EPTLotV Balance Update Preview - April 27 - Page 17
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
| ||
TelecoM
United States10890 Posts
On May 06 2015 10:41 DemigodcelpH wrote: Remove Warpgate and stop trying to bandaid fix it. Yea, that will fix everything. Actually that will just make protoss even weaker than it is now. >_< | ||
|
Pontius Pirate
United States1557 Posts
| ||
|
jotmang-nojem
39 Posts
On May 05 2015 23:45 ALAMOSS wrote: Hi every one. This might not be the right place for my comment but there it is. I think there is a big issue with the Viper. It's a great unit but very unbalanced. Abduct ability NEEDS modification. It is not normal and PHYSICALLY IMPOSIBLE for a unit like the viper to pull back a massive unit like a Mothership, a Battlecruiser or even a thor or an ultralisk... Plus the fact that abducting so easily a Unique Unit like the Mothership is Unba for Protoss. I think that one solution would be to change the size/price/speed of the Viper to make it a massive Unit that can abduct other massive units, or it can be an upgrade for normal Vipers that would make them massive. Another solution would be to change the abduct ability. Very simple, to abduct a massive Unit you would need several Vipers... That's nothing compared to the unsightly blob of bio terran that moves as if it's a giant clump of gello. But what's worse is there's a giant blob of medivacs above it making it look even more unnatural and unrealistic, putting it into the realm of ridiculous and comical. But even worse is that they somehow magically heal the giant blob of terran bio below with magical green light, defying all known laws of physics and sensibility. Only in the mind of Dustin Browder is this COOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!! He thought It was so ceeeewl, he made it the cornerstone of the terran army... lol | ||
|
mostevil
United Kingdom611 Posts
On May 06 2015 03:15 ALAMOSS wrote: I agree  Never told that everything in starcraft was logical. Just told that somethings are obviously wrong. Would be better if vipers threw down an anchor or something.... Mutas are a mystery :D | ||
|
Highways
Australia6124 Posts
Remove warpgate and rebalance Protoss, the race is badly designed. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On May 06 2015 20:38 Highways wrote: Where is double harvest?? Remove warpgate and rebalance Protoss, the race is badly designed. Do you play Protoss? I agree with you on poor design, but I think Warpgate it's decent. The race is not strong per se. Warpgate can be easily balanced with the actual nerfs as it doesn't add much offensive strength other than timings and in base warpins (ignoring that it boosts production which is the problematic point). And Speedyvac drops are fairly more abusive than lategame warpins. What warpgate provides is mobility. Something that protoss lacks. Warping is fairly strategical, as it allows you to easily rethink your basic army each round, and be active on the map instead of turtling. Protoss basic army is basically the same than in BW with few tweaks, while the basic army of Terran and Zerg has been amazingly revamped with their macrobooster strength and strong midgame units (Marauders, Roaches). The macro strength of Protoss is very low, at minute 10-11 Protoss falls behind in production very easily, there relies their poor strategic design. Also the poor efficiency of Gateways to balance out the potential cheese as Chronoboost is set by default (something that is poor design, macrobooster for free) forces Warpgate to be set early as a compensatory macro upgrade. Then Warpgate becomes a macrobooster upgrade, instead of an utility optional upgrade. That's the problem of the protoss race. The macro/production structural design is fairly non-sense. Free default access to macrobooster mechanic, mobility upgrade used as a production upgrade set up really early, initial production mechanics incompetent with other races (that was the cause of Photon overcharge introduction).... It should be Gateway > Warpgate in terms of production, not what we have now. Being a follower of SC2 developement for years, I think that the problem comes with the removal of the Obelisk, completely removing the standard macro play from protoss, that would innitially be the same as other races. (Build supply, build first production building, build macrobooster unit/building (queen, OC', Obelisk)) Rethinking that would open a lot of space to rebalance the Protoss early/early midgame, and opening space for aditional reworks to their timing potentials and additional buffs, without being rigged to immediate production needs and early game weaknesses or midgame all-in potentials. | ||
|
summerloud
Austria1201 Posts
