army control went from being all about micro and responsiveness to an even increased need for responsiveness but with worse feedback. It makes defending things like bio drops a huge huge pain in the ass, your units don't seem to listen to you half the time with all the commands @_@

Tl;Dr they should fix this issue and also see if the zealot needs any other sort of buff like this. I am hesitant on the SP change but would certainly back a different upgrade change. I absolutely hate zealots from sc2 compared to BW zealots. I'd like to control them late game instead of have it done for me... A speed buff like in BW would be a god send, speed lots in BW were basically speed lings~~

Wait, did they actually nerf them, or is the zealot speed now ~1.63. (don't know the exact conversion value, it should be around 0.73 according to liquipedia).
Because if it is 1.63 or higher, it has not changed and from watching streams I wouldn't have noticed.

w3c.TruE

Czech Republic1055 Posts

April 22 2015 13:54 GMT

Maybe I'm dumb, but I'm missing description for Cases E, F, G and H.

BaronVonOwn

299 Posts

April 22 2015 14:00 GMT

Even worse, lurkers are a really hard counter to zealots. They also cannot deal with cyclones. So it looks like Blizzard just doesn't want protoss to have any cost-efficient units unless they're part of a deathball.

The_Templar

your Country52797 Posts

April 22 2015 14:08 GMT

This is the sort of subtle buff I want to see more of.

DarkPlasmaBall

United States44053 Posts

April 22 2015 14:34 GMT

#10

Adding 10 SP to Zealots doesn't change much earlygame, but allows Zealots to hold their own against midgame speedlings (especially when they're an upgrade ahead), while returning them to a relatively normal level lategame.

Sounds subtle enough and sexy to me

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 15:03 GMT

#11

Thanks for the enthusiasm!

On April 22 2015 17:46 moofang wrote:
Interesting results!

Would be interesting to see how this affects PvT battles involving widow mines, and whether it might make chargelot-based openers more workable in that matchup again.

I can assemble some data around that, but my prediction is that with the new Marauder, both the shields and the upgrade advantage play a more significant role. In PvZ, 10 shields allows an extra shot from a Roach or a Hydralisk before dying. In PvT, you get two shots from either a Marine or a Marauder, which, if unstimmed, takes 3 seconds, 50% longer than the roach attack. So Zealots live comparatively longer than before.

MMM's survivability comes a lot from its micro, so either I'm going to assume gosu forcefields for all the tests, or I'll actually have to kite around the MMM ball and see what it does.

Mines could be really interesting! I could see a lot of experimenting with one or more mine impacts before an engagement. By themselves, I predict the mines have the same effect. 160 HP (armor doesn't matter since it's spell damage) dies to 1 direct hit and exactly 2 hits in the splash radius. To survive a second widow mine via splash, the Protoss would need to pull out for at least 7(it should be if they keep it the same thru the conversion) seconds to let the Zealots get at least one more tick mark of shield.

On April 22 2015 21:45 -Kyo- wrote:
Well, for anyone who has been playing protoss in lotv beta you know they actually nerfed the zealot rather than buffed it. Since the time value in the game has changed so have the stats such as speed since it is apparently based on time.

Basically in comparison to the zealot in hots the lotv zealot is like ~10-20% SLOWER. I asked via twitter if these values which affect stalkers and other important base units is intended but did not get a reply. There is also still the issue with acceleration and deceleration being different as well due to the time change, overall protoss mid game army control went from being all about micro and responsiveness to an even increased need for responsiveness but with worse feedback. It makes defending things like bio drops a huge huge pain in the ass, your units don't seem to listen to you half the time with all the commands @_@

Tl;Dr they should fix this issue and also see if the zealot needs any other sort of buff like this. I am hesitant on the SP change but would certainly back a different upgrade change. I absolutely hate zealots from sc2 compared to BW zealots. I'd like to control them late game instead of have it done for me... A speed buff like in BW would be a god send, speed lots in BW were basically speed lings~~

This is interesting. So all the roach/hydra proportions are slightly skewed towards the Zerg (because more time to shoot), although in all the cases with charge enabled it shouldn't make a significant difference as the Zealot quickly closes that distance.

On April 22 2015 22:54 w3c.TruE wrote:
Maybe I'm dumb, but I'm missing description for Cases E, F, G and H.

They're posted between Scenarios V and VI in the unspoilered section. I was too lazy to write them out after that, so I just described them up there. E = B, F = C, G is a midgame scenario, H is all upgrades researched.

