|
imo protoss are still fine in their current state...
only have trouble vs zerg that spams mutalisk with a fast expand
or when I fuck up badly!
so from my point of view... Zergs MUTALISK (only I don't care about roaches) needs to be either nerfed, cost more to GET THERE or give something to protoss so their can kill, cause as of now "stalkers, phoeniex, void, carriers" arrent good counters and sentries are somewhat good but FRAKING slow!
so yah... as a protoss player here is what I have to say..... if you lose to T's they you seriously need to get faster and get good upgrades (such as charge) and make more sentries and learn how to use them.
as for Zergs massing roaches if you lose to them, learn to use immortals.... like now... and learn to switch zealots as soon as they are making any hydras or ling push and also UPGRADE your damn units.... you get a forge... use it!
|
On February 28 2010 05:25 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2010 01:51 LordofAscension wrote:
As a P player this has be ticked.
I think this is the problem. Players are developing race attachments before the races themselves are fully defined in terms of the roles units play in them. It's beta. There are multiple reasons why it's a bad idea for you to be playing one race to the exclusion of others to begin with. One being that a good distribution of data across all three races is better than having a lot of data about one race (even if you disagreed that Protoss was imbalanced, you had to agree that there was a disproportionate slant of players toward Protoss). Another is that the races are going to undergo such drastic changes that it just simply makes no sense to hamstring yourself by saying you're going to play one race before release.
Will someone give this man a prize and sticky his response on the starcraft2 general AND THE SC2 strategy forum.
|
err, this isn't a buff to terran bio, but a buff to all terran production, and especially a buff for non-tech lab units. Hellions, vikings, marines are all much more viable to mass with this patch.
|
thx for 2 patches in 2 days, quick work, but it makes people want to play terran and trash toss! ok then... terran here we go!(I was deciding to switch to T/P instead of my current P/Z because of the whole thing about no scourge and sucky templar anyways) Can't wait till I can get SC2 and play it!
|
people switching races because of patches are ridiculous - SERIOUSLY WTF?? its a fcking beta!!
|
It's not a buff to bio at all really. The timings shaved off like 10 seconds for bio, and 20 seconds from teching and like a minute for cloaked banshees (which are still easily countered by toss and reasonably countered by zerg). Before it felt like you were forced to go bio because you couldn't compete with a FE by zerg or toss, and quite frankly unless you played well and protoss played poorly you couldn't even win with a push. Now i'm finding I can match a push and actually keep at an equal level with protoss. The biggest buff to terran is the huge reduction in time for the reactor core giving you a manageable infrastructure. I can now go 1 rax reactor into 2 factory still have a good enough number of marines to prevent early warpray or mutas and actually USE tanks or hellions because it's not a complete washout to 1 air unit. And protoss are still tough as shit because they have better units mid-late game.
P.S. I have over 200 games played so i'm not just making this up
|
Do me a favor and just take out the Mothership if you are going to nerf it to death
|
They should've just made the mothership armored(again?), instead of reducing HP. Currently the anti-heavy air units, like the void ray, deal low damage against it, while they should counter it somewhat.
|
Wow, totally nerfing the mothership!
|
The real funny thing is how many times has a Blizzard designer in an interview said something like "Were really trying to seperate the multiplayer experience from single player expeirence. They have different considerations and we want to make sure that the units/mechanics are appropriate for each."
Everytime I hear something like that I want to shout out "No you dont!!!!! If you did the mothership wouldnt be in multiplayer! That unit has got more singleplayer in it than Jim Raynor's vulture bike!"
|
For me, when there is a race in an RTS game (or when anything gets nerfed in any type of game i guess) I try to use that race that got nurfed more, not switch and avoid using it. If you can still win with a nurfed race, it will make you a lot better, especially if they end up buffing it later.
|
On February 28 2010 01:51 LordofAscension wrote:
ouch...
As a P player this has be ticked.
