|
On July 23 2015 08:47 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2015 08:32 [PkF] Wire wrote:On July 23 2015 08:30 Big J wrote:
Pretty much agree with everything said about warpgates, the power of gateway units and that persperctive with adepts in the picture.
I'm not a fan of splitting warpin and power radius though, it feels like a complicated solution. I believe it would be much easier if warpins just took longer if they were too far from the gateway. That way defensive warpins would remain the same but offensive warpins might take 10seconds or more which not only slows down the attack in comparison to thw current state but also gives some extra seconds until the cooldown restarts and hence adds to production time. It's always been the solution I would personally go for, but what is "too far" from the gateway ? Do we make dots indicators everywhere to define where is too far and where is not too far ? It feels at least as complicated as the splitting to me. By the way, since Blizzard seems to genuinely read TL feedback : liberator DPS is OP with lame design and the cyclone makes dots everywhere.  I think you could do something like a second for every 5-10distance with a minimum of the current 5seconds and a maximum of 10-15seconds. If an indicator is needed (which i feel like is hardly an issue for new players and experienced players will get the grip how long it will take them) it could be the plain numer of aeconds it takes the unit to warp in, showcased upon the warpin shadow of the unit. (If you know what i mean. That model of the unit you see when you clicked its warpgate button)
My biggest problem with this is harassing with warp prisms warp-ins is nerfed.
Tbh I really like the split idea. To help taking a third the mothership core could provide warp in power.
|
Just swap the timers! Normal gateways should spawn units in less time (which is good for defense because they come out faster and don't have to run far), whereas in offensive positions you get a slower warp but still faster than the units running across the map. Then that gives players the choice to pick which kind of gateway they want, and interchange them appropriately.
Or just make the transformation one-way and cost money. Maybe make WG take less time to research but put it in the Twilight Council. This has the additional benefit of nerfing blink all-ins in the process, since players would either need to chrono out both upgrades, or build two twilights.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
While this things sounds cool, the least thing protoss needs in this game are nerfs. This would remove even more mobility from the protoss. Something can be done to nerf the all ins, but protoss desperately need some buffs.
|
On July 23 2015 08:44 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2015 08:43 ejozl wrote:On July 23 2015 08:41 [PkF] Wire wrote:For example, what if we added the initial burst damage Zealots deal after charging to an enemy? I don't think I understand what it means. Buffing charge with some damage on the first attack ? y I like it
It is interesting, however, I'm not 100% sure Adept should be the tanky one, the +shield upgrade seem a little boring to me.
|
On July 23 2015 08:50 [Phantom] wrote:
While this things sounds cool, the least thing protoss needs in this game are nerfs. This would remove even more mobility from the protoss. Something can be done to nerf the all ins, but protoss desperately need some buffs.
I don't think P needs buffs, I think some Z and T things need nerfs. That "if I have something broken and you have something broken it will even out" mentality ("buffs are good, nerfs are bad") is really bothering me. You'll win 50% of the time and I'll win 50% of the time but we're frustrated 100% of the time (current PvZ in a nutshell : I win early game with adepts or lategame with carriers, or you kill me with lurkers). 8 armor ultras, liberators, cyclones or lurkers (and probably adepts and carriers) should be toned down.
|
super hype... passion over 9000!
|
What a lovely, lovely day.
|
On July 23 2015 08:52 mishimaBeef wrote:
super hype... passion over 9000!
On July 23 2015 08:54 pure.Wasted wrote:
What a lovely, lovely day.
It's not perfect, but it's a promising day for sure.
|
The main takeaway here was that we can explore potential changes to nerf the offensive warp-in case. Internally, we’re currently exploring two ideas on this front:
Pylon power is separated from warp-in power. Pylon power will just serve to power buildings, and Warp Gates will provide power to be able to warp units in near them. Warp Prisms in this scenario will provide Warp-in power.
In this scenario, in order to do an offensive all-in early, Protoss will need to construct a Pylon and a Warp Gate in order to do an all-in.
In later stages of the game, players can still use Warp Prisms for warp-in harassment, or to support armies. We believe keeping warp-in strong in this case is good because players will have to commit tech to be able to pull something like this off. And it’ll also be more easily scoutable by the opponent compared to Pylons being hidden in various locations.
Pylon power is separated from warp-in Power. Pylons would need to be upgraded to have warp-in power. Warp Prisms in this scenario will provide both types of power.
In this scenario, we’re thinking something like: Costs 100 to upgrade, upgraded Pylons have the same health as normal Pylons, upgrading gives 8 extra supply, time to upgrade takes a very long time, and upgraded Pylons provide both Pylon power and warp-in power.
Similar general idea as what’s mentioned above, but this change would be more tunable.
Okay this is interesting and I'll like to see how it pans out. Pisses me off that I had to wait til lotv beta though.
|
Mexico2170 Posts
On July 23 2015 08:51 [PkF] Wire wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2015 08:50 [Phantom] wrote:
While this things sounds cool, the least thing protoss needs in this game are nerfs. This would remove even more mobility from the protoss. Something can be done to nerf the all ins, but protoss desperately need some buffs. I don't think P needs buffs, I think some Z and T things need nerfs. That "if I have something broken and you have something broken it will even out" mentality ("buffs are good, nerfs are bad") is really bothering me. 8 armor ultras, liberators, cyclones or lurkers should be toned down.
While I kinda agree, Protoss has a very hard time with mobility still, and nerfing other rces isn't going to help that. There are some maps that for example. agaisnt an agressive zerg is very difficult to expand, and since if you don't expand you die...well.