On April 22 2015 23:08 The_Templar wrote:
This is the sort of subtle buff I want to see more of.

This was actually inspired by the warp prism buff! That speed change actually revolutionized Protoss WP harassment. As did the Oracle buff lol

BamBam

745 Posts

April 22 2015 17:29 GMT

#12

Honestly if lots are to get health buffs, I feel zlings need attack speed to compensate. Right now it is already suicidal to attack zlots with overwhelming ling forces even when the lings have an upgrade advantage. Buffing zlots even more just makes the case that lings should only be used after the hive upgrade.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 17:41 GMT

#13

On April 23 2015 02:29 Energizer wrote:
Honestly if lots are to get health buffs, I feel zlings need attack speed to compensate. Right now it is already suicidal to attack zlots with overwhelming ling forces even when the lings have an upgrade advantage. Buffing zlots even more just makes the case that lings should only be used after the hive upgrade.

Well in my 8 vs. 32 case, the fight is still anyone's. I found that the lings won when they engaged from one side, i.e. a rough version of focus firing, and you could argue that an earlier charge upgrade that Toss would get against Roaches would actually call you to switch back to lings or use both roaches and lings, since improperly controlled chargelots actually perform worse against them (they allow themselves to get surrounded much easier) than slow zealots.

Dumbledore

Sweden725 Posts

April 22 2015 17:50 GMT

#14

On April 22 2015 17:43 cSc.Dav1oN wrote:
It seems like that community cares more about sc2 than Blizzard, sadface

But still, great job done!

are you serious? I can promise you blizzards internal testing / design process is way more in depth thwn this post. You actually think they dont try anything out just cause they dont make threads on tl about it?

robopork

United States511 Posts

April 22 2015 18:07 GMT

#15

I've been thinking for a while that I'd like to see a slight movement speed buff for zealots to give them a little more power and micro-ability pre-charge.

This is a cool alternative, though. I wonder how much difference it makes if both sides are actively microing?

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 18:15 GMT

#16

On April 23 2015 03:07 robopork wrote:
I've been thinking for a while that I'd like to see a slight movement speed buff for zealots to give them a little more power and micro-ability pre-charge.

This is a cool alternative, though. I wonder how much difference it makes if both sides are actively microing?

I was going to run a third set of tests for a pure-BW Zealot, i.e. one with speed instead of charge. Differences between it and slowlot aren't as big as you'd imagine, however. Roaches can still kite them with the speed upgrade, as can Hydras, and both can always kite Zealots on creep. This is where Forcefields come in, since even if they're destroyed by Ravagers, there'll still be a good amount of time when the Zealots have free rein on the Roaches.

Basically what you're looking at is 2.25 speed Zealot vs. (in the effective range of the Roach/Hydra) a 6.05 speed zealot. Roughly a 4-point increase. A 2.75 speed Zealot would show 1/8 of the changes we've seen via charge. So speed + SP would net, instead of a combined 6-7 bonus zealots in Scenario VI, closer to the 3 side of 2-3 that we saw with the shield upgrade. Not very helpful vs. Roach Hydra, though.

purakushi

United States3300 Posts

April 22 2015 18:19 GMT

#17

Give 60 shields, remove charge, give leg enhancements.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 18:23 GMT

#18

On that note, I'm going to do a similar set of test runs in PvT, but specifically two cases. One against a small stimmed marine marauder ball, and one against the same group but with a few medivacs attached. I'll be using the standard zealot and the 60 SP zealot, and also I'll switch around between the old and new marauder.

When I'm comparing different upgrades, I can also try out an early speed upgrade, and a lategame speed upgrade with charge removed. Again, no micro (unless you or someone wants to help out!), but since I don't believe Terran has an anti-FF measure in place yet, we can assume sentries. The data comparison is the more important play here, and a similar proportion should develop in the event of micro.

On April 23 2015 02:50 Dumbledore wrote:

Show nested quote +

It's nice that they're finally reaching out to the community. I agree with you. This is only one of many solutions, and it's ultimately up to Blizzard what to do. But I do think Protoss core is desperately in need of strengthening, and this is one option.

Plexa

Aotearoa39261 Posts

April 22 2015 18:32 GMT

#19

Hey this is a good thread. +10 shields to zealots probably won't fix the issues protoss is having, but it can easily be incorporated as part of a general buff protoss patch.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 18:40 GMT

#20

On April 23 2015 03:32 Plexa wrote:
Hey this is a good thread. +10 shields to zealots probably won't fix the issues protoss is having, but it can easily be incorporated as part of a general buff protoss patch.

