| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
doggy
Germany306 Posts
But dudes lets be honest. All Z and P unitbalance there is revolves around sentries and infestors, this goes especially for protoss. By deleting or changing those three units, blizzard would need to completly redesign the unitbalance for protoss and also for zerg. That would need so much work and time (= money).. i dont think blizzard is going to invest that. Btw, correct me if im wrong, but blizzard never said anywhere that they have the intention to change forcefields, fungals and MS right? | ||
|
Nyast
Belgium554 Posts
If you buf core gateway units and nerf the sentry, suddenly all the typical Protoss all-ins become too powerful. Therefore the solution I'm proposing is a change to the warp mechanics. It's really simple: units produced from a gateway are stronger than units produced from a warpgate and produced faster. Unfortunately you'd end up with 2 variants of the same unit with different stats, which would make everything a bit too complex/hard to implement. So if we keep the same unit stats, the two variables that we can play with are cost and production time. So I'm proposing that gateway units produce 25% faster and cost 25% less than warpgate units. | ||
|
MilesTeg
France1271 Posts
| ||
|
Cloak
United States816 Posts
| ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On October 25 2012 00:08 doggy wrote: I also feel like the MS needs to be removed, and the way fungals and forcefields work needs to be changed to. But dudes lets be honest. All Z and P unitbalance there is revolves around sentries and infestors, this goes especially for protoss. By deleting or changing those three units, blizzard would need to completly redesign the unitbalance for protoss and also for zerg. That would need so much work and time (= money).. i dont think blizzard is going to invest that. Btw, correct me if im wrong, but blizzard never said anywhere that they have the intention to change forcefields, fungals and MS right? Up until a week ago, I had agreed with this position 100%, but then it occurred to me that removing forcefield wouldn't be nearly as game-breaking as I'd thought. First, I realized that zealots and stalkers are really only weak against marines and roaches which are by far and away the most cost-effective ranged units in the game. If you tweak marines and roaches slightly (I'm now thinking that +25 minerals to roach cost is slightly too much and that +15 would be better), there's a good chance that you can solve the problem for zealots and stalkers without forcefields. Add to this that in HOTS, you have purify to defend early timings and with the MSC's soft detection, you can safely get out charge, blink and upgrades faster, and I think there's an opportunity for zealots and stalkers to really shine in HoTS without forcefields. I don't think the changes would have to be that big, and I'd love if they would just play around with some ideas to make it work. Forcefield hurts the game by forcing bases to be squished together which in turn limits harassment and activity in the first 10-15 minutes of the game. It also prevents retreats which punishes players for being active with their army and poking up the ramp to see if they can do damage. And forcefields encourage colossus-based compositions, which are powerful in a setting where you turtle for a long time and then move your army out in one cohesive ball. If you removed forcefields, Protoss would be much more encouraged to split their forces and be active in midgame. If you're not sure whether that's true, watch some PvT's where P opens colossi and then watch some where P opens templar. You'll see how much more active and fun to watch the templar games are and how much less important forcefields are. | ||
|
Seiniyta
Belgium1815 Posts
| ||
|
kcdc
United States2311 Posts
On October 25 2012 01:25 Seiniyta wrote: I love using Forcefield as a protoss, and I like how unforgiving it is really. Though I do want it re-adjusted so it only lasts 5 ingame seconds but has a lower energy cost. You really love that you instantly lose if you happen to be looking at your base building something at the wrong moment? Granted, I've learned to look at my army 95% of the time when there's any possibility that Zerg will engage and I only suffer the bad luck late forcefields in maybe 1 out of 5 or 10 games, but I don't see how anyone could possibly think this is a fun or even fair mechanic. Also, if anyone has beta access and is motivated to get these issues looked at by the designers, the bnet thread has fallen pretty far down the forums, and it could use a bump. People just don't read long posts. Maybe I should tried to break each of these issues out into separate threads. Anyway, if you'd like to help out and keep the discussion alive, add a reply here: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/6934186078 Something positive or asking for a developer's thoughts would be great. | ||
|
FrogOfWar
Germany1406 Posts
| ||
|
Topdoller
United Kingdom3860 Posts
On October 24 2012 08:24 TheFish7 wrote: How about this instead? Infestor --> removed and replaced with Defiler Roach --> removed and replaced with cheaper hydralisks Mothership ---> removed and replaced with Arbiter Broodlord --> removed and replaced with Guardian Problem solved Hmmmm interesting unit ideas, you should work for Blizzard, those changes would probably turn SC into the greatest RTS of all time  | ||
|
Markwerf
Netherlands3728 Posts
Nerfing the roach like that makes 6-7 gates +1 attacks that don't use sentries unstoppable. Roaches are the only unit at the moment that deal with that by not being super vulnerable to +1 zealots etc. Retooling some other stuff could work but it's difficult. Many other of the proposed changes probably just break the game too like buffing voidrays like that and changing fungal. There was a time where voidray/colossi was basically unbeatable by just going standard colossus expansion play and gradually buidling a voidray ball to harass with, with such long range and no fungals to root in place that kind of play would be unstoppable for zerg.. Overall I really think most 'problems' mentioned in this thread here are moot. Sentries are somewhat of a dull unit when massed but they also have huge vulnerabilities by becoming bad when stuff enters the game that ignores mass FF like infestors for example. The elegant way to fix sentries imo is just improve the abilities/units that actually warrant mass sentries useless. At the moment mass sentry is only used in PvZ and occasionally PvT anyway: - in PvZ it can be nerfed easily by just giving zerg more options to counteract it early game, for example burrow movement for roaches could get a buff. Another option is to disable forcefield on creep making in an awesome defensive spell but not really much of an aggresive one (buff hallucination in response for example). I'm not even sure sentries remain a problem with the swarm host, it seems easy enough to tech too in time for many of the attacks that use critical amounts of sentries. - in PvT I don't think sentries are an issue at all anymore. With purify for defensive boost you can play perfectly fine without sentres (you don't need to box to stop stim timings anymore), with widow mine as defensive option sentries are no longer such a frustating offensive threat either anymore, besides aggresive options should be possible right? - in PvP sentries have never been a problem, you make 0-2 at most, just like is ideal for such a unit. The constriction on map design is definately true but is only a real issue in PvZ for HotS imo. I think with more defensive options for each race open thirds etc etc. are a possibility. Ideally P can play about equally fine on any kind of map, ie it must be viable to play sentryless or at least without forcefields. I truly believe that is already an option for PvP and PvT in HotS, so only some change is needed for PvZ in that regard, ie you need to be able to play on very open maps too without having to resort to 2 base all-ins only. With purify defending the third becomes more of an option but stays hard, the best option is just to buff strategies that actually work well on open maps, for example make zealot/immortal + air viable or make DT/phoenix a real option etc. The oracle could fit a good spot here by having some spell that synergizes with melee or is especially good on open maps. Just buffing the DT would work too I think, I believe it deserves a buff anyway given how easy detection is for each race now. The fungal change looks good though, changing the root to a slow should be good and not effect gameplay too much otherwise (but don't simultaneously buff voids!). Ofcourse I'm in favor of removing the mothership, it's just a terrible unit that turns long games into a very unsatisfying single coinflippy fight. Winning because you land a good archon toilet or losing because your mothership is out of position is utterly frustating. Mothership and mothership core should both be banned, terribly unfun units both.. tl;dr don't change FF just change it's role in PvZ, the rest is fine. Slightly buff protoss' options on open maps to free up map design space and improve versatility, no more is needed imo | ||
|
roffelito
Sweden9 Posts
| ||
|
nmetasch
United States600 Posts
