EPT
Community Feedback Update - July 22 - Page 6
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
| ||
|
Fall.182
United States126 Posts
By nerfing Pylons in any of the ways mentions by Blizzard: - Sure it might offset some "offensive warp-in" capabilities of Protoss and therefore reduce early game harass and all ins(a game mechanic that takes away a certain strategy from a game such as an all-in is a flawed game design just like how the new economy model is flawed in that it forces expansions). - It will pretty much secure Zerg a greedy opening vs P unless the P decides to cannon rush every PvZ as an opener. - It'll make defending expansions even harder for Protoss, because pylons at hidden expansions or bases far away will not have warp-in capabilities unless upgraded to this new pylon or having a warpgate in its proximity. And yes mentioned by David Kim, this upgrade to the new pylon will cost 100 minerals and take a considerable amount of time to upgrade. - Mind you pylons are not that hard to snipe off even if each of these upgraded pylons are built at every base. | ||
|
TedCruz2016
Hong Kong271 Posts
On July 23 2015 15:51 Fall.182 wrote: So Protoss has a definite weakness in their ability to defend multiple bases from multi-pronged harass. This was made even worse through the new economy model Blizzard implemented in Lotv, which forces players to expand to more bases overall at a faster rate. How about giving Mothership's cloaking field to nexus as a spell that cost energy as a protective measure? That would make it far more useful than it is now. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On July 23 2015 15:57 TedCruz2016 wrote: How about giving Mothership's cloaking field to nexus as a spell that cost energy as a protective measure? That would make it far more useful than it is now. THis is a very bad solution. This is a band aid solution that doesn't solve anything. So Terran will save a scan and Zerg will build an overseer(which is usually present to scout anyway). This is the same band aid solution as MSC in HotS or force field/vortex balance in WoL. | ||
|
Dracover
Australia177 Posts
However I think they are looking at it all wrong. The reason they think there's nothing wrong, is because they are looking at everything in isolation. "Warp gates don't cause a need for weak units", "forcefields can be microed out of" etc. It's the whole package, which is why the race needs a redesign. That doesn't mean the redesign shouldn't keep some existing features that are good, it means you are willing to start from scratch in your thinking. e.g. If you were to remove forcefields and warp gates, would terran have been so scared of the 7 gate blink build or zerg of 2 base all ins? If you can't warp in then your reinforcements must walk across the map and all timings are a whole cycle behind. And for zerg just like how they do against terran, will cut off reinforcing armies. Without forcefield they can surround. Without forcefields stopping scv repairing bunkers or whole chunks of army fighting, is an allin scary at all? Medivac pickup is cute and only works in open terrain. How does it help when your already fighting at your natural and they FF your ramp? Even in open field it's fairly common for stalkers to simply sniper the medivac with the units which is worse than having the units doing some last minute damage anyway. If you look at it more holistically yes you can buff all toss units by x% and it would still be balanced. | ||
|
ArcticBlue
2 Posts
On July 23 2015 15:26 DarkLordOlli wrote: So what I get from this is, again - they're nerfing everything protoss because the design isn't liked by some people... and giving nothing back. The argument that pure gateway units form armies is only really true in PvZ - and that's only when forcefields in MASS support your army and you're able to constantly pressure or defend, keeping the zerg away from higher tech and rapid expanding. Against T and P, gateway units are trash past the early game. It's all about higher tech and using your gateway units as shields for it, as well as using them for harassment. With the pylon changes, no matter which one goes through, you'd immediately take away all counterattack potential protoss has. Do you really want terran/zerg to be able to suicide their armies into protoss economy and be perfectly fine because a protoss counterattack can't be reinforced? If anything that's far more detrimental to an RTS than anything protoss currently has. I'm all for changes to protoss, but they need to make sense and these don't in my opinion. Not at all. I'm with you. To me, these changes don't make sense. Even though I'm still open to changes to Protoss, the changes made should address the current issues. What they suggest is like, instead of adding bricks to fill any vacant spaces that already exist on a newly built wall, they want to create some new openings for whatever reasons. | ||
|
Meavis
Netherlands1300 Posts
| ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:17 ArcticBlue wrote: I'm with you. To me, these changes don't make sense. Even though I'm still open to changes to Protoss, the changes made should address the current issues. What they suggest is like, instead of adding bricks to fill any vacant spaces that already exist on a newly built wall, they want to create some new openings for whatever reasons. Well, I would like to see them to tear down the wall and rebuild it. Doing so needs to remove certain skills/units and rework some mechanics(eg WG). Then the Protoss will be unplayable, but finally they would be able to balance early game, then mid game, then late game and after all the Protoss would be redesigned and balanced. But that needs to screw Protoss and screw them so hard, that they will be removed for a period of time from ladder. The question is if they aim for the right wall, because I don't think so. | ||
|
Hider
Denmark9433 Posts
Zealot vs Adepts DK suggests to make the Zealot a DPS-unit and the Adepts a tanky unit. I don't see how that properly can work as the Adept is midranged and the Zealot melee ranged. It would make much more sense to opt for the reverse role, and I am baffled why DK isn't discussing that in his update. Forcefields This was very much in line with what I expected. David Kim thinks Forcefields are pretty cool but just needs a bit more counterplay. Based on reading his comments over the last couple of years, I am convinced he thinks proper ability design is mainy related to two factors: 1. Does it take skill to use the ability? 2. Is there counterplay? However, the above two factors doesn't take into account two other essential elements: 1. Does it feel satisfcatory/fun to use? 2. How does it impact the dynamic of the game. In the case of Forcefields, I don't think its a very fun ability to use, and I think it has very poor implications for how the game dynamic works. The issue is that the protoss army composition has a much more difficult time moving out on the map as they beocme very reliant on narrow passages. Thus they will end up playing very passively unless they go for a big all in. The proper solution is imo to just remove Forcefield and create a Sentry that is fun to use but isn't neccasary for the protoss composition. Rather it should be a unit that can allow the race to play a style it otherwise wouldn't be capable of, but opting to not to use it at all should be 100% viable as well. Warpgates I guess both suggestions have their merit, though it obviously is also very important to note that just changing how the Warpgate works doesn't fix protoss as a race. You need a lot more changes and his reluctance to changing Forcefield, Immortal and Colossus are part of the problems too. Disruptor This was the obvious solution from the get-go and I don't really understand why it wasn't implemented from the get-go. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
... or does it? I'm not saying everything here is bad, but I don't think Protoss gets better overall with these changes, neither design nor balance wise. Disruptor change is good, but that's the smallest issue. Forcefields: Please make counterplay to forcields possible in every situation, not just if you have burrow movement roaches or ravagers. So my solution that I've seen from others before: Give Forcefields hitpoints! Also make the sentry useful beyond forcefields, a shield heal would be an option hear. Sentries being a dead weight after they made forcefields sucks, and I think they might just be too slow for LotV. Speed buff? (Of course you have to enable the counter play to Forcefields by giving them hitpoints first). Gateways/Warpgate: I'm all for nerfing offensive warpgate, but give Protoss something in return. Namely, make the normal Gateway better! Making a warpgate should be a choice, and not the default option. You achieve this by making it possible for Protoss to max out faster with Gateways than with Warpgates. Balancing your Gateway/Warpgate count could be a new interesting aspect of playing Protoss. Maybe you'd want to have 10 normal gateways to buld your main army as fast as possible, while having 4 warpgates for defensive warpins and warpprism harassment. Protoss also has a hard time to keep up economy wise in LotV, maybe a 300 mineral nexus that builds 10 seconds faster could be tested? Might be OP, but hey let's test it. Still very thankfull for all the updates! I just hope Protoss will feel good at the end of this process, whether it's playing it or against it. | ||
BisuDagger
Bisutopia19327 Posts
It’s very common to see small groups of Zealots harass and deal high or even game ending damage. Compare this to other races core units - How often do we see Zerglings doing this? Not as much. On a strictly pro level, does anyone in the thread agree with this? Zergling runbys and base sniping is extremely common. Meanwhile, unless it's late game warp prism drops you never see the same level of harassment. Zealots don't deal nearly as much high damage or game ending damage. | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:37 BisuDagger wrote: On a strictly pro level, does anyone in the thread agree with this? Zergling runbys and base sniping is extremely common. Meanwhile, unless it's late game warp prism drops you never see the same level of harassment. Zealots don't deal nearly as much high damage or game ending damage. It completely depends on the phase of the game, but yeah in the late game chargelots from a warpprism are the best harassment and often do a lot of damage I think. At least in PvZ. Just yesterday we saw it in code A (Symbol vs Hurricane). | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:37 BisuDagger wrote: On a strictly pro level, does anyone in the thread agree with this? Zergling runbys and base sniping is extremely common. Meanwhile, unless it's late game warp prism drops you never see the same level of harassment. Zealots don't deal nearly as much high damage or game ending damage. 3/3 zealots can force the terran player into a fight they do not want to take it, since the terran lost too much in the main. This rarely happens though because the game doesn't get to this state very often(SCV pulls/timing attacks etc.) In PvZ it's a horrible horrible damage. Against SH/Blord-infestor/ I used the 2 WP harass style of herO(or was it HerO? Not sure now, damn, probably the CJ one) - and it works like a charm even now and for sure it worked then. Chargelots takes down hatcheries and tech buildings so fast. But this can be denied by good positioning of buildings and some static D. But basically not that long time ago the one good advice of "how to beat SH/viper" was - use warp prism and warp chargelots everywhere. We don't see Zerglings do this that much often because you can wall. Defense against WP is not that easy(especially for Zergs) | ||
|
Musicus
Germany23576 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:50 deacon.frost wrote: 3/3 zealots can force the terran player into a fight they do not want to take it, since the terran lost too much in the main. This rarely happens though because the game doesn't get to this state very often(SCV pulls/timing attacks etc.) In PvZ it's a horrible horrible damage. Against SH/Blord-infestor/ I used the 2 WP harass style of herO(or was it HerO? Not sure now, damn, probably the CJ one) - and it works like a charm even now and for sure it worked then. Chargelots takes down hatcheries and tech buildings so fast. But this can be denied by good positioning of buildings and some static D. But basically not that long time ago the one good advice of "how to beat SH/viper" was - use warp prism and warp chargelots everywhere. We don't see Zerglings do this that much often because you can wall. Defense against WP is not that easy(especially for Zergs) Agreed! We might hopefully see more of it soon, with single overlords getting morphed into dropships and real cracklings on hive tech. But before that Protoss has to survive the lurker phase. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:37 BisuDagger wrote: On a strictly pro level, does anyone in the thread agree with this? Zergling runbys and base sniping is extremely common. Meanwhile, unless it's late game warp prism drops you never see the same level of harassment. Zealots don't deal nearly as much high damage or game ending damage. It's a question of what you perceive as harassment. When we talk about base-sniping with zerglings, it is 90% about sniping the third base, often before it is done. And in those scenarios that's often the whole zerg army that does this in a very upfront manner. I can very well agree if someone perceives that as frontal attack of the main army, not as harassment with zerglings. The scenario in which zerglings actually pass by defenses are much more uncommon. Though that is obviously because the whole building layout in TvZ and PvZ has been designed to prevent it. | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
On July 23 2015 16:50 deacon.frost wrote: 3/3 zealots can force the terran player into a fight they do not want to take it, since the terran lost too much in the main. This rarely happens though because the game doesn't get to this state very often(SCV pulls/timing attacks etc.) It's part of the reason the game doesn't get there. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
One thing i dislike is the talk about "more dmg" here and "more dmg" there (not just in this update). SC2 has already far to much dps for it's mechanics that make the battles be over in an instant. So maybe buff HP would be a better course. | ||
|
Big J
Austria16289 Posts
On July 23 2015 17:06 Sapphire.lux wrote: Sounds resonable and i especially agree with the WG solutions. One thing i dislike is the talk about "more dmg" here and "more dmg" there (not just in this update). SC2 has already far to much dps for it's mechanics that make the battles be over in an instant. So maybe buff HP would be a better course. The game would profit a lot if they started nerfing again, instead of counterbuffing things that aren't broken yet. | ||
|
Ketch
Netherlands7285 Posts
Personally, I'd like to see removal of the MSC, I still don't like the hero unit concept, by having the following ideal situation: Nexus Changes - keep Chronoboost - Add small area of effect recall like Starbow - Give Nexi a defensive ability that delays the attacker for a example a area of effect spell called shield barrier that gives friendly units and buildings a "forcefield" like protective shield, delaying the attack and allowing for the Protoss to warp-in / recall units - similar to a Terran BW defensive matrix Sentry Changes - having time warp on sentry, instead of the forcefield - giving sentries a more active protection / healing spell than guardian shield | ||
|
Startyr
Scotland188 Posts
Why not a universal upgrade for pylon warp in. Research warp gate on the cyber core and you can transform gateways into warp-gates and warp in next to just those warp gates. Research pylon warp in on the cyber core and you can then warp in next to pylons. The costs and timings of those two upgrades can easily be adjusted depending on when early aggressive proxy pylons should be available. This also means mid to late game warp ins can remain as they are now. | ||
| ||