:D

Well if there's any other proposed changes with a lot of enthusiasm I'd be happy to try them out!

Geiko

France1939 Posts

April 22 2015 18:41 GMT

#21

I'm assuming you didn't micro the zealots for more consistent results. However, for instance, everyone knows that 1zealot beats 4 slowlings and 1 zealot + 1 probe beats 4 speedlings.

I would guess that with 60 shields, maybe one zealot could beat 5 lings, and even maybe 4 speedlings. This is the sort of data that would be more relevant for balance I think.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 18:49 GMT

#22

On April 23 2015 03:41 Geiko wrote:
I'm assuming you didn't micro the zealots for more consistent results. However, for instance, everyone knows that 1zealot beats 4 slowlings and 1 zealot + 1 probe beats 4 speedlings.

I would guess that with 60 shields, maybe one zealot could beat 5 lings, and even maybe 4 speedlings. This is the sort of data that would be more relevant for balance I think.

You could micro lings as well though, pulling them back after they receive two swipes of damage (at even upgrades). I recall Destiny doing it a lot early on.

You're right about lack of micro. In every case other than Zealot at wall and vs. Roach Hydra, I just a-moved the two into each other.

If you like, you can try it out! I can't stutter step for my life (which is also why I'm considering getting some help for my PvT tests), but anyone can easily check my results or improve on them. I'd be more than happy to see if I was getting some odd results because I was doing something wrong, or maybe if I was doing something unintentionally unrealistically (say, my Roach/Hydra positioning was bad)

I used this map: http://www.sc2mapster.com/maps/unit-tester/ instead of one of the arcade testers so I could more easily play around with the values. To adjust for the HotS Hydralisk speed upgrade I just hardcoded the value into the unit and ran it that way.

Pontius Pirate

United States1557 Posts

April 22 2015 19:50 GMT

#23

On April 23 2015 03:15 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

Show nested quote +

If it's a pure BW Zealot, you should set it's speed to 3.375 instead of 2.75, because BW speedlots moved at stim speed. So Roaches could only kite them on creep. That actually strikes me as a pretty nice unit interaction

Has anyone had some ideas as to what an alternate effect for Charge as an ability could be? It's pretty hard to deny that it's a boring anti-micro autocast ability right now, but it's so necessary to the game that it's been difficult to think about changing it. I thought of a 4-second boost to 3.5 (or 3.875) speed and a boost to armor and shield armor by 2, and an immunity to slow effects, so that it could be activated to either close the distance with bio balls or activated to make sure your Zealots can escape an engagment with their lives. But that's just a quick draft of an ability redesign, and it would be necessary to include it with either stim speed speedlots, or a weird new speed tier of speedlots that falls in between Roach speed and stim speed, like maybe 3.125 or 3.25.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 22 2015 21:14 GMT

#24

Stim speed would actually be beautiful in PvT, and the immunity to slows being an active would also be quite interesting.

I'll use the 3.375 speed in my PvT tests alongside the existing charge ability (not simultaneously).

Fuchsteufelswild

Australia2028 Posts

April 23 2015 00:07 GMT

#25

Ditto to the idea of going back to stim speed. Just FYI though, in BW, stim marines and speed zealots they had 3.15 and lurkers either had the same speed or may have actually had 3.375 (so actually faster), whereas I believe in LotV they only have 2.95 speed.

JCoto

Spain574 Posts

April 23 2015 00:26 GMT

#26

On April 23 2015 06:14 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
Stim speed would actually be beautiful in PvT, and the immunity to slows being an active would also be quite interesting.

I'll use the 3.375 speed in my PvT tests alongside the existing charge ability (not simultaneously).

Just download it on the SC2 Editor (Open > Battle.net > (Search: Unit Tester) HotS Unit Tester Modified 1.5. It's up to date in everything.

I also think that 3.375 speed would be good for SC2, with Charge providing some speed manual buff to counter slows or so, to act "stim-like".

Maybe we need to rebalance Concussive shells so it doesn't affect light/light bio units. It would only really affect Zealots, Lings and Hydras (mirror matchup not considered), solving the "softcounter" issue from the marauder and allowing more styles to be played.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 23 2015 00:36 GMT

#27

On April 23 2015 09:26 JCoto wrote:

Show nested quote +

Oh so that's how you do it...

