|
On November 02 2011 12:55 kcdc wrote:
-The oracle can't shoot and is one-dimensional. Even if the oracle is balanced in such a way that it surpasses the harassment value of the phoenix and void ray, it lacks even the limited combat utility of its stargate peers. If Protoss already can't afford to get phoenixes or void rays against Terran, how can we expect them to afford a dedicated harassment unit that offers even less defensive value? Moreover, unlike the void ray (or the banshee or mutalisk), the oracle is only capable of raiding, and cannot be recycled into other functions after the harass has been defended. The mark of a robust unit design (like the void ray) is that it retains its value in many roles and is over-powered in none of them. Because the oracle is exceptionally one-dimensional, its harassment ability needs to be extremely strong in order to justify its cost. Blizzard is painting itself into a corner where the oracle's single function will need to be overpowered in order to offset its failings across the board.
-The oracle, as prosposed at BlizzCon, is ridiculously expensive. Gas is the lifeblood of the Protoss force that allows sentries, colossi, archons, storm, void rays, stalkers, etc. Beyond the mid-game, minerals are largely a throw-away resource dumped on spawning zealots to distract the opponent or lines of cannons to shore up expansions. For the cost of an oracle, Zerg can afford an expansion, and because a Protoss that has built an oracle will have too little gas invested in their army, he will be unable to punish the Zerg's expansion. Compare this to a zealot drop which costs no gas, is available from a more streamlined tech path, and achieves the same purpose of preventing workers from mining at a mineral line until a force returns to the base.
Why aren't people talking about the uses for the "nullify" ability in a main army (the one that shuts down structures)? Can't this be used to supplement harassment options (shutting down spore crawlers, turrets, PFs, and cannons for Warp Prism drops/DT harass)? What about locking down Zerg spine crawler walls that show up in late game PvZ for big pushes? How about incorporating an Oracle into early- or mid-game timing pushes to lock down defensive structures?
Concerning it's cost, sure, expensive now, but as it's been said a thousand times before, the costs and unit stats have not gone through balancing. The dev team was very clear that these units are concepts, not their actual realization.
|
On November 02 2011 23:32 Grumbels wrote:
I think the phase shift ability is a bit silly. If it becomes popular enough then zergs are just going to build an additional roach warren and spawning pool in another base. True, you could scout that with observers and then build more oracles to also lock those down, but it seems like a risky strategy.
Isn't that a way of harassment ? You are forcing the opponents to react building something that is not useful.
Succesful harassment, i would say.
|
On November 02 2011 23:42 BlitzerSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:32 Grumbels wrote:
I think the phase shift ability is a bit silly. If it becomes popular enough then zergs are just going to build an additional roach warren and spawning pool in another base. True, you could scout that with observers and then build more oracles to also lock those down, but it seems like a risky strategy. Isn't that a way of harassment ? You are forcing the opponents to react building something that is not useful. Succesful harassment, i would say.
One additional roach warren is a very small price to shut down a protoss tactic of attacking and then phase shifting the roach warren to prevent roach remax. Yeah, you've done damage, but it's also insignificant.
|
On November 02 2011 23:13 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 22:38 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 22:06 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:58 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 21:34 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:54 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 20:35 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:24 Dommk wrote:But not only that: Gateway is a complete tech path. It has tank units (archons, zealots), antiair units (stalkers), casters (sentry/templar), damage dealers (zealot, templar, archon), mineraldump units (zealot), harass units (stalker, dt). Baracks is not. As opposed to Tank units (Marauders), antiair units (Marines, Ghosts), Casters (Ghosts), Damage Dealers (Marines,Marauders), mineral dump units (Marines), harass units (Marines, Marauders) ?? Read the full comment. Also Marauders aren't tank units. They have 125life for 100/25 costs. Stimmed they have 105life. Zealots have 150life, 50 in shields and cost 100 (also lesser passive costs, because they don't require tech labs). Marauder are tank units with medivac support, which are no baracks unit. Also Marines and Marauders are no harass units. Marine/Marauder drops are, which again requires a Starport. I was hoping you would see how ignorant your argument is by by pointing out something in such a ridiculous fashion. EDIT: I'm just going to make this simple. Marines, Marauders, Stim, Combat Shield, Concussive Shell, Ghosts and Reapers are all T 1.5 Tech, but Templars, Archons, DT's, Blink and Charge are not. Terrans OFTEN tech safely to Starport tech on a SINGLE base where as Protoss can barely even tech to Templars on two. Hell, by the time Protoss actually manages to get everything needed it is usually 20mins+ into the game on 3/4 bases. Different races are different and you cannot simply compare something that comes out of a barracks to something that comes out of a Gateway because Protoss and Terran ARE NOT THE SAME And when was the last time you have seen a Protoss win without Colossus? The unit is a necessity We are talking about starcraft and not C&C, try again with a better argument. In C&C T3>T2>T1. In Starcraft not. All those Tier 1,2,3 arguments are just simplyfications to make talking about implied tech (costs) and time to get the tech out simpler. Example: + Show Spoiler +150/0+150/100+150/100+50/25+150/150 = 650/375 are the passive costs for a battlecruiser.
250/0+150/100+150/100+250/200+100/150 = 900/550 are the passive costs for a broodlord.
If we define battlecruiser as T3, then broodlords are T5. But that's really not very useful when talking about nonmirror matchups. As long as you don't build Colossi, Templar or Carriers, "T1" Marines counter every protoss unit, no matter what "tier" they are. (I'm not saying that one can't rely on defensive mechanisms like FFs against them! But in direct engagments the marine wins) Just think about Mech ("T2" and "T3" mixture) in PvT and Bio ("T1" and "T2" mixture). Guess which one has proven to be playable and which hasn't? Seriously? You harp on like one part of one line as my "argument"? I just used Tiers as an easy way to explain the relative timings. The part where I explain how Terran often get to Starport tech one a single base where as Protoss generally only get to Templar by 3bases should have been enough. And your use of Tiers is just as awful. That isn't even what I meant But what does it matter than Mech hasn't been proven vs Protoss? Terran have a viable way to play that is extremely effective . The point still stands, races aren't the same, you can't compare anything that comes from the barracks to anything that comes from the gateway, that isn't how the game is built Because my argument doesn't fall if you replace "Tier X" with "starport tech". Also there are Protoss 2gate 1robo openings. Protoss dt openings. Protoss Stargate openings in PvT. (all of 1base) And Protoss have viable ways to play play PvT, PvP and ZvP with or without colossi. (though I'd always say that in standard play you always want to be able to have each tech available in lategame) Terrans don't have viable ways to play TvP without Stargates. And they don't have viable ways to play lategame (=standard, else someone just made a mistake) TvZ or TvT on pure baracks. That's why I say that gateway is a more complete tech path than Barracks. This is such a ridiculous argument What does it matter that you have to produce a Starport? Protoss may have a tech tree that complements the gateway well but to reach that requires a 20min+ game. Terran can safely get to Starport on a single base. Not to mention in the current metagame it is no longer possible to play a soley gateway tech game What defines play styles like Mech is HOW the style is played, not where the units are made.