id love to see those changes, and an increased supply cap could solve the mining problem by itself also: On April 29 2015 19:38 dust7 wrote: Blizzard is playing this too safe. They said the Beta would be long and a time of massive changes and experimentation, but all I see is minor tweaks. They have already entered the stage of trying to find the "correct place" for now predetermined units, their abilities, the economy and other major game aspects (like warpgate). For example, there is zero chance for units that are in the beta right now being removed again. With the exception of the terran unit to come, they decided on the set of units before the beta (when they actually removed the herc). SH, Tempest, Thor, etc. will stay. There is also zero chance for community inspired changes to units and abilities at this point because those are not playing it safe enough. In years of reading TL I saw nobody suggesting another high range unit from the starport or more armor for the ultralisk. Community participation in the design of the new terran unit is an illusion. There is zero chance for a redesign of warpgates and zero chance for any economic model that is much different from the current one. It hurts so much to witness the last Starcraft there will ever be to become a pretty good game when it could have become a timeless classic. my thoughts exactly! | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On May 07 2015 03:11 summerloud wrote: is there any talk at all about possibly increasing the supply cap and/or adding upgrade levels? id love to see those changes, and an increased supply cap could solve the mining problem by itself also: my thoughts exactly! Please, no more ultra armies beyond 200 supply or even longergame upgrade levels, Bio could get out of control with that. Personally, I don't see why Tempests or Thors should go. But almost any high-cost/big unit needs adjustements. Tempests could have tweaks to make it less late-late game or more accessible, since I think that it is going to be interesting as a counter Lurker/Cyclone/SiegeMedivac combo, considering how Widow mines and Vipers can trash Carriers and interceptors. Obviously, it needs to be really more interesting as a unit itself, having better utility instead of lame "1-click, enjoy free kill" mechanics. A little cost decrease, more micro with some range nerf, utility vs buildings (antiturtle), support debuffs... Thors are actually the best option for Mech to go against ultras on creep because of the insane DPS,and we haven't seen the new air unit yet, so it would be bad to remove them. But the introduction of a new air unit opens a lot of space for new mechanics out of the Thor. A barricade ability would be god-like on the Thor. MMMMThor compos would have much more sense in a LBM that now will go for Ultralisk switches. | ||
|
KeksX
Germany3634 Posts
On May 06 2015 11:26 GGzerG wrote: Yea, that will fix everything. Actually that will just make protoss even weaker than it is now. >_< Thats the point. Those units are weak exactly because of warpgate. Removing it would allow us/them/whoever to make them stronger since players wouldn't have to fear that 10 of them are being warped in into their base at once. | ||
|
caznitch
Canada645 Posts
On May 06 2015 18:03 jotmang-nojem wrote: That's nothing compared to the unsightly blob of bio terran that moves as if it's a giant clump of gello. But what's worse is there's a giant blob of medivacs above it making it look even more unnatural and unrealistic, putting it into the realm of ridiculous and comical. But even worse is that they somehow magically heal the giant blob of terran bio below with magical green light, defying all known laws of physics and sensibility. Only in the mind of Dustin Browder is this COOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!! He thought It was so ceeeewl, he made it the cornerstone of the terran army... lol For all the physics whiners out there, why not just make the viper a ground unit for the second or so it's abducting. Ie. it roots to the ground to abduct thereby conforming to Newtons 3rd law. The tinniest of nerfs and maybe even a buff as it would stop vikings from shooting it for the second or so. | ||
|
Grumbels
Netherlands7032 Posts