I'll probably get this done some time around the weekend.

devius26

Sweden15 Posts

April 23 2015 00:59 GMT

#28

On April 23 2015 03:40 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

Show nested quote +

:D

Well if there's any other proposed changes with a lot of enthusiasm I'd be happy to try them out!

Would you consider testing Stalkers with the old upgrade scaling? They currently only get +1 damage per weapon upgrade but in WoL beta they used to get +1 vs armor per upgrade as well. Stalkers are already very solid early and midgame units but perhaps a small buff like that could improve their late game potential.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 23 2015 01:10 GMT

#29

On April 23 2015 09:59 devius26 wrote:

Show nested quote +

This is interesting. It might actually help them hold their own against roaches (which also get +2 attack) and hydras (which get +1, and stalkers get +1 against them). So stalkers and roaches get +3 damage against each other, and the rest is all cancelled out.

Wildmoon

Thailand4189 Posts

April 23 2015 01:20 GMT

#30

If Zealot has leg upgrade like BW, wouldn't that make bio in TvP severely weaker?

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 23 2015 01:23 GMT

#31

On April 23 2015 10:20 Wildmoon wrote:
If Zealot has leg upgrade like BW, wouldn't that make bio in TvP severely weaker?

Right. But now mech is much stronger. And hellbats are still a thing.

varsovie

Canada326 Posts

April 23 2015 02:39 GMT

#32

I'd say yes, but just so it can have more HP than a siege TANK and resist a bit more to WM.

Pontius Pirate

United States1557 Posts

April 23 2015 04:47 GMT

#33

On April 23 2015 09:07 Fuchsteufelswild wrote:
Ditto to the idea of going back to stim speed. Just FYI though, in BW, stim marines and speed zealots they had 3.15 and lurkers either had the same speed or may have actually had 3.375 (so actually faster), whereas I believe in LotV they only have 2.95 speed.

Yeah, I believe the conversion is this weirdly imperfect one, where based on the speed of a worker, every unit's cooldown is something like 7.46% shorter than in BW, and their speed, once again excepting workers, is 6.9% faster. But for the sake of these tests, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to undo every speed change that Blizzard made, so it should probably just be tested at a stim speed of 3.375, or 4.6575 if you're testing it in LotV's normalized game speed values.

Rollora

2450 Posts

April 23 2015 06:15 GMT

#34

On April 22 2015 16:06 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
So with Warpgate weakened by warp-in time and 200% damage dealt, it would only make sense for the Protoss core to be strengthened in compensation.

Is it really that much more weaker?
I mean: you should just not warp in in the opponents face.

I think Blizzard should reconsider warpgate entirely. Having to carefully watch for your army while it moves to the battlefield is some of the basic things you should know and do in a strategy game.

JCoto

Spain574 Posts

April 23 2015 19:04 GMT

#35

On April 23 2015 10:10 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:

Show nested quote +

They weren't 10+4 with more damage scaling (+1/+1). Stalkers had 8+6vs armored on beta (+1/+1 upgrading), so they were far weaker against lings, hydras, marines and mutas. Strong points to consider since the Gateway Protoss army already struggles against this kind of units, so not sure if that type of damage might be a buff or just a big nerf.

That type of damage benefits only vs roaches and marauders, but makes them substantially weaker against everything else, considering that stalkers trash out Tanks the same by focus fire/Blink. So IMAO that change would be pretty much a nerf.

I think that the real problem on LotV is that with the new econ models, the Zerg race would get indirectly buffed since they have a far easier time setting their poduction up, so probably, Roaches need a health nerf more than Stalkers a buff (They can be used very effectively even with their relatively low damage efficiency thanks to Blink micro, as they can scape death). Marauders are also weaker now with their double attack, but the same effect can be achieved with a minor damage nerf.

I think it is quite good to have relatively weak early/midgame units and stronger units as the game advances. Marauders have been very strong, probably too much since the start of SC2. So maybe trying a different approach could help that.

BluzMan

Russian Federation4235 Posts

April 23 2015 21:25 GMT

#36

On April 23 2015 11:39 varsovie wrote:
I'd say yes, but just so it can have more HP than a siege TANK and resist a bit more to WM.

In more than a decade of it's existence siege tank has never been a tank really so it's ok. Call it mobile artillery if you want.

-Switch-

Canada506 Posts

April 24 2015 03:16 GMT

#37

On April 23 2015 03:19 purakushi wrote:
Give 60 shields, remove charge, give leg enhancements.