And my point still stands: I'm pretty certain that due to the in the quotes mentioned arguments, "Protoss reapers" would have to suck even more than Terran reapers (and they suck pretty hard right now).
That is something play testing would decide Really, "how something is played" is more important than where and from which tech it is made (my point all along)? So why do you keep arguing that Terrans can build a Starport of 1base, while protoss needs a 20min game to get all the tech they need to kill a complete bio composition. Matter of the fact is, that Protoss can play very active through all those 20mins. (with dts, with blink, with allins, with warp prisms) At least once you are high enough level to have a decent amount of multitasking for that.
Who says I'm complaining? I'm trying to make a point. The point YOU are complaining that Terran "have" to make a Starport is absolutely absurd
For the time gateway styles did work forging Colossus actually had a meaningful impact on the game. It allowed you to get MUCH faster upgrades, faster expos, defend drops easier and be much more active around the map as opposed to the turtle style of Colossus.But it isn't possible anymore. I have yet to see any standard play using these pure styles. But the point still stands, you play differently.
How does forging Medivacs and Viking expand on Bio play? It Doesn't. Not to mention skipping Starport does not have the same implications on Terran as skipping Robo tech for Protoss.
Protoss is a race divided by tech.
Protoss may have three production facilities but it is not those three that define them, it is what is beyond that. Fleet Beacon, Templar Archives/Dark Shrine and Support bay are significantly more meaningful than the Gateway, Robotics Facility and Stargate. Gateways are still made en-mass lategame as Protoss regardless of which tree you take but what makes them meaningful is the Tech you have got along the way.
Stop trying to compare races so casually. Why things work for one race and not the other is because it is completely different race
|
On November 02 2011 23:46 Grumbels wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:42 BlitzerSC wrote:On November 02 2011 23:32 Grumbels wrote:
I think the phase shift ability is a bit silly. If it becomes popular enough then zergs are just going to build an additional roach warren and spawning pool in another base. True, you could scout that with observers and then build more oracles to also lock those down, but it seems like a risky strategy. Isn't that a way of harassment ? You are forcing the opponents to react building something that is not useful. Succesful harassment, i would say. One additional roach warren is a very small price to shut down a protoss tactic of attacking and then phase shifting the roach warren to prevent roach remax. Yeah, you've done damage, but it's also insignificant.
So, everytime Zerg sees a starport/starport unit, he has to react with an additional roach warren/spawning pool?
Man that unit is good, the pure possibility of protoss being able to have it, already makes me waste 450minerals and 2larva, just to be safe.
That being said, an additional pool and an additional roach warren is a small price. Mining 300less minerals because of an entomb is another small price. Losing an extra queen and 2more probes to stargate harass early, because the oracle has phased out my first spore crawler is another small price. Building an extra spore crawler, so that this can't happen again is another small price... "Aiur, they have got a problem", "Mission succesful Oracle!"
And even if the balancing will be completly different, so that this isn't a realistic scenario: The oracle will see use and people will LOVE it, once they figure out how to use it.
|
On November 02 2011 17:53 Thrombozyt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 13:58 kcdc wrote:On November 02 2011 13:50 Vindicare605 wrote:
Without getting in to why I like the Oracle. Can I ask you something?
Why is the Dark Templar not included in your list of Protoss Harassment options? It should be. But it's pretty simple: DT's are good if your opponent isn't prepared. Otherwise, they're expensive archons. Either way, they're not consistent harass options because your opponent will certainly be prepared the second time. So I get it right? You want a unit that pulls off harass successfully even if the opponent is prepared, that demands a response from the opponent that is out of the way of his usual combat tech and that is located conveniently in your tech path so you don't have to specifically invest in harassment? Oh.. and it should also have some utility in other roles... Tell me one unit that fullfils those criteria...
This one is easy. MM drops are the best example. They require literally no extra tech, they often pick off workers and structures even when the opponent knows they're on the map, they force the opponent to build static defenses and leave troops in his bases which weakens his core army strength, and they can swing back around and join your main army.
Other options that complete this quadruple threat: banshees, hellions, speedlings, delayed mutalisks (you need the spire anyway), baneling drops (if Z is going banelings anyway), zealot drops (sort of), void rays (sort of--the stargate is out of the way at that timing, but becomes useful again later).
|
That's not the point, it's about design. A unit that forces some costs to be shut down isn't balanced well. Sure, you might build one every game because of its strength, but is that fun design?
|
Honestly protoss need a harassment unit that is able to provide utility into the main army. The reaver was perfect for this because it was a decent siege unit as well as able to harass the economy with drops. I honestly don't see how the oracle is going to be used very much because the issue with protoss econ harass was that it forced protoss to go so far out of the way of their bulk army path that it was almost not worth it. The oracle isn't going to solve this problem because simply put it's not a main army unit. I was thinking about some combination of a sentry and the oracle. The oracle would be able to cast force fields around minerals one at a time for certain energy a piece. Then the oracle would serve as a decent part of your army due to the fact that it could cast these force fields in battle as well. These FFs wouldn't be as strong as the one that came out of the sentry because they could be targeted down, but you'd be able to cast more of them. What does everyone think?
|
On November 02 2011 23:00 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:15 Toadvine wrote:In any case, if HotS is supposed to add units that shore up weaknesses of the races, then the Terran and Zerg units do make sense in this context. Terran units serve to make mech a viable playstyle in all matchups, for example by giving Hellions the option to act as proper meatshields for Tanks. Zerg units allow them to break entrenched positions more easily, and generally achieve pressure without sacrificing tons of units. In light of this, the new Protoss units are a total joke, they don't solve Protoss problems at all. Well, you can Replicate a Siege Tank and maybe defend 1/1/1, so that's nice I suppose. :/ HotS is not supposed to do anything but sell well for blizzard. If you argue that further, it means that it should be interesting to buy it, so the game should be fun to play and balanced on high level of play. What the game doesn't need, is 3races that all have no weaknesses and play similar. Races in SC2 aren't supposed to have no weaknesses and play similar. But they also aren't supposed to be WoW classes that are only good at one thing, and have glaring holes in their arsenal. The weaknesses we do want are the ones that produce interesting gameplay. Zerg not being able to break a turtling Terran even when at a huge advantage was a bad weakness that led to stupid games. An entire Terran tech tree being unusuable in TvP was a bad weakness, so units were added to help that. Protoss had no effective means to harass in the early to mid game, and were extremely reliant on expensive tech to keep them on par with core Zerg/Terran units. This is a bad weakness, because it produces boring gameplay, where the Protoss sits in his base with no map control and just defends and masses up. So, units were added to help this... oh wait. Stargate openings vs Zerg? It's just that it seems like this techpath isn't viable further. That's why they try to make it more viable. Also: why should they give Protoss a pure early(gateway) harassment unit, that is a) hard to balance, due to warp gates b) overlapping with the dt in later stages of the game c) something terrans have; zergs partly have (zerglings harass, but they are not a unit purely designed to do so); so giving it to protoss would just mean that they "want each race to open with hellions vs zerg". It's a unique thing to have hellion openings as terran. Don't let them ruin the game with each race having the same basic strategy, just with different units. d) not necessary if they already make a spell like mass recall, which will basically make your whole army a big harrassment composition Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:
Zergs and Terrans also don't just get units that counteract weaknesses that are intended to be there. But Mech was intended to be playable in TvP, giving them battlehellions and warhounds might fix that.