What I believe this will accomplish is it will still allow for hunting down armies, you can chain force field their path, and you can use it to slow units like marines from running up right by you. Obviously other buffed will be needed to deal with things like packs of stimmed units etc. I think that the MS Core and purify ability will adequately defend your natural and third, but to supplement the force field nerf, protoss will need more adequate speedling defense before ms core comes out, so maybe just make ms core easier to acquire. What I would suggest to help MS Core is make it cheaper and come out with gateway tech, then change purify to enable the MS Core to attack on its own, but only within an X distance leash radius of a nexus. It would be a low dps, like that of a zealot or so. It should also buff the armor of the Nexus it is leashed to significantly to prevent it from being quickly focused down. The mothership core could get another ability that works along the lines of protecting workers. Maybe like a 15 second defensive bunker that you can throw your workers into while you react to the attack. This will make it so early speedlings won't just rape you without the ability to force field, but when you have more bases, they can simply run to another base if you do this, because you can only have one MS Core at a time, and it moves pretty slowly. | ||
|
GARcher
Canada294 Posts
| ||
|
Lauriel
United States108 Posts
On one hand, I agree that the luster has worn off of forcefield, fungal, and vortex, and they make for stale, boring matchups. The problem is that protoss and zerg, from top to bottom, are incredibly reliant on these spells. It's not just the units that are the problem. It's the entire tech tree. Collossi for example are slow and incredibly vulnerable. Without a ball armed with forcefields, they simply have very little value. Alternatively, Zerg has very little in the midgame that's a targeted response to protoss mid-game forces, like blink stalkers and zealot/archon outside of Infestors. They simply are the answer to everything pre-collossus, and it's almost entirely because of fungal. As many people have stated, forcefield is absolutely necessary to stop early all ins and mass numbers of roaches. On top of that though, forcefields are critical to being able to stop ling all ins and runbys, and protecting vital structures critical to protoss surviving the early game, especially their wall, from things like baneling all ins. On top of that, taking a 3rd on some maps without forcefield would be borderline impossible. They're less critical in PvT (save for perhaps 1 base immortal busts), but they still allow protoss to be greedy enough to keep up with terran macro while still being prepared for all-ins. It's really not just roaches (although those are the most dire need for them) - it's early game security in general. I truly don't think that a minor marine nerf and a minor roach nerf is enough to make up for the huge loss of synergy between forcefield and the other gateway units, and making the sentry purely a defensive unit as recommended by the OP may allow other races to be more active on the map, but it practically eliminates any reasonable way for Protoss to be, outside of cute little tactics that already exist like zealot timings in PvZ. I don't think that's good game design, not just because it pidgeon-holes protoss terribly, but also allows the protoss' opponents to know that there is absolutely nothing that is stopping them from taking a fast 3rd or fast 4th. If forcefield is going to be removed or made a slow, then it's simply impossible (again, in my opinion) to get around the fact that gateway units must be stronger. But, now we have a new problem. Protoss already has many, many 2 base gateway all ins available to them which are very potent, and buffing gateway units would make it nearly impossible for zerg to hold them without playing so safe that they'd be neutering themselves as the game moved on. What do all of these all-ins rely on? Our old friend, Warpgate technology. So what to do with Warpgate? I know many would love it if it were removed entirely, but lets be real - it's not going to happen. Blizzard loves it, and, to be frank, it's a pretty neat mechanic that gives the races some diversity. However, I think that having it available so early is a mistake, as it limits the options blizzard has with tools protoss is allowed to have access to. So, perhaps it should be available from a later tech structure, like perhaps the twilight council. That would allow protoss to still have the strength in the early game to withstand all-ins with proper scouting, and have the ability to take a 3rd with relative ease (as the other races can), but would put a choke on the timings of warpgate all ins. I suspect those all-ins would exist anyway, but they would hit at least 2 minutes later, which should give opponents ample time to respond and defend. One possible problem with this would be that things like blink and charge would research much later as well, which could be an issue (though it would require testing to see). Perhaps if make one of these available on a different structure? Just a thought - it might not be needed. As for Fungal, I think there are a number of solutions here. Perhaps a repeatable slow would be effective, or perhaps a short cooldown on how quickly you can fungal the same unit. There are a number of things that can work here, and to be honest, I'm less concerned about the ramifications of this than I am the removal of forcefield or vortex, as even a fungal that slowed by 50% or allowed a 2-3 second reprieve on when a unit could be re-fungaled is very strong. I'm positive that numbers could be tweaked with either of those solutions that would still leave the Infestor a valuable unit. Vortex, unfortunately, is just the only way to defeat a broodlord infestor army at this point without having the time and resources to make a full carrier transition (which, lets be frank, is much harder to achieve than BL/Infestor). The real problem with this army is the double threat of broodlings affecting the pathing units that could potentially be damaging, and of course fungal growth further preventing any sort of aggressive movement. Vortex is the only thing that allows units to even come close to broodlords, but it does it's job too well, and success means you win, failure means you lose. It's quite frustrating as the op points out. I'm not 100% sure of what the solution to replacing vortex is, but I think it would be impacted heavily by how adjusted fungal becomes. Currently I believe the slow is the correct choice, as well as preventing fungal from hitting air (although that might prove to be too strong a nerf), and on top of that, reducing the cost of carriers by 50 gas, and reducing their build time to 90 seconds. On top of that, a minor movement speed buff might be in order for them as well. Wow...wall of text. TL;DR: -You have to buff gateway units if forcefield is removed or turned into a slow. -Gateway units will be too strong if this is done. Compensate by moving wargate technology to the twilight council. -Fungal should be made into a 50% spammable slow, that possibly cannot hit air. -Vortex should be removed and carriers should be made more accessible to allow protoss to be able to effectively combat infestor/broodlord armies. Just my take on it. Fwiw - I agree with basically all of the problems the OP identifies. I think these could be better solutions though. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6228 Posts
On October 25 2012 09:06 Lauriel wrote: TL;DR: -You have to buff gateway units if forcefield is removed or turned into a slow. -Gateway units will be too strong if this is done. Compensate by moving wargate technology to the twilight council. -Fungal should be made into a 50% spammable slow, that possibly cannot hit air. -Vortex should be removed and carriers should be made more accessible to allow protoss to be able to effectively combat infestor/broodlord armies. Just my take on it. Fwiw - I agree with basically all of the problems the OP identifies. I think these could be better solutions though. I'd agree with this, although I'm still not sold on removing forcefield. Also, with the new oracle ability... that's a lotta slow abilities. | ||
|
targ
Malaysia445 Posts
However after some thought I think I get your point - nerf marines and roaches slightly so that zealot/stalker can fight Z and T tier 1 evenly, without the all-or-nothing nature of forcefield engagements so that more small skirmishes early will happen. Then sentry is used mainly for guardian shield and base defence. It sounds quite sensible. There are two things I wonder though. The first is, would this fortify spell lead to alot of proxy pylon/cannon all ins? Since once the spell is casted buildings become invulnerable. Secondly, since marines/roaches are weaker now, would Z and T be able to stand up to the P colossus push with gateway units/storm supporting? | ||
|
GARcher
Canada294 Posts
On October 25 2012 15:49 targ wrote: Initially I was abit confused by your suggestions. Protoss play is too turtley and you suggest that the sentry get a base defense spell? However after some thought I think I get your point - nerf marines and roaches slightly so that zealot/stalker can fight Z and T tier 1 evenly, without the all-or-nothing nature of forcefield engagements so that more small skirmishes early will happen. Then sentry is used mainly for guardian shield and base defence. It sounds quite sensible. There are two things I wonder though. The first is, would this fortify spell lead to alot of proxy pylon/cannon all ins? Since once the spell is casted buildings become invulnerable. Secondly, since marines/roaches are weaker now, would Z and T be able to stand up to the P colossus push with gateway units/storm supporting? T would be completely screwed since they already are disadvantaged in the late game. The proposed changes still causes the same metagame where protoss turtles to deathball and it's up to the Terran to attack and do critical damage before 15 minutes. For Z I don't see much changing other than less allins. | ||
|
Insoleet
France1806 Posts
On October 25 2012 16:11 GARcher wrote: T would be completely screwed since they already are disadvantaged in the late game. The proposed changes still causes the same metagame where protoss turtles to deathball and it's up to the Terran to attack and do critical damage before 15 minutes. For Z I don't see much changing other than less allins. True. Maybe the sentry could get a time accelerator skill instead of the forcefield. It would increase attack rate and movement speed of protoss units in a fixed area, like where the fight is happening. This way, protoss can hold early pressure from stimmed terrans or zergs units. It wouldnt be gamebreaking as the forcefield is, and accelerating units is a great way to promote micro plays. Actually, it would be a stim-like spell. But without damaging the units, and only affecting units staying in the fixed area. If they go out of the time accel area, they loose the speed bonus. | ||
|
aZealot
New Zealand5447 Posts
Forcefield: I like this, despite the fact that it can be unforgiving for Protoss. It's a racial feature for Protoss in WOL that a split second delay in reactions can often spell GG. Is it a good feature? I'm still not sure about that - but I do like that it is a demanding feature of good Protoss play. You have to be vigilant, you have to know where the opposing army is, you have to be fast. The same feature which means a ling run-by if my FF is a hex off, also means that I get to lol if my FF is right, and those lings are trapped between FF and I slaughter them. (It also enables good Z play in terms of baiting FF energy etc.) I also disagree that it is in large part due to FF that PvZ has evolved into a NR20 snoozefest. If PvZ had indeed come to this, it is only a relatively recent development. For most of SC2 PvZ has been, for the most part, an active contest. If it is becoming a snoozefest it is more the power of the BL/Infestor + Spines combo and the fact that Protoss openings from the standard FFE have been mostly figured out at the highest levels of play. This only leaves 3 base pre-Hive timings or the coin flip of the Vortex. This does lead to stagnant play, but to claim that this is because of FF is wrong. This may, or may not, be solved as players continue to explore WOL. If not, the MS Core in HoTS may go a long way towards refreshing the MU. The best reason you've given for nerfing FF is Protoss reliance in PvZ and how that affects map-making. But, I don't think this is a sufficient reason for nerfing FF. It seems a better solution to me to allow different maps and map pools for different match ups (at least at tournament level). Therefore PvZ maps may be constrained in the way you describe, but other match-ups (involving P and without) can be played on different maps. It's also a lot easier than messing with fundamental mechanics. Fungal Growth: I don't like it. Who does? But, heck, if even MC says that Zerg may need FG who am I to argue (given that MC is the President and also plays a very high calibre of off-racing Zerg). I'd prefer it if were projectile, at least, but apart from that I have not thought too much about it, as I don't play Zerg and have little or no interest in Zerg. The best reason I think to change Fungal is that, I think, it prevents Z from exploring their (powerful+fun) race further than BL/Infestor+Spines. Vortex: Yeah, this is a little silly.And yeah, NP on a hero unit is retarded. And yeah, this is not Starcraft. I don't like your nerfs to the Marine and the Roach, and the corresponding buffs to Protoss. It's not the Roach and the Marine that are the issue, it's that Zerg can make so many of them so fast (necessitating Protoss use of FF), and that Terran can make 2 Marines at a time. As I've said elsewhere, the fact that the Roach also counters the Zealot (so hard) and further that the Marauder counters the Stalker means that the basic Protoss army lacks its other half, to a large extent, in two of its match-ups. It's really only in PvP that we get the viability of cool Zealot+Stalker battles - at least for most of the match-up. From a Protoss pov, I like those nerfs, but I can't pretend that I think the combination good for Z and T, or for SC2 in general. The SG buffs are nice though: VR buffs at SG tech, and lower carrier build time. I don't think these would affect the game adversely, either, and I don't think any reasonable Terran or Zerg could complain about these changes. I respect your passion, kcdc. But, I think you are wrong regarding the sources of the problems you highlight (some of which may not be problems at all), and I think your solutions are also, to a large extent, misplaced or wrong. | ||
|
bokeevboke
Singapore1674 Posts
On October 24 2012 07:48 Trotim wrote: But doesn't Stasis Field have the same issues you complained about? Isn't it actually both Fungal and FF combined? I agree with the general sentiment, definitely, but a couple of your "solutions" had nothing to do with the topic you explained Stasis Field drawbacks compared to Fungal and Force Field. 1. available only in late game. 2. can't mass arbiters, hence no spell spamming. 3. damn difficult to use. | ||
| ||
|
|
Replay Cast
OSC
Epic.LAN
Big Brain Bouts
sebesdes vs SpeCial
Harstem vs YoungYakov
GgMaChine vs uThermal
CranKy Ducklings
Epic.LAN
CSO Contender
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Online Event
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