Do this please. Charge sucks

boxerfred

Germany8360 Posts

April 24 2015 07:55 GMT

#38

I have the fear that a buff to the Zealot will encourage +1 timings from Protoss.

KaZeFenrir

United States37 Posts

April 24 2015 22:26 GMT

#39

10 HP isn't a subtle buff. Before talking about adding 10 more shields you might want to talk more about lowering the warp in damage. From a tvp standpoint that means a base marine takes 2 extra shots to kill a zealot, and a marauder an additional shot. It's not a purely "defensive" buff as HP affects a units viability in "offense", ie it lives longer to take an extra shot.

Ill agree and say with the increased warp in time and extra damage they have been nerfed, but you can easily adjust those without affecting other match ups without flat out buffing the units HP.

Just because a change means you have to play different doesn't mean it's purely a nerf either. Maybe protoss players need to learn better strategies for warp ins, where to do them, and hot to protect them. It's too early to really tell, and the fact remains zealots are still insanely powerful in PvZ and PvT. It will take more time and balance to really figure out what needs fixing where, but at best this is a bandaid fix.

xxjcdentonxx

Canada163 Posts

April 24 2015 23:00 GMT

#40

Nice try, OP. The changes to warp-gate tech are that is takes 8 seconds and units take more damage when inbound. Neither change affects defence in a way that can't be adjusted for with decision making.

ZombieFrog

United States87 Posts

April 25 2015 03:40 GMT

#41

Actually this post draws the exact opposite conclusion from me. This would make zealots far too good against zerg. I've already won plenty of PvZ's by warping in mass zealots early game outside the zerg base and running in, and I've lost plenty of ZvP's the same way. Why does this work? Because zealots are amazing against zerglings and can fighht on a decent level with roaches or queens. Buffing them would let them fight far better against these units, as some of your numbers suggest. Either way those are all the early game zerg units, and being able fight them all without any tech or gas so well seems absurd. Early game zealot aggression would shred zerg far too often for this to be reasonable. The warp in nerf would hardly matter as people usually warp in several rounds of zealots off screen before you move for the attack.

DeadByDawn

United Kingdom476 Posts

April 25 2015 04:15 GMT

#42

On April 25 2015 08:00 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Nice try, OP. The changes to warp-gate tech are that is takes 8 seconds and units take more damage when inbound. Neither change affects defence in a way that can't be adjusted for with decision making.

I agree with this. When defending you have a huge choice of where to warp in, sure it might take you longer to get to the enemy than warping in their face but that is how it should be.

It is better for Toss than for Terran. Offensively if I just fly into stalkers and zealots and try to drop, then all my units die. If the enemy is in my production line all my units die as they rally out of the buildings. At least as Toss you can pop out your units in safe locations as long as you have a pylon.

JimmyJRaynor

Canada16647 Posts

April 25 2015 04:23 GMT

#43

On April 22 2015 16:06 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
So with Warpgate weakened by warp-in time and 200% damage dealt, it would only make sense for the Protoss core to be strengthened in compensation. That way, the Protoss loses some offensive capability since proxy pylons lose their strength, but can still defend adequately.

i agree. i want it to go back to the brood war days when my tiny group of marines were scared shitless of a group of zealots.
I want to see both the Zealot and Stalker buffed.. and if they have to further weaken the Warp Gate mechanic to justify the buff.. then so be it.

Cricketer12

United States13969 Posts

April 25 2015 04:40 GMT

#44

Beautiful work Sentinel

Hider

Denmark9364 Posts

April 25 2015 12:27 GMT

#45

On April 25 2015 13:23 JimmyJRaynor wrote:

Show nested quote +

Eh.... Marines wrecked gateway units in BW. However, only a timing attack was viable as protoss AOE hardcountered bio.

JCoto

Spain574 Posts

April 25 2015 13:12 GMT

#46

On April 24 2015 12:16 -Switch- wrote:

Show nested quote +

Do this please. Charge sucks

I'm 99% on this, Zealots should move fairly faster than they do now. That's why I think that old BW upgrade was far better.
Sadly, Charge is quite needed in any of its possible redesigns, because of Concussive shells and their 50% slow. Otherwise, Zealots would be just even more trash in TvP. Marauder's slow is what basically makes TvZ Bio viable and quite balanced, so we can't just remove it from the game.

However, If leg enchancements granted slow immunity, that could work.