Mass Thor in ZvT wasn't intended to be playable, that's why the Thor has to go and make space for a unit that is worse vs roaches.
And Zerg was intended to be one of the more aggressive races. In the alpha and beta days when people weren't that great at that game, the general opinion was that zerg was THE pressuring race, running all over the place and denying expos.
Protoss was intended to work well on Stargate tech, that's why they are trying to fix that with oracles and tempests.
Also, Protoss ground tech gets HUGE buffs through the mass recall. Like artosis said: In the current state of the game, he would ALWAYS build an extra Nexus just to have ONE mass recall, because then he could just be out on the map and harass the hell out of everything, for 400 extra minerals... Recall is actually one great thing about HotS, and is way better than our new units combined. I'd trade all of them just to keep the current Recall in the game, which will no doubt get nerfed hard at some point in the beta. However, the point about Stargate tech is retarded. The problem with Stargate was that the units weren't very good in direct army vs army engagements. So, this problem is solved by adding a unit that doesn't attack, and a unit that is only good vs mass air? So in SC:BW Protoss players only went corsairs because they were so good vs hydralisks? No. Zerg players go for mass muta play vs terran because they are obviously soooo strong vs marines the main unit in standard biomech compositions? HELL NO! The problem isn't that Stargate tech is bad in combats. The problem is that Stargate tech and the complete airfleet that a Protoss invested into becomes useless in the midgame. (unlike corsairs in SC:BW) An Oracle would definatly help, because an oracle does never get useless, assuming that it doesn't die from 3spore shots. A Tempest is at least a try to give Protoss a flaggship that is playable. The carrier is not. So it has to go. The Tempest is at least a unit that will be fooled around with anew, before people decide if it is viable or not.
Sorry, but at this point, I'm pretty sure you don't understand what you're talking about at all. The exact problem with Stargate, in both PvT and PvZ, is that if it doesn't do enough damage, it is simply awful for its cost in a direct army vs army fight. Do you know what good Zergs do when they see a Stargate opening? They spore up, make tons of drones to saturate 3 bases, and then just make a shitload of roaches and lings to deny the Protoss third. Do you know what Terrans do? They expand, go up to 5-6 raxes, and then push with stim/combat shields done, and kill the Protoss natural.
The problem is very clearly that the units aren't good enough. And you even bring up Mutalisks, the perfect example of how this kind of unit can work well. Mutas have amazing combat utility compared to Phoenix/VRs. In fact, Zerg players often continue massing Mutas throughout the whole game, just because of how good they are as a core army unit.
Stargate openings being standard in BW is kind of a moot point, since SC2 Protoss is way different from BW Protoss (in fact, SC2 Terran is more similar to BW Protoss).
|
I have a good solution - scrap the oracle and bring back the REAVER.. warp prism reaver drops mmmmm...
|
Switzerland2892 Posts
I think the oracle could be a really good unit, but I feel like it needs something to be useful in battles.
Not something like damaging but maybe something in the same order as detection.
|
I can't agree more with your thoughts and opinions. And after having played around with it in the HotS custom maps I really agree... it's crazy expesive and is just better to not bother with it at all... espeically given that its also pretty weak and one mis-click and you've lost it to two stalkers defending the mineral line.
And in general I really don't like the new protoss units at all, they seem to offer no real fixes to any of the short comings that the protoss has in WoL... further more I really think that the new Z and T units make them far, far more powerful than the protoss which at the highest level isn't as strong as T or Z anyway...
|
On November 02 2011 23:49 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:13 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 22:38 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 22:06 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:58 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 21:34 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:54 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 20:35 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:24 Dommk wrote:But not only that: Gateway is a complete tech path. It has tank units (archons, zealots), antiair units (stalkers), casters (sentry/templar), damage dealers (zealot, templar, archon), mineraldump units (zealot), harass units (stalker, dt). Baracks is not. As opposed to Tank units (Marauders), antiair units (Marines, Ghosts), Casters (Ghosts), Damage Dealers (Marines,Marauders), mineral dump units (Marines), harass units (Marines, Marauders) ?? Read the full comment. Also Marauders aren't tank units. They have 125life for 100/25 costs. Stimmed they have 105life. Zealots have 150life, 50 in shields and cost 100 (also lesser passive costs, because they don't require tech labs). Marauder are tank units with medivac support, which are no baracks unit. Also Marines and Marauders are no harass units. Marine/Marauder drops are, which again requires a Starport. I was hoping you would see how ignorant your argument is by by pointing out something in such a ridiculous fashion. EDIT: I'm just going to make this simple. Marines, Marauders, Stim, Combat Shield, Concussive Shell, Ghosts and Reapers are all T 1.5 Tech, but Templars, Archons, DT's, Blink and Charge are not. Terrans OFTEN tech safely to Starport tech on a SINGLE base where as Protoss can barely even tech to Templars on two. Hell, by the time Protoss actually manages to get everything needed it is usually 20mins+ into the game on 3/4 bases. Different races are different and you cannot simply compare something that comes out of a barracks to something that comes out of a Gateway because Protoss and Terran ARE NOT THE SAME And when was the last time you have seen a Protoss win without Colossus? The unit is a necessity We are talking about starcraft and not C&C, try again with a better argument. In C&C T3>T2>T1. In Starcraft not. All those Tier 1,2,3 arguments are just simplyfications to make talking about implied tech (costs) and time to get the tech out simpler. Example: + Show Spoiler +150/0+150/100+150/100+50/25+150/150 = 650/375 are the passive costs for a battlecruiser.
250/0+150/100+150/100+250/200+100/150 = 900/550 are the passive costs for a broodlord.