Altough that may also be a problem caused by the weird maps, still restricting the map pool to a certain layout isnt good either.
About the warpgate, if they make the updraded pylons thing they are nerding the defense too, since you'd need a warp prism to defend an expansion or stuff like that until your research is done. The "gateways have a warp in radius" is better for defense, and it basically eliminates protoss all-ins....but it also eliminates early game pressure unless you get a war prism, because you'd need to send units from your base to the battle field to reinforce, and protoss isn't balanced around that, so Protoss would simply stay in base until they get two warp prism, giving the race even less mobility/map control.
|
I don't like the upgraded pylon change. It's basically two proxy pylons for the offense and sniping upgraded pylons would make defending drops/air harass a nightmare if you don't have units. I think this would be a bad change ; I am really interested by the other proposition as I already stated though.
|
|
|
On July 23 2015 08:57 [Phantom] wrote:
About the warpgate, if they make the updraded pylons thing they are nerding the defense too, since you'd need a warp prism to defend an expansion or stuff like that until your research is done. The "gateways have a warp in radius" is better for defense, and it basically eliminates protoss all-ins....but it also eliminates early game pressure unless you get a war prism, because you'd need to send units from your base to the battle field to reinforce, and protoss isn't balanced around that, so Protoss would simply stay in base until they get two warp prism, giving the race even less mobility/map control.
You, like a couple of other posters in this thread, are assuming that no other changes will be made to Protoss until the end of LOTV beta.
Why would you assume this?
|
Germany1878 Posts
Hmm I'm not sure I'm totally onboard with the Zealot Idea but it sounds cool enough sooo lets try it out, its a beta afterall!
I also like the warpgate stuff and just in general most seems to make a lot of sense.
The one thing that I dislike is the Iron will with which they clammer onto forcefields, I don't think there exists enough counterplay, the ones he said a very very situational, I also don't think the ability adds so much great stuff to the game anymore, and when he talks about how Protoss without WarpGate would be totally OP with a 5% buff to gateway units is because of the ForceField, that ability is what makes Gateway units having to be shitty, and therefor leads to them having to ball it up....
As a Protoss player this is just so frustrating because it feels like I don't enjoy the same amount of Freedom players of other races have with their army in later stages! Because its a beta I'd wish they'd just try it out, its not like there is perfect balance right now anyways especially not in PvZ just a couple of weeks without forcefields and with some buffs to see what happens!
But I suppose I'm too emotionally invested into that one stupid aspect as 90% of this was pretty damn good in my opinion sooooo I shouldn't be too negative huh? =P
|
Very disappointed by this tbh, they still completely neglect that ff are bad in their current form (imo they come too early, ff on mid to lategame units would be way more interesting)
Warpgates simply being in the game cause they are unique is just a bad reason too, warpgates being a choice for specific strategies instead of being the norm would be far more interesting and would probably be a better basis for the gameplay as well.
I also like how he says they never wanted the disruptor to be too easy to save, well making it invincible AFTER the explosion told me the exact opposite, it just makes no sense.
Yeah, pretty disappointed by LOTV overall, i don't think the standard gameplay changes will make me "shit my pants", i guess Lycan was talking about gamemodes/skins there...
|
once this patch is live, it begins 
|
On July 23 2015 09:13 The_Red_Viper wrote:
Very disappointed by this tbh, they still completely neglect that ff are bad in their current form (imo they come too early, ff on mid to lategame units would be way more interesting)
Warpgates simply being in the game cause they are unique is just a bad reason too, warpgates being a choice for specific strategies instead of being the norm would be far more interesting and would probably be a better basis for the gameplay as well.
I also like how he says they never wanted the disruptor to be too easy to save, well making it invincible AFTER the explosion told me the exact opposite, it just makes no sense.
Yeah, pretty disappointed by LOTV overall, i don't think the standard gameplay changes will make me "shit my pants", i guess Lycan was talking about gamemodes/skins there...
?
Lycan is casting WCS. That's what was supposed to make you "shit your pants."
|
This is nice, i'm digging these discussion The idea of re-building protoss design is too much. But small changes like this will help close the gap on the balance.
Even David Kim admit that Protoss is edging out in strength, just by a little bit.
I like the idea of an upgraded pylon, but then losing 16 supply from 1 building will be pretty crippling in the mid game.
Especially when the pylon is meant for offense, it's going to get cleaned up eventually.
|
On July 23 2015 08:12 SetGuitarsToKill wrote:We’d like to share a scenario that someone mentioned during the summit that we found interesting. Imagine if Warp Gates were removed. Could we just buff Zealot/Stalker health by 5% to 10% and the game will be balanced still? The answers from almost everyone were that Protoss would be way too strong. And we agree, because both of those units are core units that are used in mass so a buff to these could more easily be game breaking compared to a slight buff to end game units which are used in smaller numbers.
This highlights a big problem with a lot of the demands for warp gate changes: the main justification given for the change is that it allows gateway units to be buffed, and yet no-one is willing to talk about serious buffs they would accept.
There's no point thinking about warpgate changes if Blizzard aren't already considering gateway unit buffs - which may even need to be BIGGER than a 10% health boost.
|
On July 23 2015 09:27 CKSide wrote:
I like the idea of an upgraded pylon, but then losing 16 supply from 1 building will be pretty crippling in the mid game.
Especially when the pylon is meant for offense, it's going to get cleaned up eventually.
Not to mention that Nexus give 14 Supply and you'll expand faster, so can't really see how there's even gonna be enough Pylon power for production. Then drop comes in and kills the 16 supply Artosis Pylon and you have to warp in at your natural, with half the remaining Warp Gates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
