| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20323 Posts
None of this changes the fact that 7-gate blink kills Zergs with no force fields needed. Address that concern before you go praising Stalker buffs as necessary for the good of the game. That is simply not the case, FFE-Blink all-ins are terrible without forcefields if zerg plays correctly | ||
|
nebula.
Sweden1431 Posts
On October 12 2012 12:52 XXXSmOke wrote: A great post here, "Protoss simultaneously feels unbeatably strong and unwinnably weak." Great quote, exactly how I feel when I play vs P. This is the last thing you want in any RTS is a race that is purely gimmicky, yet thats what we get in SC2. Bottom line, Its not fun to play vs Toss, and it is certainly not fun to be toss. A reworked Protoss, could solve a lot of the issues the game has. lol this is so true. ZvP is so fucking frustrating against 3+ base toss and when I lose against it I go play toss on ladder and lose to such basic stuff. >_> | ||
|
Fenris420
Sweden213 Posts
| ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
| ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On October 13 2012 02:17 Cyro wrote: That is simply not the case, FFE-Blink all-ins are terrible without forcefields if zerg plays correctly Ok, "no force fields" may be a bit of an exaggeration, but anything short of a complete removal of the skill does not justify a gateway unit buff. Equally so. If you remove force fields, you largely remove all modern Protoss openings, I don't even know if 1 gate expos would even work. Force field is kind of the core of the entire race. One does not simply remove the skill on a whim. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
Force fields are problematic to the balance of the game, but Gateway units are JUST weak enough to not be OP when you look at the numbers. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20323 Posts
On October 13 2012 02:38 Jermstuddog wrote: Still more problematic. Since I'm delving into the realm of actually removing force field, is the Zealot. If you give it even 1 more damage on it's standard attack, Zerglings become essentially worthless in the ZvP MU, and we would likely see 4-gates come back around with a vengeance as even a handful of Zealots would mow through Zerglings like crazy. Force fields are problematic to the balance of the game, but Gateway units are JUST weak enough to not be OP when you look at the numbers. Which is why they lose horribly to bio and roaches? Read the OP | ||
|
RehnFreemark
Italy144 Posts
On October 13 2012 02:38 Jermstuddog wrote: Still more problematic. Since I'm delving into the realm of actually removing force field, is the Zealot. If you give it even 1 more damage on it's standard attack, Zerglings become essentially worthless in the ZvP MU, and we would likely see 4-gates come back around with a vengeance as even a handful of Zealots would mow through Zerglings like crazy. Force fields are problematic to the balance of the game, but Gateway units are JUST weak enough to not be OP when you look at the numbers. What most people don't realize is that when you tweak a unit in starcraft you are not upsetting just the balance of your race, your are upsetting the whole game, with a cascade effect on the rest of the units and strategies of the other races. This is why I feel threads like "remove force field" or "remove colossi" or "change warpgate tech" are utterly useless, they generally try to imagine how to balance the changes within their race, but not in the context of their opponents. This said, the problem will protoss in SC2 in SC2 is and always will be the same: they are supposed to be the expensive but strong race, the one that the more money (and time) you put into, the stronger it gets compared to the opponents. But the reality is that it's only the most expensive, it doesn't get stronger compared to the others (zerg in wol, for example, are way better in late game, and with terran the problem is not being strong or not, is just a question of landing the right storms or the right EMPs, as the OP correctly stated). The only two realistic solutions for this situation I could see, short of a rework of the entire race, is either a nerf in unit costs for some Protoss units (immortals, to name just one) OR some surgical nerfs to other races' units, specifically zerg, to make them way more vulnerable in late game to protoss. Or, as a last possibility, foregoing the initial idea for the P race and just add more early game capabilities to give them more early game harassment and the possibility to end the game in early-mid stages without resorting necessarily to all ins. | ||
|
Yoshmaista
United States18 Posts
That combined with a fungal range of only 7 (therefore making it EQUAL to feedback and one hex LESS than colossi with range, letting both strategies have a chance to taking out infestors) would balance the matchup fairly well IMO. | ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On October 13 2012 02:57 Cyro wrote: Which is why they lose horribly to bio and roaches? Read the OP I'm not talking about Terran here, I will agree that bio is bullshit, but I would go about changing things with bio in my perfect world, not gateway units. Back to the ZvP relationship. Zealots don't lose horribly to roaches. In the current game, they lose due to the roaches speed and range, but if you blindly 1A them vs each other, equal numbers of Zealots will largely break even or even come out ahead. Not bad for a mineral-only investment. Now here's where the problem comes when you suggest stat buffs to Zealots AND Stalkers to make up for the loss of force field. Zealots will make Zerglings useless. Hell, even upping Stalker damage vs light to 12 makes Zerglings useless as they now kill them in 3 shots instead of 4 (part of why the +2 blink timings are so powerful). So, since Zealots with even 1 addition damage in the current game ALREADY shut down lings, you can't buff their damage without effectively removing lings from ZvP. Stalkers ALREADY win vs Roaches in any equal-supply fights and their cost-effectiveness scales up insanely with the addition of Blink, so I guess you can't buff there either... Where exactly are you going to buff gateway units without screwing the whole ZvP MU? | ||
|
Archybaldie
United Kingdom818 Posts