If we define battlecruiser as T3, then broodlords are T5. But that's really not very useful when talking about nonmirror matchups. As long as you don't build Colossi, Templar or Carriers, "T1" Marines counter every protoss unit, no matter what "tier" they are. (I'm not saying that one can't rely on defensive mechanisms like FFs against them! But in direct engagments the marine wins) Just think about Mech ("T2" and "T3" mixture) in PvT and Bio ("T1" and "T2" mixture). Guess which one has proven to be playable and which hasn't? Seriously? You harp on like one part of one line as my "argument"? I just used Tiers as an easy way to explain the relative timings. The part where I explain how Terran often get to Starport tech one a single base where as Protoss generally only get to Templar by 3bases should have been enough. And your use of Tiers is just as awful. That isn't even what I meant But what does it matter than Mech hasn't been proven vs Protoss? Terran have a viable way to play that is extremely effective . The point still stands, races aren't the same, you can't compare anything that comes from the barracks to anything that comes from the gateway, that isn't how the game is built Because my argument doesn't fall if you replace "Tier X" with "starport tech". Also there are Protoss 2gate 1robo openings. Protoss dt openings. Protoss Stargate openings in PvT. (all of 1base) And Protoss have viable ways to play play PvT, PvP and ZvP with or without colossi. (though I'd always say that in standard play you always want to be able to have each tech available in lategame) Terrans don't have viable ways to play TvP without Stargates. And they don't have viable ways to play lategame (=standard, else someone just made a mistake) TvZ or TvT on pure baracks. That's why I say that gateway is a more complete tech path than Barracks. This is such a ridiculous argument What does it matter that you have to produce a Starport? Protoss may have a tech tree that complements the gateway well but to reach that requires a 20min+ game. Terran can safely get to Starport on a single base. Not to mention in the current metagame it is no longer possible to play a soley gateway tech game What defines play styles like Mech is HOW the style is played, not where the units are made.
And my point still stands: I'm pretty certain that due to the in the quotes mentioned arguments, "Protoss reapers" would have to suck even more than Terran reapers (and they suck pretty hard right now).
That is something play testing would decide Really, "how something is played" is more important than where and from which tech it is made (my point all along)? So why do you keep arguing that Terrans can build a Starport of 1base, while protoss needs a 20min game to get all the tech they need to kill a complete bio composition. Matter of the fact is, that Protoss can play very active through all those 20mins. (with dts, with blink, with allins, with warp prisms) At least once you are high enough level to have a decent amount of multitasking for that. Who says I'm complaining? I'm trying to make a point. The point YOU are complaining that Terran "have" to make a Starport is absolutely absurd For the time gateway styles did work forging Colossus actually had a meaningful impact on the game. It allowed you to get MUCH faster upgrades, faster expos, defend drops easier and be much more active around the map as opposed to the turtle style of Colossus. But it isn't possible anymore. I have yet to see any standard play using these pure styles. But the point still stands, you play differently. How does forging Medivacs and Viking expand on Bio play? It Doesn't. Not to mention skipping Starport does not have the same implications on Terran as it does Protoss. Protoss is a race divided by tech. Protoss may have three production facilities but it is not those three that define them, it is what is beyond that. Fleet Beacon, Templar Archives/Dark Shrine and Support bay are significantly more meaningful than the Gateway, Robotics Facility and Stargate. Gateways are still made en-mass lategame as Protoss regardless of which tree you take but what makes them meaningful is the Tech you have got along the way. Stop trying to compare races so casually. Why things work for one race and not the other is because it is completely different race
so you think blizzard has been working nearly a year now on HotS, but there is a reason that protoss has NOT been given a reaper/hellion unit on gateway tech?
I'm sure there was a contest in the developing team with the rules: First three units a single person comes up with, make it into the game for protoss. (lol)
And sadly all those great, great units some of the guys had in mind didn't make it, because the dumbest of those guys sadly had the fastest handwriting...
It was one of exactly 2reasons, why Protoss didn't get this (terranlike) unit, that people like you want them to have:
a) The unit didn't fit in the Protoss concept, so they didn't want Protoss to have it
b) The unit couldn't be balanced, therefore was either overpowered without completly redesigning parts of the Protoss race; or so underpowered, that it would not have seen use anyway
And I really don't blame them for that. Even if there was a way to implement such a unit and make it "protossish": Why do it, when they are planning to fix that "issue" in protoss gameplay anyway with mass recall?
People keep focusing on why new units don't do what they want them to do, while blizzard is adding huge features all around the game. Who plays roaches without speed? Noone. Who plays hydras without speed? Noone. Maybe Hydras with speed will be playable!
Who plays mass (blink) stalkers to harass a terran with concussive shells? Noone. Who plays them, when you can just blink in, kill something and teleport home? Maybe that is what people will do!
Cliffwalking colossi, walking into a mineral line, focusing scvs and then being teleported home, once the viking fleet arrives.
Oracles, whichever balancing they will have shutting down spores and turrets, so protoss air harass/dts do major damage.
Those are all possibilities how the game may work out. We don't know yet, but ignoring that it may work out like that, and saying that a protoss reaper unit would surely have a big harass role while the terran reaper unit does not, is just whining about/glorifying things that we don't know how they will/would turn out.
|
Reavers replacing colossi would be good. Reavers wouldn't be countered by vikings, so in order to shut down the harass, Terran would need to make units that are suboptimal in combat. SC2 Terran would still have an easier time getting a viking than SC1 Terran has getting a wraith, but it'd be a step forward for Protoss harass.
It would probably also be imbalanced as hell because splash is way stronger in SC2 than it is in SC1.
|
On November 02 2011 14:13 Whiplash wrote:
Agree 100% with this post kcdc, this is exactly my thoughts on the Oracle. I think the idea of the Oracle is great but it doesn't fill the role that the Oracle is suppose to be: An early game cheep harassment unit that can scout.
The oracle seems to me like way more than an early game cheap harassment unit. I feel like many of you are just pigeonhole-ing it into that category without thinking of the mid-late game strategic options for it. Being able to shut down production/tech buildings is HUGE to do during or in the wake of a large battle where both sides lose units.. How awesome is it to prevent the other side from rebuilding as much as you? Come back and fight with an army advantage because you were able to reinforce with more units.. and if you dont win outright, you can do it again till it becomes one-sided.
EDIT: Although I do agree that giving toss ANOTHER caster is kinda crazy. Especially a caster who probably won't be with your main army.
|
On November 03 2011 00:20 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:49 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 23:13 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 22:38 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 22:06 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:58 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 21:34 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:54 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 20:35 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:24 Dommk wrote:
[quote]
As opposed to
Tank units (Marauders), antiair units (Marines, Ghosts), Casters (Ghosts), Damage Dealers (Marines,Marauders), mineral dump units (Marines), harass units (Marines, Marauders) ?? Read the full comment. Also Marauders aren't tank units. They have 125life for 100/25 costs. Stimmed they have 105life. Zealots have 150life, 50 in shields and cost 100 (also lesser passive costs, because they don't require tech labs). Marauder are tank units with medivac support, which are no baracks unit. Also Marines and Marauders are no harass units. Marine/Marauder drops are, which again requires a Starport. I was hoping you would see how ignorant your argument is by by pointing out something in such a ridiculous fashion. EDIT: I'm just going to make this simple. Marines, Marauders, Stim, Combat Shield, Concussive Shell, Ghosts and Reapers are all T 1.5 Tech, but Templars, Archons, DT's, Blink and Charge are not. Terrans OFTEN tech safely to Starport tech on a SINGLE base where as Protoss can barely even tech to Templars on two. Hell, by the time Protoss actually manages to get everything needed it is usually 20mins+ into the game on 3/4 bases. Different races are different and you cannot simply compare something that comes out of a barracks to something that comes out of a Gateway because Protoss and Terran ARE NOT THE SAME And when was the last time you have seen a Protoss win without Colossus? The unit is a necessity We are talking about starcraft and not C&C, try again with a better argument. In C&C T3>T2>T1. In Starcraft not. All those Tier 1,2,3 arguments are just simplyfications to make talking about implied tech (costs) and time to get the tech out simpler. Example: + Show Spoiler +150/0+150/100+150/100+50/25+150/150 = 650/375 are the passive costs for a battlecruiser.
250/0+150/100+150/100+250/200+100/150 = 900/550 are the passive costs for a broodlord.
If we define battlecruiser as T3, then broodlords are T5. But that's really not very useful when talking about nonmirror matchups. As long as you don't build Colossi, Templar or Carriers, "T1" Marines counter every protoss unit, no matter what "tier" they are. (I'm not saying that one can't rely on defensive mechanisms like FFs against them! But in direct engagments the marine wins) Just think about Mech ("T2" and "T3" mixture) in PvT and Bio ("T1" and "T2" mixture). Guess which one has proven to be playable and which hasn't? Seriously? You harp on like one part of one line as my "argument"? I just used Tiers as an easy way to explain the relative timings. The part where I explain how Terran often get to Starport tech one a single base where as Protoss generally only get to Templar by 3bases should have been enough. And your use of Tiers is just as awful. That isn't even what I meant But what does it matter than Mech hasn't been proven vs Protoss? Terran have a viable way to play that is extremely effective . The point still stands, races aren't the same, you can't compare anything that comes from the barracks to anything that comes from the gateway, that isn't how the game is built Because my argument doesn't fall if you replace "Tier X" with "starport tech". Also there are Protoss 2gate 1robo openings. Protoss dt openings. Protoss Stargate openings in PvT. (all of 1base) And Protoss have viable ways to play play PvT, PvP and ZvP with or without colossi. (though I'd always say that in standard play you always want to be able to have each tech available in lategame) Terrans don't have viable ways to play TvP without Stargates. And they don't have viable ways to play lategame (=standard, else someone just made a mistake) TvZ or TvT on pure baracks. That's why I say that gateway is a more complete tech path than Barracks. This is such a ridiculous argument What does it matter that you have to produce a Starport? Protoss may have a tech tree that complements the gateway well but to reach that requires a 20min+ game. Terran can safely get to Starport on a single base. Not to mention in the current metagame it is no longer possible to play a soley gateway tech game What defines play styles like Mech is HOW the style is played, not where the units are made.
And my point still stands: I'm pretty certain that due to the in the quotes mentioned arguments, "Protoss reapers" would have to suck even more than Terran reapers (and they suck pretty hard right now).
That is something play testing would decide Really, "how something is played" is more important than where and from which tech it is made (my point all along)? So why do you keep arguing that Terrans can build a Starport of 1base, while protoss needs a 20min game to get all the tech they need to kill a complete bio composition. Matter of the fact is, that Protoss can play very active through all those 20mins. (with dts, with blink, with allins, with warp prisms) At least once you are high enough level to have a decent amount of multitasking for that. Who says I'm complaining? I'm trying to make a point. The point YOU are complaining that Terran "have" to make a Starport is absolutely absurd For the time gateway styles did work forging Colossus actually had a meaningful impact on the game. It allowed you to get MUCH faster upgrades, faster expos, defend drops easier and be much more active around the map as opposed to the turtle style of Colossus. But it isn't possible anymore. I have yet to see any standard play using these pure styles. But the point still stands, you play differently. How does forging Medivacs and Viking expand on Bio play? It Doesn't. Not to mention skipping Starport does not have the same implications on Terran as it does Protoss. Protoss is a race divided by tech. Protoss may have three production facilities but it is not those three that define them, it is what is beyond that. Fleet Beacon, Templar Archives/Dark Shrine and Support bay are significantly more meaningful than the Gateway, Robotics Facility and Stargate. Gateways are still made en-mass lategame as Protoss regardless of which tree you take but what makes them meaningful is the Tech you have got along the way. Stop trying to compare races so casually. Why things work for one race and not the other is because it is completely different race so you think blizzard has been working nearly a year now on HotS, but there is a reason that protoss has NOT been given a reaper/hellion unit on gateway tech? I'm sure there was a contest in the developing team with the rules: First three units a single person comes up with, make it into the game for protoss. (lol) And sadly all those great, great units some of the guys had in mind didn't make it, because the dumbest of those guys sadly had the fastest handwriting... It was one of exactly 2reasons, why Protoss didn't get this (terranlike) unit, that people like you want them to have: a) The unit didn't fit in the Protoss concept, so they didn't want Protoss to have it b) The unit couldn't be balanced, therefore was either overpowered without completly redesigning parts of the Protoss race; or so underpowered, that it would not have seen use anyway And I really don't blame them for that. Even if there was a way to implement such a unit and make it "protossish": Why do it, when they are planning to fix that "issue" in protoss gameplay anyway with mass recall? People keep focusing on why new units don't do what they want them to do, while blizzard is adding huge features all around the game. Who plays roaches without speed? Noone. Who plays hydras without speed? Noone. Maybe Hydras with speed will be playable! Who plays mass (blink) stalkers to harass a terran with concussive shells? Noone. Who plays them, when you can just blink in, kill something and teleport home? Maybe that is what people will do! Cliffwalking colossi, walking into a mineral line, focusing scvs and then being teleported home, once the viking fleet arrives. Oracles, whichever balancing they will have shutting down spores and turrets, so protoss air harass/dts do major damage. Those are all possibilities how the game may work out. We don't know yet, but ignoring that it may work out like that, and saying that a protoss reaper unit would surely have a big harass role while the terran reaper unit does not, is just whining about/glorifying things that we don't know how they will/would turn out.
Recall will change a lot if it makes it into the game. I think a lot of people are expecting it to be scrapped or nerfed to the ground because it's really stupidly good. But if it does make it, then everything P has looks a lot better, including options like blink stalkers.
|
On November 03 2011 00:20 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:49 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 23:13 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 22:38 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 22:06 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:58 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 21:34 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:54 Dommk wrote:On November 02 2011 20:35 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 20:24 Dommk wrote:
[quote]
As opposed to
Tank units (Marauders), antiair units (Marines, Ghosts), Casters (Ghosts), Damage Dealers (Marines,Marauders), mineral dump units (Marines), harass units (Marines, Marauders) ?? Read the full comment. Also Marauders aren't tank units. They have 125life for 100/25 costs. Stimmed they have 105life. Zealots have 150life, 50 in shields and cost 100 (also lesser passive costs, because they don't require tech labs). Marauder are tank units with medivac support, which are no baracks unit. Also Marines and Marauders are no harass units. Marine/Marauder drops are, which again requires a Starport. I was hoping you would see how ignorant your argument is by by pointing out something in such a ridiculous fashion. EDIT: I'm just going to make this simple. Marines, Marauders, Stim, Combat Shield, Concussive Shell, Ghosts and Reapers are all T 1.5 Tech, but Templars, Archons, DT's, Blink and Charge are not. Terrans OFTEN tech safely to Starport tech on a SINGLE base where as Protoss can barely even tech to Templars on two. Hell, by the time Protoss actually manages to get everything needed it is usually 20mins+ into the game on 3/4 bases. Different races are different and you cannot simply compare something that comes out of a barracks to something that comes out of a Gateway because Protoss and Terran ARE NOT THE SAME And when was the last time you have seen a Protoss win without Colossus? The unit is a necessity We are talking about starcraft and not C&C, try again with a better argument. In C&C T3>T2>T1. In Starcraft not. All those Tier 1,2,3 arguments are just simplyfications to make talking about implied tech (costs) and time to get the tech out simpler. Example: + Show Spoiler +150/0+150/100+150/100+50/25+150/150 = 650/375 are the passive costs for a battlecruiser.