On April 29 2015 19:38 dust7 wrote: There is also zero chance for community inspired changes to units and abilities at this point because those are not playing it safe enough. In years of reading TL I saw nobody suggesting another high range unit from the starport or more armor for the ultralisk. Community participation in the design of the new terran unit is an illusion. I don't know, the new terran unit reminds me a bit of Gretorp's suggestion here: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/481156-tl-terran-unit-comp-voting + Show Spoiler + On March 23 2015 15:19 Gretorp wrote: I built the unit on stream and have notes on it here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NUjOjdG46MdMAeIigFpuTEwu-vpaMlq-256a9vmMT9g/edit#gid=0 Here are the highlights: Air units Speed 4/5 Requires Tech lab. Is a support AOE air to air damage dealer with ability utility to help out ground. It does bonus damage to armored. Abilities Disabling Field: Units that are inside or walk inside this field are unable to attack or cast. Grenade: shoots a grenade charge that slows and reduces armor of all units inside. Here's the reason why it should exist. TvZ: seeing muta ling bling the whole game makes the matchup very linear. We want it to move past tier 2 units for zerg while maintaining their viability. If terran techs up to this unit we can force them to lay off the mass mutas, else this AOE unit will be able to eventually be amassed in larger numbers, and it can deal with the heavy muta counts in larger numbers with the grenade + light AOE dmg. Lurker ling/bling seems unreasonable to attack into. This allows bio to be viable. TvP Bio needs help in late game. Not in early game. This unit can be a helping solution to the constant problem of HT/Collo. That combination is so good at end game stages. With this unit, zoning sides and not having to worry about them against hts makes the match a lot more interesting TvT Nobody likes raven/viking. It's random. It's silly at times, and it's a very unrewarding feeling when you're playing it/playing against it/watching it. because of its burst AOE against armored units, I hope to remove the capacity for the raven to be the go to AOE air unit. Thereby giving a more expected result when we see these armies collide. In summation, we have a utility spell casting unit that's a splice of the valkyrie/queen/corsair/Devouruer from BW that is tier 2.5ish and can live in mid game to late game. It forces other races not to just defend, else they'll get punished with the disabling field, while still being expensive enough to be of high opportunity cost. It forces zerg to end game compositions, strays the TvTaway from RNG wins, and gives bio a potential way to deal with HTs and blink stalkers killing all our vikings and our units. It could be that Blizzard didn't read that and wasn't inspired by it however. On May 07 2015 10:33 caznitch wrote: For all the physics whiners out there, why not just make the viper a ground unit for the second or so it's abducting. Ie. it roots to the ground to abduct thereby conforming to Newtons 3rd law. The tinniest of nerfs and maybe even a buff as it would stop vikings from shooting it for the second or so. Conservation of momentum is not exactly an obscure law though, everyone knows that when you pull a heavy object towards you, you'll end up pulling yourself toward it if not careful. Abduct looks equally ridiculous to me as if marines could walk on water and zerglings could fly. Actually, in both those cases you'd get used to it about 10 games in anyway. Anyhow, intuitive ability design doesn't mean that one ability needs to operate the same way on every single unit. Players look at the graphics of the ability and will realize that it shouldn't work on massive units and units which are grounded such as a sieged tank. That's easy to understand, you could even have a funny graphic where the viper torpedoes itself towards such targets. | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2665 Posts
On May 06 2015 21:39 JCoto wrote: Do you play Protoss? I agree with you on poor design, but I think Warpgate it's decent. The race is not strong per se. Warpgate can be easily balanced with the actual nerfs as it doesn't add much offensive strength other than timings and in base warpins (ignoring that it boosts production which is the problematic point). And Speedyvac drops are fairly more abusive than lategame warpins. What warpgate provides is mobility. Something that protoss lacks. Warping is fairly strategical, as it allows you to easily rethink your basic army each round, and be active on the map instead of turtling. Protoss basic army is basically the same than in BW with few tweaks, while the basic army of Terran and Zerg has been amazingly revamped with their macrobooster strength and strong midgame units (Marauders, Roaches). The macro strength of Protoss is very low, at minute 10-11 Protoss falls behind in production very easily, there relies their poor strategic design. Also the poor efficiency of Gateways to balance out the potential cheese as Chronoboost is set by default (something that is poor design, macrobooster for free) forces Warpgate to be set early as a compensatory