If not, I think that maybe what we need is a different type of mechanic, in a redesigned Charge.

Actual Charge is an autocast speed buff that combines with the basic attack acquistion (Augment ability) so it basically ensures guaranteed hit, and autosourrounds on AI. It removes control from the player and removes possible micro to display. It can only be used offensively, and base speed of Zealots is quite low (2.75) to compensate for the big autobuff the ability provides.
However, the relatively low base speed of upgraded Zealots is a quite a punishement defensively (slow retreats, specially vs bio) and helps "Deathball" formations (as Zealots get absorbed in the Stalker/Sentry ball when moving, instead of being in front). Also, it removes micro control from the player and makes Zealot chasings and retreats quite inneficients, specially vs bio or on creep.

IMAO, a "Charge" mechanic should be a tactical ability to use, not an autobuff. When an army orders a charge movement, specially thinking in meele tactics (medieval fights, for example) front troops sprint. Front troops are usually light and more mobile than other type of units.

A stim-like buff with more cooldown, with forced linear movement, or some targeted ability (charge at point) makes more sense design-wise than an autocast buff with guaranteed and surround AI. It could be aslo a very interesting buff defensively since it might be used for retreats, increasing their cost-efficiency without increasing damage or countering.

I think we should combine Leg Enchancements with a reworked, manual Charge mechanic that brings control to the player, skill to use, and remove the "automicro" and "guaranteed hit" design from Charge. Player control, skill, versatility.

Just forcing it to be manual use, shorter duration, and linear movement (removes autosurround) would be a very interesting upgrade of Charge's design. Let's try it that way.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 25 2015 17:20 GMT

#47

I don't have any time to fiddle around with the charge ability other than reducing it to BW-style speed upgrade (which I'll peg at 3.375), but if anyone wants to fuck around with Zealot abilities, I'll be happy to help out in any way I can.

Can't run tests this weekend due to work, I might be able to do it all next week though.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 25 2015 17:22 GMT

#48

I was also thinking, what if the Adept wasn't a thing, and its spell replaced Charge on Zealots? For a shorter time. Like 1 second, but you hit F, click behind the MMM ball or into the middle of the hydralisks, Zealot ghosts travel at... let's say speed 5, then a second later the Zealots warp and do their damage.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

April 25 2015 17:26 GMT

#49

On April 25 2015 21:27 Hider wrote:

Show nested quote +

Eh.... Marines wrecked gateway units in BW. However, only a timing attack was viable as protoss AOE hardcountered bio.

Well it would have been just a fast-mo version of early game Zealot vs. Marine in PvT right now, right? They move at the same speed, you split the Marines and run around, etc. Dragoons didn't do shit damage, and HT's are half the reason mech was always preferable to bio. Stalkers outrange more easily than Dragoons (competent AI) and shoot faster, so Marauders are needed to compensate.

Pontius Pirate

United States1557 Posts

April 25 2015 19:33 GMT

#50

On April 26 2015 02:22 [UoN]Sentinel wrote:
I was also thinking, what if the Adept wasn't a thing, and its spell replaced Charge on Zealots? For a shorter time. Like 1 second, but you hit F, click behind the MMM ball or into the middle of the hydralisks, Zealot ghosts travel at... let's say speed 5, then a second later the Zealots warp and do their damage.

I feel that Adepts' spell would actually have more use as such in a game where Zealots didn't have vanilla Charge to allow them to just zoom in, auto-surround, and get a free hit off. You'd use the Adepts to surround the MMMM or the Roach-Ravager-Hydra with their super fast shade and try to hold them into place like Speedlings do in ZvT, and then have your newly quickened Zealots march in towards the center mass of the army at stim speed, activating their manual-cast Charge ability to shrug off the slow effect of Marauders' conc shells.

StatixEx

United Kingdom779 Posts

April 26 2015 00:32 GMT

#51

i mean if im being stupid here plz, ill hold my hand up but...

i personally believe they increased the damage done to warping in units so you cant just pylon up warp in 10 units in the opps face . .

now u might just have to pull back a bit giving the opp that chance to so something about ur proxy remax with pretty tanky units as it is. The other two races at least have to rally, i know this is a mechanic of ur race but come on . . .

now u want to make ur already tanky units more tanky? sorry if ive missed something here but it wasnt hard for u toss to warp into a mieral line with 20 zealots late game as a wall . . what can anyone do about that

Normal

Please or register to reply.

The Effect of the 60-Shield Zealot in PvZ

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming