|
On July 23 2015 22:39 KT_Elwood wrote:
If you nerf offensive Warp-In you auto-Nerf the Zealot RunBy damage. if you nerf Warpgate in general, you nerf protoss instant-Remax capabilities for the ultra lategame.
That's why they should separate Instant-build from Warp-In
Give Gateways and Warpgates the Instant build, but only Warpgates can Warp in anywhere under Pylon power (Gateways "warp in" on location)
Then nerf the Offensive Warp in by having a longer cooldown on Warpgates than Gateways
|
The burst damage of the post-charge zealot plays out exactly the same way as it does in HotS in terms of control from the Protoss player. Blizzard does not seem to understand:
It has the type of micro that a lot have been asking for: More positioning and movement-based, rather than ability-click based.
There is no "more positioning and movement-based [micro]." It is literally a buff to the zealot without changing the way a player controls it.
Remove concussive shells. Change Charge to just be Leg Enhancements. Increase zealot speed with Leg Enhancements more than it is passively with Charge.
|
I like the idea of Zealots as tank and adept as DPS and not the other way around. The tank should be in front soaking up damage... that is kind of the point of a tank.
If the weak units are in the front because they are melee they will just die quickly.
Also I agree that concussive shields needs to be removed if they want to implement some sort of BW style Zealot leg speed upgrade. Concussive is really what mandates charge.
|
I think Blizzard is failing to understand that force fields are just not fun.
I don't care if there's counter play or micro against them.
Do they really think the design of the Forcefield and Gateway army works so well that they point blank refuse to redesign the game?
|
On July 24 2015 00:29 DinoMight wrote:
I like the idea of Zealots as tank and adept as DPS and not the other way around. The tank should be in front soaking up damage... that is kind of the point of a tank.
If the weak units are in the front because they are melee they will just die quickly.
Also I agree that concussive shields needs to be removed if they want to implement some sort of BW style Zealot leg speed upgrade. Concussive is really what mandates charge.
It's more about balancing the tankiness out so that it won't be no zealot = paperweight dps wiped in seconds.
|
Been watching starcraft 2 continually,ever since the WOL beta, so think I have some good insight to comment here.
Please try to avoid bad language and attacking the dev team, that wont help. Secondly the team has been working on completing the single player campaign for a long time, so big drastic changes to to whole race of Protoss invalidating that work wont be happening. Saying that I agree that Protoss have problems but believe they can be fixed.
The biggest problem as I see it is how PvT and PvZ does not involve interesting skirmishes and long pushes, all over the map but rather deathballs and all-ins, why is that?
* gateway units on its own does not trade well with stimmed bio or roach/hydra, unless lots of forcefields are available
* the warp gate mechanic is according to me very interesting, but offensive warpgates negate the defenders advantage and causes all-ins to be very powerful, since the army can be reinforced quickly
* if the protoss army has committed to moving out on the field it is vulnerable to surrounds and must clump up and use force fields and/or AOE to fight effectively, meanwhile the AOE elements are not that mobile and can not retreat quickly, and if lost the remaining gateway army is often doomed
* Protoss have a hard time defending multiple locations at once, in LOTV I can see mutas becoming a big problem once again, not sure why terran was given two more AA units, and protoss none. In HOTS I quite enjoy the dymanic in TvZ with muta harass, thors and missile towers+ marines, widow mines for AA and sniping of workers, magic boxing and sniping of lone thors and siege tanks. Protoss have phoenix and stalkers, which are fine, but against large numbers of muta and tech switches they still suffer. Now with the liverator the mutas will have an even harder time against terran while protoss got nothing to help them move out on the map
* force fields works well for all in pushes but less so for skirmishes
That said I find force fields and warp mechanic interesting and it should stay but with offensive warp ins tweaked. Only warping in around upgraded pylon sounds like a bad change to me, sniping etc and does not really solve the problem with defenders advantage. I for one, quite enjoy offensive pylon placement on the map, without the need for a gateway either. Same problem here, if Protoss gets away with an unscouted gateway the all-in will be just as hard to hold as now.
Us other has suggested: increase the cool down on warp ins quite a bit! And decrease it in a normal gateways. That way you can not endlessy warp in blink stalkers for example unless you have constructed several warpgates, ie late game. That would add some needed macro to Protoss too, having to balance/change between the modes, for quick production and warp ability. That is all that is needed!!! Early game warp ins offensive warp ins become weaker while late game pushes are still strong. Lower build time on gateways means that Protoss can remax quicker at home, something that can be a problem for them if their army is lost.
I would also like to discuss the Mothership Core. As I see it, it is a band aid. The Core was supposed to help defend against early pushes and help the protoss army become mobile. Photon overcharge is great, but why not give it to the nexus? Using that energy instead? Then pushes against them slow down the teching of Protoss. The adept helps protect against early pushes too.
The problem with the recall ability is that it can only be at one place at once thereby promoting deathball play.
What if nexus gained the ability to use energy for:
* photon overcharge (could stay on the core, not crucial this change)
* RECALL to that nexus, but with much smaller area! Maybe takes a while and units still vulnerable while warping out and in, Gives protoss good mobility, availability to recall chosen units, but not just warping away the whole army freely while Surrounded.
The stalker is in a perfect position according to me, the adept is too strong with early game offensive warp ins, and the zealot could use some additional change, but late game zealot sniping of hatcheries should not become too strong, maybe just give them a first strike extra damage as suggested but only against bio units?? Since that is where Protess has difficulties, stimmed bio and zerg ground armies without force fields splash. Protoss are strong against mech already.
Also, please revert the Immortal, the hardened shield was my favorite part of SC2, why not just increase the cap to 20 or something, and give it some more health instead. alternatively make the barrier always autocast when take damage, that opens up for counterplay where you could attack forward, damage the immortal, then retreat for a while before returning when barries is down.
Protoss could use some AA with long range than own air units, phoenix they are very vulerable to Parasitic bomb, and need to clump up to fight mutaball, not sure what to do here, but I think the Tempest could fill this rule as originally intended, maybe make disintegration AOE but with less area, stopping regeneration for mutas could be included!
TLDR:
Increasing warp in cooldown quite a bit, removes almost all problems with all-ins with endlessy warping in of units.
Lower build times of units from normal gateways, to enable Protoss quicker production but without offensive advantage.
Remove Mothershipcore! Give photon overcharge and recall to each and every nexus. Recall with much smaller radius and vulnerable units while teleporting! The removal of the Core prevents early gateway pushes to be too strong eith the change above. Energy on the nexus must be balanced between chronoboost and other uses. The recall can be used to give protoss mobility which they are lacking. The current recall just promotes deathballing since the Core can only be at one place, the adept negates the need for the core as defending unit too. Timewarp can be give to another unit! Oracle?
Give zealots extra damage on first strike after charge, but only versus biological units, and not structures. Gives them strength were needed and not too strong at sniping hatcheries or against terran mech.
Give the immortal either:
* hardened shield with higher cap (20?) and more HP (not shield) to compensate
* automatic cast (cant be cancelled) of the barrier when taking damage (promotes micro from both sides)
Make widow mine cause normal damage to Immortals, not some kind of spell damage. With the barrier above the immortal could be good against lurkers, something that is needed, and not useless against widow mines.
Make the disintegration AOE but with much less damage, not enough to kill mutas, and cause it to stop regeneration and repairs for the time. Make the main attack of the tempest stronger versus massive! That way tempest get a roll as sniper of capital ships, but too expensive too fight effectively against vikings, corruptors etc. The disintegration change helps protoss against mutaball, mainly by removing regeneration, and preventing them from harassing for a while.
|
Very cool ideas! I like the stated direction and developer thoughts about Protoss. I especially like the idea of zealots being more about damage and less about tanking for the Protoss player.
|
Czech Republic12133 Posts
Problem with Nexus calling on itself overcharge and recall means that Protoss will have to choose between chrono(which is heavily needed in the early game) and saving energy for defensive abilities. I kinda see this as wrong. You would need to rebalance economy of the whole Protoss - meaning probes need to be more efficient(since less chrono), all tech needs to have the build-research time lowered etc. Which will lead to reckless Protoss players not saving energy and heavily chronoing tech again...
Edit: Also with more efficient probes every probe kill hurts more thus you will need to change everything what harasses probes in early game... I do not see this happening. Unless it is an ability with cool-down, which is dumb IMO
|
This was rather dissappointing. Forget about FF and Waprins, the protoss race really need some big changes to be on par with other races.
|
WarpGates
about warpgates.... i dont know, they need to be changed but the 2 option they mentioned are not what i was wating for. Gateways and WG should be used for differentes scenarios during the game not like the mechanic we have now that after the upgrade Gateways dissapear from the game. it would be cool see this kind of decision making in the game of when to use each of them.
the problem with the upgraded pylon imo is in the defensive scenarios when a drop or something destroy that pylon the protoss would be in huge problem maybe receiving game ending damage because the inability do defend that precious pylon, on the other option, having WG around the maps seems weird idk about that.
FF
every time this topic comes to discussion the same defense is mention, the pick up and drop behind the FF or burrow but but the ultimate fact imo is that this ability is just way to absolute. how many times we have seen a FF in the ramp deciding a game, or a player taking a defensive position just to be forcefield into oblivion. maybe this will change in LotV with the interaction with the new units and some buff/nerfs. a posible change to this ability would improve the game.
Zealots
i wish we could see a change in Charge, speedlots like in BW would make them more micro intensive but obviously nerfing marauder in order to make them viable mid/late game.
overall i like this blog from DK
|
On July 24 2015 01:56 deacon.frost wrote:
Problem with Nexus calling on itself overcharge and recall means that Protoss will have to choose between chrono(which is heavily needed in the early game) and saving energy for defensive abilities. I kinda see this as wrong. You would need to rebalance economy of the whole Protoss - meaning probes need to be more efficient(since less chrono), all tech needs to have the build-research time lowered etc. Which will lead to reckless Protoss players not saving energy and heavily chronoing tech again...
Edit: Also with more efficient probes every probe kill hurts more thus you will need to change everything what harasses probes in early game... I do not see this happening. Unless it is an ability with cool-down, which is dumb IMO
Agreed, but even now the mothership core is not always built, and with the adept, maybe and improved zealot and quicker build times for units from the gateway without warpresearch (no need to chronoboost units out) the photon overcharge might not be needed as much, and protoss would have (and be able) to build more gateway units early game, which I think would be good for the game. If not building enough units they can still defend with overcharge but this would cost in economy and teching, cause using energy that otherwise could be used for Chronoboost.
Therefore I think, with these changes and with balanced adept + other gatewayunits, the morthership core would be unnecessary.
|
posted this in a previous warp gate thread:
one warpin per pylon per a set cool down rate. if you want to be aggressive you have to add more pylons in the same spot. at home you can strategically line up pylons at key warpin points near mineral lines or tech without extra investment, as it would just be a new form of simcity. maybe limit warp prisms but give them a higher limit like 3 or 6, which would soften insane 3/3 zealot main base destruction but keep it as a potent form of harass, and even make double warp prism and WP speed more of a thing
it's not my intent to just nerf toss, they clearly need help in other areas, but if the goal is to soften aggressive warp gate styles like people want i think my idea is decent for a starter
|
Generally pretty disappointing post, it feels like they invited the wrong Pro's and community members to the summit if DK didnt understand the point of all the issues regarding Protoss.
Unit buffs was in combination with a FF nerf(like add HP to them) or changing the Sentry in order to combat the weakness of gateway composition which clearly does exist. <-- As shown with Protoss and expansion taking in LOTV.Unable to split up the army.
Instead he focusses on single issues without seeing the whole race.
Gateway units alone are weak as hell, as you can see when you get caught without Colossi, Forcefields or HT's, your army will just melt .....instead he cherry picked PvZ all ins with mass stalkers, which only even happens AFTER the initial engagement where Protoss killed most of Zergs army due to Forcefields already and then says Stalkers alone are good..
Someone ask him to play mass stalker in PvT outside of Blink all ins, see how strang mass stalker is.
Or PvP vs Chargelot , Archon, Colossi.
|
What's really horrible about David Kim post is that it just shows how completely clueless their design team is. Some of the things said are absurd. Gateway units can't handle a buff? Stalker is a good unit? Any clue why photon overcharge is needed? Or why a hero unit like mothership is needed? How clueless can someone be? Nerf colossus, nerf immortal, nerf warp ins, nerf protoss economy, buff other races (ravager, lurker, parasitic bomb ...) and hey the adept unit, warp prism pick up and stasis mines will fix things. These guys are hopeless, just completely hopeless and they have been ALWAYS clueless about protoss and I see that hasn't changed at all. I'm gonna start practicing zerg now.
|
Bisutopia19386 Posts
We can't really accuse them of being clueless until we see the changes they will make in the next patch. Grab pitchforks at the right time I always say.
|
I loved basically everything they said except that zealots deal game ending damage more often than zerglings. That is absolutely obviously wrong.
|
On July 24 2015 00:08 purakushi wrote:The burst damage of the post-charge zealot plays out exactly the same way as it does in HotS in terms of control from the Protoss player. Blizzard does not seem to understand: Show nested quote +It has the type of micro that a lot have been asking for: More positioning and movement-based, rather than ability-click based. There is no "more positioning and movement-based [micro]." It is literally a buff to the zealot without changing the way a player controls it. Remove concussive shells. Change Charge to just be Leg Enhancements. Increase zealot speed with Leg Enhancements more than it is passively with Charge.
This THIS THIS David really seems to be missing the point of the Zealot. Since Adepts outshine Zealots on almost every aspect (ranged/super beefy/ability) the Zealot being a melee unit needs to be faster to close the distance, benefit from micro more to avoid mine hits, and for Concussive Shells to be removed, at this point the ability is just crap and is limiting the design of other things for an anti micro unit.
- Remove Concussive Shell/Charge (both are micro LIMITING abilities David they LIMIT MICRO)
- Add Leg Enhancements at Twilight with a small speed buff from the get go
- Buff Marauders to not suck because even with CS they suck currently
I'm kind of disappointed with this update, I like the upgraded pylon idea but this seems to be another well crafted, "We don't really agree with the community on this one, sorry guys but we like Warp Gate."
At least they are communicating on the issue though.
|
I think I just read that marauders suck
|
On July 24 2015 04:00 BisuDagger wrote:
We can't really accuse them of being clueless until we see the changes they will make in the next patch. Grab pitchforks at the right time I always say.
I'm polishing mine and making extra torches :D <3
|
On July 24 2015 04:18 Little-Chimp wrote:
I think I just read that marauders suck
They really do man, bio of course is still strong and viable but honestly, with Lurkers and super Ultras coupled with the attack nerf I don't know if one can really deny that Marauders aren't in the best place right now, and I'm Zerg.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
