|
On October 12 2012 08:13 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 08:03 aZealot wrote:
Those are terrible examples. In what game would I expect my Chargelots to win against a Marine ball of that size with stim and medivac support? My Stalker heavy Stalker/Immortal ball will lose to a Roach army which is able to get a concave on my army in an open field. I am not sure why I should expect otherwise. Biased examples do not help your post.
You shouldn't expect to win either of those fights--it's actually guaranteed that you won't win either of those fights. My point was simply to illustrate that Protoss depends on forcefields and tech units to win battles. If they don't have the right combination of forcefields and tech units, they lose badly even if they match their opponent's army value. That's not to say that Protoss is weaker than the other races--they just have to play to take advantage of forcefields and tech units. And I think the consequences of that requirement are bad for the game.
But, equally, you might also argue for the converse. That Terran upgrades + production are too strong or that Zerg production is too plentiful, too fast. It's really these factors that mean that Protoss gateway units must have some tech advantage (be it +1 and charge; or Colossus/HT/Archon for the two Medivac timing etc). It's because Zerg production is so plentiful that Protoss need Sentries and FF (and simcity for the Roach max etc). This dance of respective racial strength vs weakness at points in the game is hardwired into the game, true. But, if so, it is not specific to Protoss, IMO. So, any substantive change like those you seem to suggest above would have to be sweeping - more sweeping than you appear to realise.
|
On October 12 2012 08:13 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 08:03 aZealot wrote:
Those are terrible examples. In what game would I expect my Chargelots to win against a Marine ball of that size with stim and medivac support? My Stalker heavy Stalker/Immortal ball will lose to a Roach army which is able to get a concave on my army in an open field. I am not sure why I should expect otherwise. Biased examples do not help your post.
You shouldn't expect to win either of those fights--it's actually guaranteed that you won't win either of those fights. My point was simply to illustrate that Protoss depends on forcefields and tech units to win battles. If they don't have the right combination of forcefields and tech units, they lose badly even if they match their opponent's army value. That's not to say that Protoss is weaker than the other races--they just have to play to take advantage of forcefields and tech units. And I think the consequences of that requirement are bad for the game.
That's my problem with Protoss, you are required to get core units that cost a lot of gas to survive, which in turn limits the choices you can make in tech down the road AND limits how you can use those units since they cost so much.
I can't advocate free hallucination as someone said. That's too strong 
I think that a lot of problems would be solved if cannons were mobile again like they were in early WoL. Either that or shield batteries that are a mineral sink but don't serve the same role as other mineral sinks (zealots, WPs).
|
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out.
|
On October 12 2012 09:18 xDaunt wrote:
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out.
The Stalker is a fast, tier 1 unit that can attack air, has good range, and has bonus damage vs armor. It can be warped in across the map and resources can quickly be dumped into them. It can also be buffed with blink. This is not a unit you want any stronger. Stalker-heavy compositions are part of what makes the three Protoss match-ups so boring to watch. You should want to reduce Stalker play from its current levels, not increase it.
|
On October 12 2012 09:27 unteqair wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 09:18 xDaunt wrote:
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out. The Stalker is a fast, tier 1 unit that can attack air, has good range, and has bonus damage vs armor. It can be warped in across the map and resources can quickly be dumped into them. It can also be buffed with blink. This is not a unit you want any stronger. Stalker-heavy compositions are part of what makes the three Protoss match-ups so boring to watch. You should want to reduce Stalker play from its current levels, not increase it.
The stalker doesn't perform well the longer the game goes on. For the only staple unit out of the gateway that has the right amount of range, it's exceedingly weak for it's cost.
|
|
|
On October 12 2012 09:27 unteqair wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 09:18 xDaunt wrote:
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out. The Stalker is a fast, tier 1 unit that can attack air, has good range, and has bonus damage vs armor. It can be warped in across the map and resources can quickly be dumped into them. It can also be buffed with blink. This is not a unit you want any stronger. Stalker-heavy compositions are part of what makes the three Protoss match-ups so boring to watch. You should want to reduce Stalker play from its current levels, not increase it.
Stalkers (even with blink) also get rocked for cost by marines, marauders, roaches, speedlings, hydras or chargelots. Let's not act like stalkers are on the brink of becoming OP.
|
Yep, this thread is sort of a response to that thread.
|
I feel one of the primary culprits of keeping Gateway units weaker is the inherent advantages of Warpgate. With it, there is no way without drastic fundamental changes to gameplay, that Gateway units can be stronger without horribly breaking the game.
|
On October 12 2012 09:41 ktimekiller wrote:
I feel one of the primary culprits of keeping Gateway units weaker is the inherent advantages of Warpgate. With it, there is no way without drastic fundamental changes to gameplay, that Gateway units can be stronger without horribly breaking the game.
Sure, just nerf forcefield. Then Terran holds rushes easily with bunkers. Immortal/sentry gets weaker--the rush that gets stronger is 7 gate, which isn't hard to hold anyway unless you're late with your roach warren.
|
On October 12 2012 09:27 unteqair wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 09:18 xDaunt wrote:
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out. The Stalker is a fast, tier 1 unit that can attack air, has good range, and has bonus damage vs armor. It can be warped in across the map and resources can quickly be dumped into them. It can also be buffed with blink. This is not a unit you want any stronger. Stalker-heavy compositions are part of what makes the three Protoss match-ups so boring to watch. You should want to reduce Stalker play from its current levels, not increase it.
I agree that balancing the stalker is tough because of its mobility. I'm just pointing out that it utterly fails in situations where it has to form the backbone of an army in the mid to late game. Also, the problems with PvP go beyond just the stalker.
|
Hope you don't mind, but I posted on the official forums directing to this post.
|
I wonder, would anyone play a Protoss with no forcefields, no warpins but stronger t1?
I'm not sure how I feel about this. I wonder how TvP would work. Would stronger gateway units + stalker speed mean T would just be cooped up in his base until medivacs?
How would toss t3 be adjusted?
If t3 is nerfed, would this do the exact opposite of encouraging varied, macro oriented play from Protoss and encourage more blinkstalker allins because of buffed gateway units and reduced gas spending on sentries to stay safe?
|
I don't know about re-design, but I read on bnet forums (a blue post made 2 days ago) that Protoss is getting some buffs soon. I hope it's something nice.
|
On October 12 2012 09:32 kcdc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 09:27 unteqair wrote:On October 12 2012 09:18 xDaunt wrote:
Yeah, this has been an issue since beta. Nothing new really. However, my criticism from back then focused solely upon the stalker. It simply is a pathetically weak unit in terms of combat power. I don't think that zealots are really any different than their SC1 counterparts. The problem with gateway units being generally weaker than their terran and zerg counterparts is the stalker. Yes, as others have pointed out, Protoss tech offsets this disadvantage to help make the game "balanced," but there are obvious problems with the current equilibrium as kcdc points out. The Stalker is a fast, tier 1 unit that can attack air, has good range, and has bonus damage vs armor. It can be warped in across the map and resources can quickly be dumped into them. It can also be buffed with blink. This is not a unit you want any stronger. Stalker-heavy compositions are part of what makes the three Protoss match-ups so boring to watch. You should want to reduce Stalker play from its current levels, not increase it. Stalkers (even with blink) also get rocked for cost by marines, marauders, roaches, speedlings, hydras or chargelots. Let's not act like stalkers are on the brink of becoming OP.
If you make Stalkers trade well in terms of cost to these units, then what happens? Every game will be mass Stalker. The combination of being able to hit air, the speed, being able to blink, the range, and being able to be quickly warped in and to have minerals dumped into them will not allow for a buff. Add in FF's and there is an even larger restriction on their being buffed.
I could definitely understand buffing them to be cost-effective against other ground units if they were less versatile, say if they couldn't hit air units, but as it is the measure would be unwarranted.
|
Your examples, as people have mentioned before, are really really biased just to "prove" your point. This is exactly when protoss is at its weakest. How about trying some smaller food comparisons? Wanna guess who wins between 2 chargelots and 4 stim/combat shield marines? How bout 2 stim/conc marauders vs 1 chargelot 1 stalker? How bout 1 immortal 1 zealot vs 4 roaches 2 speedlings? 1 immortal 1 stalker vs 5 roaches?
You could also use the same method to prove zerglings REALLY REALLY need buffing because a similar number of marines and medivacs would decimate an equal cost number of zerglings.
Edit: Also roaches need a buff because 8 marauders 2 medivacs can beat 14 roaches.
|
|
|
On October 12 2012 12:08 boxman22 wrote:
Your examples, as people have mentioned before, are really really biased just to "prove" your point. This is exactly when protoss is at its weakest. How about trying some smaller food comparisons? Wanna guess who wins between 2 chargelots and 4 stim/combat shield marines? How bout 2 stim/conc marauders vs 1 chargelot 1 stalker? How bout 1 immortal 1 zealot vs 4 roaches 2 speedlings? 1 immortal 1 stalker vs 5 roaches?
You could also use the same method to prove zerglings REALLY REALLY need buffing because a similar number of marines and medivacs would decimate an equal cost number of zerglings.
Edit: Also roaches need a buff because 8 marauders 2 medivacs can beat 14 roaches.
The marines would win I believe, with stutter stepping. A larger amount would see the marines winning even more severely.
The two marauders win easily.
The immortal zealot would probably just win. I should hope so as immortal is the direct counter to roach.
The roaches would probably barely win by focusing the immortal. Either way it would be very close, which isn't too good as the immortal is the roach's direct counter and the roaches collectively are cheaper than the immortal zealot.
Just to add, I personally don't agree with the OP's solutions, but I certainly agree with his issues.
|
On October 12 2012 12:08 boxman22 wrote:
Your examples, as people have mentioned before, are really really biased just to "prove" your point. This is exactly when protoss is at its weakest. How about trying some smaller food comparisons? Wanna guess who wins between 2 chargelots and 4 stim/combat shield marines? How bout 2 stim/conc marauders vs 1 chargelot 1 stalker? How bout 1 immortal 1 zealot vs 4 roaches 2 speedlings? 1 immortal 1 stalker vs 5 roaches?
You could also use the same method to prove zerglings REALLY REALLY need buffing because a similar number of marines and medivacs would decimate an equal cost number of zerglings.
Edit: Also roaches need a buff because 8 marauders 2 medivacs can beat 14 roaches.
That's cute and all, but you'll notice he didn't send zealots against roaches, he sent Immortals and Stalkers.
And you'll notice that he used charge-zealots against marines and not stalkers against Marauders. The point I'm making is that these are the units you tend to *want* to use against marines and roaches - whereas you never want to use lings against marines.
Regarding your smaller army comparisons, they're a bit silly because those army sizes don't exist when you have charge, or Immortals, or stim/combat shields. It might be comforting for you to know that 3 microed marauders beat a Colossus by itself, but it also might not - because when does this ever happen in a real game?
|
On October 12 2012 12:24 Yaeryn wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2012 12:08 boxman22 wrote:
Your examples, as people have mentioned before, are really really biased just to "prove" your point. This is exactly when protoss is at its weakest. How about trying some smaller food comparisons? Wanna guess who wins between 2 chargelots and 4 stim/combat shield marines? How bout 2 stim/conc marauders vs 1 chargelot 1 stalker? How bout 1 immortal 1 zealot vs 4 roaches 2 speedlings? 1 immortal 1 stalker vs 5 roaches?
You could also use the same method to prove zerglings REALLY REALLY need buffing because a similar number of marines and medivacs would decimate an equal cost number of zerglings.
Edit: Also roaches need a buff because 8 marauders 2 medivacs can beat 14 roaches. The marines would win I believe, with stutter stepping. A larger amount would see the marines winning even more severely. The two marauders win easily. The immortal zealot would probably just win. I should hope so as immortal is the direct counter to roach. 1 immortal 1 stalker, the roaches would probably win. Just focus immortal. And collectively the roaches are cheaper too. Just to add, I personally don't agree with the OP's solutions, but I certainly agree with his issues.
I tested them all. Without any micro every case the toss wins. Even with micro toss wins both cases of zerg. And not sure who would win with stutter stepping the marines. My attempt at stutterstepping the lots still won.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