250/0+150/100+150/100+250/200+100/150 = 900/550 are the passive costs for a broodlord.
If we define battlecruiser as T3, then broodlords are T5. But that's really not very useful when talking about nonmirror matchups. As long as you don't build Colossi, Templar or Carriers, "T1" Marines counter every protoss unit, no matter what "tier" they are. (I'm not saying that one can't rely on defensive mechanisms like FFs against them! But in direct engagments the marine wins) Just think about Mech ("T2" and "T3" mixture) in PvT and Bio ("T1" and "T2" mixture). Guess which one has proven to be playable and which hasn't? Seriously? You harp on like one part of one line as my "argument"? I just used Tiers as an easy way to explain the relative timings. The part where I explain how Terran often get to Starport tech one a single base where as Protoss generally only get to Templar by 3bases should have been enough. And your use of Tiers is just as awful. That isn't even what I meant But what does it matter than Mech hasn't been proven vs Protoss? Terran have a viable way to play that is extremely effective . The point still stands, races aren't the same, you can't compare anything that comes from the barracks to anything that comes from the gateway, that isn't how the game is built Because my argument doesn't fall if you replace "Tier X" with "starport tech". Also there are Protoss 2gate 1robo openings. Protoss dt openings. Protoss Stargate openings in PvT. (all of 1base) And Protoss have viable ways to play play PvT, PvP and ZvP with or without colossi. (though I'd always say that in standard play you always want to be able to have each tech available in lategame) Terrans don't have viable ways to play TvP without Stargates. And they don't have viable ways to play lategame (=standard, else someone just made a mistake) TvZ or TvT on pure baracks. That's why I say that gateway is a more complete tech path than Barracks. This is such a ridiculous argument What does it matter that you have to produce a Starport? Protoss may have a tech tree that complements the gateway well but to reach that requires a 20min+ game. Terran can safely get to Starport on a single base. Not to mention in the current metagame it is no longer possible to play a soley gateway tech game What defines play styles like Mech is HOW the style is played, not where the units are made.
And my point still stands: I'm pretty certain that due to the in the quotes mentioned arguments, "Protoss reapers" would have to suck even more than Terran reapers (and they suck pretty hard right now).
That is something play testing would decide Really, "how something is played" is more important than where and from which tech it is made (my point all along)? So why do you keep arguing that Terrans can build a Starport of 1base, while protoss needs a 20min game to get all the tech they need to kill a complete bio composition. Matter of the fact is, that Protoss can play very active through all those 20mins. (with dts, with blink, with allins, with warp prisms) At least once you are high enough level to have a decent amount of multitasking for that. Who says I'm complaining? I'm trying to make a point. The point YOU are complaining that Terran "have" to make a Starport is absolutely absurd For the time gateway styles did work forging Colossus actually had a meaningful impact on the game. It allowed you to get MUCH faster upgrades, faster expos, defend drops easier and be much more active around the map as opposed to the turtle style of Colossus. But it isn't possible anymore. I have yet to see any standard play using these pure styles. But the point still stands, you play differently. How does forging Medivacs and Viking expand on Bio play? It Doesn't. Not to mention skipping Starport does not have the same implications on Terran as it does Protoss. Protoss is a race divided by tech. Protoss may have three production facilities but it is not those three that define them, it is what is beyond that. Fleet Beacon, Templar Archives/Dark Shrine and Support bay are significantly more meaningful than the Gateway, Robotics Facility and Stargate. Gateways are still made en-mass lategame as Protoss regardless of which tree you take but what makes them meaningful is the Tech you have got along the way. Stop trying to compare races so casually. Why things work for one race and not the other is because it is completely different race so you think blizzard has been working nearly a year now on HotS, but there is a reason that protoss has NOT been given a reaper/hellion unit on gateway tech? I'm sure there was a contest in the developing team with the rules: First three units a single person comes up with, make it into the game for protoss. (lol) And sadly all those great, great units some of the guys had in mind didn't make it, because the dumbest of those guys sadly had the fastest handwriting... It was one of exactly 2reasons, why Protoss didn't get this (terranlike) unit, that people like you want them to have: a) The unit didn't fit in the Protoss concept, so they didn't want Protoss to have it b) The unit couldn't be balanced, therefore was either overpowered without completly redesigning parts of the Protoss race; or so underpowered, that it would not have seen use anyway And I really don't blame them for that. Even if there was a way to implement such a unit and make it "protossish": Why do it, when they are planning to fix that "issue" in protoss gameplay anyway with mass recall? People keep focusing on why new units don't do what they want them to do, while blizzard is adding huge features all around the game. Who plays roaches without speed? Noone. Who plays hydras without speed? Noone. Maybe Hydras with speed will be playable! Who plays mass (blink) stalkers to harass a terran with concussive shells? Noone. Who plays them, when you can just blink in, kill something and teleport home? Maybe that is what people will do! Cliffwalking colossi, walking into a mineral line, focusing scvs and then being teleported home, once the viking fleet arrives. Oracles, whichever balancing they will have shutting down spores and turrets, so protoss air harass/dts do major damage. Those are all possibilities how the game may work out. We don't know yet, but ignoring that it may work out like that, and saying that a protoss reaper unit would surely have a big harass role while the terran reaper unit does not, is just whining about/glorifying things that we don't know how they will/would turn out.
I actually like the Oracle, Replicant and Mass Recall. I think I must have been the only Protoss that did in the discussion thread--just check my post history. I think the Oracle is one of the more intelligently designed units in HOTS.
But for the most part, that is completely irrelevant to what we were going back and forth on.
Recall will change a lot if it makes it into the game. I think a lot of people are expecting it to be scrapped nerfed to the ground because it's really stupidly good. But if it does make it, then everything P has looks a lot better, including options like blink stalkers.
Yeah exactly. It will change how Protoss plays so much. That is why I'm skeptical on it making it in or not, it completely flips the race on its head.
|
On November 03 2011 00:00 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On November 02 2011 23:00 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:15 Toadvine wrote:In any case, if HotS is supposed to add units that shore up weaknesses of the races, then the Terran and Zerg units do make sense in this context. Terran units serve to make mech a viable playstyle in all matchups, for example by giving Hellions the option to act as proper meatshields for Tanks. Zerg units allow them to break entrenched positions more easily, and generally achieve pressure without sacrificing tons of units. In light of this, the new Protoss units are a total joke, they don't solve Protoss problems at all. Well, you can Replicate a Siege Tank and maybe defend 1/1/1, so that's nice I suppose. :/ HotS is not supposed to do anything but sell well for blizzard. If you argue that further, it means that it should be interesting to buy it, so the game should be fun to play and balanced on high level of play. What the game doesn't need, is 3races that all have no weaknesses and play similar. Races in SC2 aren't supposed to have no weaknesses and play similar. But they also aren't supposed to be WoW classes that are only good at one thing, and have glaring holes in their arsenal. The weaknesses we do want are the ones that produce interesting gameplay. Zerg not being able to break a turtling Terran even when at a huge advantage was a bad weakness that led to stupid games. An entire Terran tech tree being unusuable in TvP was a bad weakness, so units were added to help that. Protoss had no effective means to harass in the early to mid game, and were extremely reliant on expensive tech to keep them on par with core Zerg/Terran units. This is a bad weakness, because it produces boring gameplay, where the Protoss sits in his base with no map control and just defends and masses up. So, units were added to help this... oh wait. Stargate openings vs Zerg? It's just that it seems like this techpath isn't viable further. That's why they try to make it more viable. Also: why should they give Protoss a pure early(gateway) harassment unit, that is a) hard to balance, due to warp gates b) overlapping with the dt in later stages of the game c) something terrans have; zergs partly have (zerglings harass, but they are not a unit purely designed to do so); so giving it to protoss would just mean that they "want each race to open with hellions vs zerg". It's a unique thing to have hellion openings as terran. Don't let them ruin the game with each race having the same basic strategy, just with different units. d) not necessary if they already make a spell like mass recall, which will basically make your whole army a big harrassment composition On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:
Zergs and Terrans also don't just get units that counteract weaknesses that are intended to be there. But Mech was intended to be playable in TvP, giving them battlehellions and warhounds might fix that.
Mass Thor in ZvT wasn't intended to be playable, that's why the Thor has to go and make space for a unit that is worse vs roaches.
And Zerg was intended to be one of the more aggressive races. In the alpha and beta days when people weren't that great at that game, the general opinion was that zerg was THE pressuring race, running all over the place and denying expos.
Protoss was intended to work well on Stargate tech, that's why they are trying to fix that with oracles and tempests.
Also, Protoss ground tech gets HUGE buffs through the mass recall. Like artosis said: In the current state of the game, he would ALWAYS build an extra Nexus just to have ONE mass recall, because then he could just be out on the map and harass the hell out of everything, for 400 extra minerals... Recall is actually one great thing about HotS, and is way better than our new units combined. I'd trade all of them just to keep the current Recall in the game, which will no doubt get nerfed hard at some point in the beta. However, the point about Stargate tech is retarded. The problem with Stargate was that the units weren't very good in direct army vs army engagements. So, this problem is solved by adding a unit that doesn't attack, and a unit that is only good vs mass air? So in SC:BW Protoss players only went corsairs because they were so good vs hydralisks? No. Zerg players go for mass muta play vs terran because they are obviously soooo strong vs marines the main unit in standard biomech compositions? HELL NO! The problem isn't that Stargate tech is bad in combats. The problem is that Stargate tech and the complete airfleet that a Protoss invested into becomes useless in the midgame. (unlike corsairs in SC:BW) An Oracle would definatly help, because an oracle does never get useless, assuming that it doesn't die from 3spore shots. A Tempest is at least a try to give Protoss a flaggship that is playable. The carrier is not. So it has to go. The Tempest is at least a unit that will be fooled around with anew, before people decide if it is viable or not. Sorry, but at this point, I'm pretty sure you don't understand what you're talking about at all. The exact problem with Stargate, in both PvT and PvZ, is that if it doesn't do enough damage, it is simply awful for its cost in a direct army vs army fight. Do you know what good Zergs do when they see a Stargate opening? They spore up, make tons of drones to saturate 3 bases, and then just make a shitload of roaches and lings to deny the Protoss third. Do you know what Terrans do? They expand, go up to 5-6 raxes, and then push with stim/combat shields done, and kill the Protoss natural. The problem is very clearly that the units aren't good enough. And you even bring up Mutalisks, the perfect example of how this kind of unit can work well. Mutas have amazing combat utility compared to Phoenix/VRs. In fact, Zerg players often continue massing Mutas throughout the whole game, just because of how good they are as a core army unit. Stargate openings being standard in BW is kind of a moot point, since SC2 Protoss is way different from BW Protoss (in fact, SC2 Terran is more similar to BW Protoss).
NO. Stargate units not being core combat units is not the problem. Making them core combat units COULD BE a solution.
Making them able to harass an opponent, pin him in his base and delay pushes, a much more interesting one.
I play zerg at masters league, and I can tell you that if you go Mutalisks as "core army unit", you are fucked. Play a game with zerg and engage a Marineball with mutalisks... Engage a blinkstalker ball with mutalisks. Engage mass thor with mutalisks. THOSE are combat units (and the blinkstalker is already a harass/combat hybrid). You won't beat them.
And it's the same with stargate units. You don't ENGAGE even armies of marines or hydralisks with them. You try to do damage in his base and pin him there. The fact simply is, that it is easy to deny this kind of harass most of the time. If the Oracle can make the harass continue, we will see PvZ with Protoss having mapcontrol... THAT would be a good way to improve Protoss gameplay.
But I guess some players would rather just have more options to sacrifice units on mineral lines, then to improve good concepts that are out there right now, but too wacky to be called stable.