Recently, I've phased phoenixes out of my play in PvZ because it wasnt as safe as using immortals to try and transition into a macro game. The biggest kick in the balls was last season. Through plat/low-mid diamond PvT was my best matchup. Last season i dropped to 24% in PvT. There was 1 common theme through out the whole season. I'd play too aggressive id pressure and it wouldnt work or i'd over extend occasionally and be disproportionatly punished. In PvP/PvZ where i feel i can fall behind and micro my way out of a bad situation in PvT that just seems much less viable without aoe i can't get enough out of my units. So i've switched to a VERY passive style of PvT and its really dramatically helped my winrates. But honestly its just not nearly as much fun as it was in before. All in all its felt like i've been punished for having an aggressive playstyle as protoss. Things i've enjoyed in the past i cant really use anymore. I do feel the game is balanced, or at the very least balance has NEVER been the reason why i've lost a game. Protoss just doesn't seem to be balanced around my playstyle or things i find enjoyable. But for some reason i stick to protoss because i think warp gates are kinda fun, Blink micro is pretty awesome, and that moment where you lay the perfect set of forcefields is possibly the greatest feeling ever. Not to mention i still <3 white-ra. Maybe i should switch races because i have a pretty solid terran and zerg (going by sc2gears i almost never miss an inject  ) but i still kinda maintain that soft spot i have for protoss. | ||
|
Rorschach
United States623 Posts
| ||
|
TheMads
48 Posts
| ||
|
washikie
United States752 Posts
If terran start to mech than some of the core issues in tvp that make the map a nr 15 style match i think will be resolved: 1. in mech tvp map control matters again, one of the things i notice about tvp that differentiates it from tvz and tvt is that taking and maintaining a dominant position on the field maters alot less, a protoss or Terran army at home is just as good as threatening as one near your base were as in the other matches a t with siege tanks creeping to a zergs 4th is alot more frightening than a t at home in a defensive position,. But with mech now a terran at your base or conversely a p with tempests near your is alot more of a threat than if they are back home chilling, this also means that back stabs are alot more of a threat and can happen with more frequency as players may try to aquire map control so that they can limit their opponents expos. 2 protoss in now the aggressor. You might think that this just means that now Terran will turtle even harder than they do already however, because mech is alot slower than a protoss army the opportunity for p to be aggressive, do dmg and than run away become more interesting and create a dynamic that forces the mech player to carfuly distribute their forces it also makes map control via mines important for t as if they have this control they can keep more of their army together. Most importantly this change makes the power of gate way units less relevant than their mobility which is something the poses in spades, with warp in blink and warp prisms p has alot of ability to quickly build and launch raids on undefended Terran locations, effectively solving some of the boring turtly problems p has without making any major changes to gateway units. 3. The death ball mat still be their but its a more interesting death ball, colossus ht might give way to a slow air army combined with a nimble gate way army, also any battle that involves mech and besieging it i feel tends to create less battles that end in under 30 seconds. I like how tempests kill things slowly but from a distance so that p does not have to dive mech to kill it off and mech does not have to instantly charge p if they start getting hit by tempests. 4. Because mech cant really kill or push a protoss in the early game like bio can P does not need to build sentrys. Iin addition sentrys are not good vs mech ff is not great vs mech, they move slowly and are rather fragile, instead i think p will be more encouraged to use aggressive and mobile stalker strats. Another affect of mechs slow and fragile buildup is that p can get a third before they are forced into teching really hard, and more money means more gateway units to use in multipronged raids. I think all of these potential changes in the meta will make tvp alot better in other words i think that if bliz can balance widow mines so that they make mech viable without making it op and terran are attracted to mech that the match will take on a style much more reminiscent of the way brood war tvp played out wich at least i think is alot better than the current tvp of today, as it is more dynamic, more cerebral, and more exiting to play and watch. As for tvz i honestly don't know enoph to comment on it and how hots might improve it. | ||
|
Paincarnate
115 Posts
To add: Warp-in mechanic. One of the reasons gateway units are so weak is because they can be warped in, as opposed to being built at barracks/hatcheries (think 4-gate). If anything, this is the biggest issue why blizzard can't just straight up remove forcefields and tweak zealots/stalkers to compensate. | ||
Chill
Calgary25991 Posts
| ||
|
D_K_night
Canada615 Posts
On October 12 2012 08:01 willoc wrote: That Marine vs. Chargelot scenario bothers me because you added Medivacs using Healing but did not add Sentries using Guardian Shield. Same. It doesn't appear to be a fair comparison when you combine marines(tier 1) together with medivacs(tier 2.5), against just chargelots alone. So you have marines + support unit, vs unsupported chargelots. The numbers don't appear to work out. Chargelots in a vacuum, which only cost minerals, versus the marines + medivac which is minerals and gas. | ||
|
Digitalis
United States1043 Posts
On October 12 2012 07:49 tokinho wrote: Another thing is that a lot of terrans struggle with tier three games, but you watch and the trend has not been to use ghosts or ravens. WTF?!!!! Watch MVP, byun, taeja and marineking own with these units. EMP is sooo sick. You can cast two emps and remove all shields/ 12 infestors energy. vs broods get like 4-5 ghosts snipe overseer, stim marines- broods die, or raven viking sooo sick. Taeja recently commented on this, making ghosts makes the terran a victim for a ultralisk transition and ever since the EMP radius nerf the emp will hit like 3-4 infestors at the most... not 12 | ||
|
oOOoOphidian
United States1402 Posts
| ||
|
Jermstuddog
United States2231 Posts
On October 13 2012 04:11 Digitalis wrote: Taeja recently commented on this, making ghosts makes the terran a victim for a ultralisk transition and ever since the EMP radius nerf the emp will hit like 3-4 infestors at the most... not 12 While Ravens are becoming more important in late-game TvZ, I don't think Ghosts really have a place after the massive nerf to snipe. If snipe hit for 30 or 35, you would have a case for why they are still good, but 25 damage snipes make ghosts basically worthless against anything that doesn't have light and/or psionic as modifiers. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Korean StarCraft League
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
HomeStory Cup
Replay Cast
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Invitational
The PondCast
WardiTV Invitational
|
|
|
EPT