macro upgrade. Then Warpgate becomes a macrobooster upgrade, instead of an utility optional upgrade. That's the problem of the protoss race. The macro/production structural design is fairly non-sense. Free default access to macrobooster mechanic, mobility upgrade used as a production upgrade set up really early, initial production mechanics incompetent with other races (that was the cause of Photon overcharge introduction).... It should be Gateway > Warpgate in terms of production, not what we have now. Being a follower of SC2 developement for years, I think that the problem comes with the removal of the Obelisk, completely removing the standard macro play from protoss, that would innitially be the same as other races. (Build supply, build first production building, build macrobooster unit/building (queen, OC', Obelisk)) Rethinking that would open a lot of space to rebalance the Protoss early/early midgame, and opening space for aditional reworks to their timing potentials and additional buffs, without being rigged to immediate production needs and early game weaknesses or midgame all-in potentials. I think WG is a good mechanic actually, just badly implemented, as right now it imposes too many restriction on the protoss race. The problem is that as long as WG are the default production for protoss, you can't make meaningful changes to the units themselves. I always tought that the Sbow solution was really good. WG: fast harras, easy reinforces units, not too strong, good mobility. Less cost efficient but with more utility GW: strong, slow to make but good in low numbers, hard to reinforce with but can be the core of an army. Cost efficient but army becomes weak without them. The robo+wg combo was not a bad one, but since wg was how it was robo units had to be too strong and so they became too vulnerable and that forced deathball play. If GW only become a thing, protoss will have a cheaper faster version of robo units, since they would more of them and losing 1 or 2 wouldn't be such an investment compared to robo units, protoss wouldn't need to death ball as much. There are a few ways to go about, a simply one would be: WG: Stalker, DT (zealots maybe) GW: Adept or other (if they keep the adept they need to make a core army unit and not a harass one) zealot maybe too. If they keep zealots on WG no changes, if they move them to GW they could be buffed if needed. I'm not sure where to put sentrys and templars, stalkers and DT could still be made from GW but in a less efficient way. Also put a certain limit in how to change between WG and GW as needed. This gives option to keep WG, make GW useful and make the core changes to a protoss Gateway army that players have asked since forever without the limits of WG. | ||
|
Stuvv360
United States5 Posts
Thor: Add Railgun Ability Deals 100 damage to single target (ground or air) within range 7. This ability ignores armor and should have a long cooldown maybe 60 seconds. Cyclone: Change Lock-On so is stops as soon as the target is out of vision. Can Attack ground and air without upgrade. Adept: Remove Psionic Transfer Add Psionic Lash Adept pulls the target of Psionic Lash to it the target is stunned for 1 seconds. Psionic Lash has a range of 6 and cooldown of 30 seconds. Massive targets are immune to this ability and only ground units can be targeted. This new ability works perfectly with the shield boost upgrade. It would become a Archon/ HERC hybrid. | ||
|
JCoto
Spain574 Posts
On May 08 2015 02:31 Lexender wrote: I think WG is a good mechanic actually, just badly implemented, as right now it imposes too many restriction on the protoss race. The problem is that as long as WG are the default production for protoss, you can't make meaningful changes to the units themselves. I always tought that the Sbow solution was really good. WG: fast harras, easy reinforces units, not too strong, good mobility. Less cost efficient but with more utility GW: strong, slow to make but good in low numbers, hard to reinforce with but can be the core of an army. Cost efficient but army becomes weak without them. The robo+wg combo was not a bad one, but since wg was how it was robo units had to be too strong and so they became too vulnerable and that forced deathball play. If GW only become a thing, protoss will have a cheaper faster version of robo units, since they would more of them and losing 1 or 2 wouldn't be such an investment compared to robo units, protoss wouldn't need to death ball as much. There are a few ways to go about, a simply one would be: WG: Stalker, DT (zealots maybe) GW: Adept or other (if they keep the adept they need to make a core army unit and not a harass one) zealot maybe too. If they keep zealots on WG no changes, if they move them to GW they could be buffed if needed. I'm not sure where to put sentrys and templars, stalkers and DT could still be made from GW but in a less efficient way. Also put a certain limit in how to change between WG and GW as needed. This gives option to keep WG, make GW useful and make the core changes to a protoss Gateway army that players have asked since forever without the limits of WG. The Starbow solution as you said it's pretty good. It's the very simple concept: Reversed WG and Gateway build times. Warpgate delayed in tech - Gateway as main production. More faster building - Warpgate as aggressive production, chronoboost soaker, timings, reinforcements (aggressively) and harass. Only available as a mid/lategame tech. But less efficient (longer build times) However that implies reworking the Protoss macro in some aspects, as you have default acces to CB. In other words: that means standarizing Protoss macro. - Making Protoss pay 150 each base for access to their macrobooster (like Terran and Zerg) Fun fact, it was the way Protoss was exactly pre-beta release with the Obelisk. - Giving them strong macroboosters and defensive options. The Starbow chronoboost is a 100% boost for 20s (40s of build time) for 15 energy. Limited to 50 max energy. (3 chronos) The SC2 chronoboost is 50% bonus for 20s (30s of build time) for 25 energy. Limited to 100 energy. (4 chronos) Fun fact 2: SC2 chronoboost was nerfed from 30s (45s of build time) in WoL beta patch 5. There is an obvious correlation between removing the need to pay for your macrobooster and the initial strength you can give to it and to your production. I've defended for years that the Macro weakness (compared to Terran and Zerg) and the Gateway/Warpgate problems of Protoss came all from the rebalancing as the Obelisk was removed. - Giving a macrobooster mechanic by default is problematic if your production is strong per se initially. That leads to nerfs in early game production.See WoL beta patches about Gateway build time, Chronoboost duration and Zealot build time. - Then you have to reintroduce the production strength relatively early -> Warpgate as earlygame boost to production, must-have upgrade, main building structure. - As you can't compete in production pre-warpgate, you turtle. You eat roach all-ins, speedlings and bio tank pushes for years at your nat. - Then someone "clever" decides to give you a 1-click safety mechanic to let you play safe. - Then you can abuse very safe turtling 2-base and go awesome all-ins combined with the comfort of having Warpgates early. - Then people complains for 2 years about OP. - Then in the new expansion, economic changes lead to faster start early game, where you are fairly vulnerable. - You are forced to be defensive again, and new units are going to be problematic to balance early game. Anyone knows the history? I think that the game works fairly balanced even with the non-standarized Protoss, and I want to clarificate that I still like how Protoss is able to be aggressive with Warpgate relatively earlygame, specially since time-wise, the all-ins and timings have been nerfed by the effect of the economy, making them more doable. However, for design reseasons, re-standarizing the Protoss macro, giving room for rebalancing the early game and the mid-game production would be really interesting, specially considering how a DH-like econ could affect the game (with fast expansion of Zergs, and MULES still in the game) What's more, delaying a bit the Cybercore in favor of the Obelisk would help with balancing oracles, solving some Terran complains about that. Obviously, as long as Warpgate gets direct or indirect nerfs, and we don't need to have much the imminent issue of Proxy gate strenght because of the delayed CB, we can have buffs to Gateway units. For example, Adepts are extremely uberbuffed with 180 HP early game and there has been relatively few complaints about that for now, comparing the volume of complaints about the Cyclone. | ||
|
Jenia6109
Russian Federation1613 Posts
It has an AoE AA attack and ~range 9 AG normal attack. Also, it has transformation ability like a Viking. It can land and have AoE GG attack and ~range 9 AA normal attack. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i1.daumcdn.net/thumb/R750x0/?fname=http%3A%2F%2Fcfile25.uf.tistory.com%2Fimage%2F115CBF0F4A928092237EFA) So, it can be useful versus deathballs, both aerial and ground. It's like Valkerie with ground attack and like Goliath with ground AoE damage. Transformation from this: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CDotNqjWAAIWryV.png) Into this and vice versa: + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/images/e/e5/Goliath.png) | ||
| ||