|
On November 03 2011 00:34 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On November 03 2011 00:00 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 23:00 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:On November 02 2011 21:15 Toadvine wrote:In any case, if HotS is supposed to add units that shore up weaknesses of the races, then the Terran and Zerg units do make sense in this context. Terran units serve to make mech a viable playstyle in all matchups, for example by giving Hellions the option to act as proper meatshields for Tanks. Zerg units allow them to break entrenched positions more easily, and generally achieve pressure without sacrificing tons of units. In light of this, the new Protoss units are a total joke, they don't solve Protoss problems at all. Well, you can Replicate a Siege Tank and maybe defend 1/1/1, so that's nice I suppose. :/ HotS is not supposed to do anything but sell well for blizzard. If you argue that further, it means that it should be interesting to buy it, so the game should be fun to play and balanced on high level of play. What the game doesn't need, is 3races that all have no weaknesses and play similar. Races in SC2 aren't supposed to have no weaknesses and play similar. But they also aren't supposed to be WoW classes that are only good at one thing, and have glaring holes in their arsenal. The weaknesses we do want are the ones that produce interesting gameplay. Zerg not being able to break a turtling Terran even when at a huge advantage was a bad weakness that led to stupid games. An entire Terran tech tree being unusuable in TvP was a bad weakness, so units were added to help that. Protoss had no effective means to harass in the early to mid game, and were extremely reliant on expensive tech to keep them on par with core Zerg/Terran units. This is a bad weakness, because it produces boring gameplay, where the Protoss sits in his base with no map control and just defends and masses up. So, units were added to help this... oh wait. Stargate openings vs Zerg? It's just that it seems like this techpath isn't viable further. That's why they try to make it more viable. Also: why should they give Protoss a pure early(gateway) harassment unit, that is a) hard to balance, due to warp gates b) overlapping with the dt in later stages of the game c) something terrans have; zergs partly have (zerglings harass, but they are not a unit purely designed to do so); so giving it to protoss would just mean that they "want each race to open with hellions vs zerg". It's a unique thing to have hellion openings as terran. Don't let them ruin the game with each race having the same basic strategy, just with different units. d) not necessary if they already make a spell like mass recall, which will basically make your whole army a big harrassment composition On November 02 2011 22:38 Toadvine wrote:On November 02 2011 21:54 Big J wrote:
Zergs and Terrans also don't just get units that counteract weaknesses that are intended to be there. But Mech was intended to be playable in TvP, giving them battlehellions and warhounds might fix that.
Mass Thor in ZvT wasn't intended to be playable, that's why the Thor has to go and make space for a unit that is worse vs roaches.
And Zerg was intended to be one of the more aggressive races. In the alpha and beta days when people weren't that great at that game, the general opinion was that zerg was THE pressuring race, running all over the place and denying expos.
Protoss was intended to work well on Stargate tech, that's why they are trying to fix that with oracles and tempests.
Also, Protoss ground tech gets HUGE buffs through the mass recall. Like artosis said: In the current state of the game, he would ALWAYS build an extra Nexus just to have ONE mass recall, because then he could just be out on the map and harass the hell out of everything, for 400 extra minerals... Recall is actually one great thing about HotS, and is way better than our new units combined. I'd trade all of them just to keep the current Recall in the game, which will no doubt get nerfed hard at some point in the beta. However, the point about Stargate tech is retarded. The problem with Stargate was that the units weren't very good in direct army vs army engagements. So, this problem is solved by adding a unit that doesn't attack, and a unit that is only good vs mass air? So in SC:BW Protoss players only went corsairs because they were so good vs hydralisks? No. Zerg players go for mass muta play vs terran because they are obviously soooo strong vs marines the main unit in standard biomech compositions? HELL NO! The problem isn't that Stargate tech is bad in combats. The problem is that Stargate tech and the complete airfleet that a Protoss invested into becomes useless in the midgame. (unlike corsairs in SC:BW) An Oracle would definatly help, because an oracle does never get useless, assuming that it doesn't die from 3spore shots. A Tempest is at least a try to give Protoss a flaggship that is playable. The carrier is not. So it has to go. The Tempest is at least a unit that will be fooled around with anew, before people decide if it is viable or not. Sorry, but at this point, I'm pretty sure you don't understand what you're talking about at all. The exact problem with Stargate, in both PvT and PvZ, is that if it doesn't do enough damage, it is simply awful for its cost in a direct army vs army fight. Do you know what good Zergs do when they see a Stargate opening? They spore up, make tons of drones to saturate 3 bases, and then just make a shitload of roaches and lings to deny the Protoss third. Do you know what Terrans do? They expand, go up to 5-6 raxes, and then push with stim/combat shields done, and kill the Protoss natural. The problem is very clearly that the units aren't good enough. And you even bring up Mutalisks, the perfect example of how this kind of unit can work well. Mutas have amazing combat utility compared to Phoenix/VRs. In fact, Zerg players often continue massing Mutas throughout the whole game, just because of how good they are as a core army unit. Stargate openings being standard in BW is kind of a moot point, since SC2 Protoss is way different from BW Protoss (in fact, SC2 Terran is more similar to BW Protoss). NO. Stargate units not being core combat units is not the problem. Making them core combat units COULD BE a solution. Making them able to harass an opponent, pin him in his base and delay pushes, a much more interesting one. I play zerg at masters league, and I can tell you that if you go Mutalisks as "core army unit", you are fucked. Play a game with zerg and engage a Marineball with mutalisks... Engage a blinkstalker ball with mutalisks. Engage mass thor with mutalisks. THOSE are combat units (and the blinkstalker is already a harass/combat hybrid). You won't beat them. And it's the same with stargate units. You don't ENGAGE even armies of marines or hydralisks with them. You try to do damage in his base and pin him there. The fact simply is, that it is easy to deny this kind of harass most of the time. If the Oracle can make the harass continue, we will see PvZ with Protoss having mapcontrol... THAT would be a good way to improve Protoss gameplay. But I guess some players would rather just have more options to sacrifice units on mineral lines, then to improve good concepts that are out there right now, but too wacky to be called stable.
Let's not pretend that mutas don't have combat value. Mutas aren't bad against stalkers (when factoring in the resource advantage Z gets due to his map control) and they're an essential component for defending marine-tank pushes.
Mutas, like banshees, are not strong for cost in combat, but they're a lot better than phoenixes. The oracle, as proposed, is way behind the phoenix.
|
I guess the biggest problem is that Blizzard has no idea what do to, there are tons of harassments you can do as a toss, but no one wants to use it, because it costs micro and you cannot afford to lose it. Sounds like mutas to me. Anyway toss was always the race that defended their territory and teched up behind it, that way they could get an advantage. What could you do in bw, get dts get corsairs (they don't even have a ground attack) tech up to reaver shuttle. (reaver have 1 nice upgrade and shuttle also have one + you need observer tech as well, and you can lose your shuttle to one wraith (they are out at the same time and have a chance to intercept the shuttle over no drop land)).
Sounds to me exactly like the protoss in sc2 and i like them that way. To bad Blizzard listens to the community and wants to go away from the protoss deathball, made the race so cool to play and fight against in bw. I wish they would never have made air tech viable in sc2 and would have left it a nice gimmick. Currently you can't build a ground based army since most races can just do a sudden air switch for a few ressources and fight the anti air head on.
I don't think all 3 toss units will make it live, the tempest is probably the only one. Harassment wise the biggest change is the toss ability to recall units midgame now making the warp prism more scary, being able to warp in a small army and save it at the same time, just at the cost of a few chrono boosts. Also increases the chance to win a basetrade scenario or atleast able to turn around.
Oracle is nice to get early game and harass over the whole game. Don't have an issue with them they will work just fine if you don't want to go for timing attacks. I will still prefer the phoenix and warp prism though, but if i ever manage to control another unit aside i will of course get the oracle.
Just start to think like a dieing high tech race, they don't throw lives away like you want them too.
Oh and i will get them off course against the zerg late game spine wall, since the mothership will be gone, the only way to get around that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