Nerf my gateways
Take away my moship starting energy
Take away wormhole transit (I actually loved this ability)
Then nerf the moship to make it an unglorified unique arbiter which I will no longer waste my minerals on? puh-leeze
Nerf my chrono boost
AND THEN buff early T (which was already my worst match-up. (Plus they already buffed the build time on orbital command so DT's are even less viable.. FAIL! Yeah there goes any chance I had of doing decent in the near future with P...
le sigh. I might just wait for the next patch...
~LoA
Why the Mothership got nerfed - because of those players that basically used it as a single-unit early rush (as opposed to the supersized Arbiter replacement it was supposed to be). Normally, you can't rush Protoss (because of the unit costs); however, the Mothership was rushable (because you only had to stock up somewhat on minerals + gas early; the only prereq is a Fleet Beacon). Never mind that you could (and still can) rush/spam Terrans and Zerg (especially Zerg). The thinking was "Proactive Protoss? Time to slow them down!"
Now, you pretty much would *only* use the Mothership (in the early game) as a defender (too expensive to use as a harass/rush unit by itself); then, once you build proper support (not just air units, like Void Rays and Phoenix, as well as a Carrier or two, but Stalkers, Immortals, Colossi, and possibly High/Dark Templars and Zealots), "counterattack".
There are still those that fear the idea of aggressive Protoss (even though, historically, the Protoss were VERY proactive pre-Tassadar, with the biggest example being Chau Sara). Aggressive Terrans or Zerg are fine, but proactive Protoss? Oh, heck no!
|
On February 28 2010 06:11 PredY wrote:
people switching races because of patches are ridiculous - SERIOUSLY WTF?? its a fcking beta!!
Well, being that a majority of American players right now are Protoss, this might balance out the races. People don't choose to play Protoss just because they love their look but it was easier to play Protoss than the other two races.
|
United States47024 Posts
On February 28 2010 10:23 PGHammer wrote:
Why the Mothership got nerfed - because of those players that basically used it as a single-unit early rush (as opposed to the supersized Arbiter replacement it was supposed to be). Normally, you can't rush Protoss (because of the unit costs); however, the Mothership was rushable (because you only had to stock up somewhat on minerals + gas early; the only prereq is a Fleet Beacon). Never mind that you could (and still can) rush/spam Terrans and Zerg (especially Zerg). The thinking was "Proactive Protoss? Time to slow them down!"
Now, you pretty much would *only* use the Mothership (in the early game) as a defender (too expensive to use as a harass/rush unit by itself); then, once you build proper support (not just air units, like Void Rays and Phoenix, as well as a Carrier or two, but Stalkers, Immortals, Colossi, and possibly High/Dark Templars and Zealots), "counterattack".
There are still those that fear the idea of aggressive Protoss (even though, historically, the Protoss were VERY proactive pre-Tassadar, with the biggest example being Chau Sara). Aggressive Terrans or Zerg are fine, but proactive Protoss? Oh, heck no!
It probably did have to do with mothership rushing, but more than just a lore issue of protoss being an aggressive race (if anything, Terran is the race that's supposed to be the most defensive) -- mothership rushing just doesn't seem interesting. There's not much micro to either side of the battle (the Protoss only has one unit to control, and the opponent only has one unit to fire at), and if, heaven forbid, there was a mirror match, it'd basically be a WC3 hero vs. hero fight.
|
lmao the mothership got so owned. I bet it can still play a powerful role in PvT tho  I can't wait to see pros use it.
|
On February 28 2010 07:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
The real funny thing is how many times has a Blizzard designer in an interview said something like "Were really trying to seperate the multiplayer experience from single player expeirence. They have different considerations and we want to make sure that the units/mechanics are appropriate for each."
Everytime I hear something like that I want to shout out "No you dont!!!!! If you did the mothership wouldnt be in multiplayer! That unit has got more singleplayer in it than Jim Raynor's vulture bike!"
Why do it scream singleplayer? One race having a one at a time limited unit can lead to even more diverse matchups than what we got in sc1. I mean, who decided that you can't have one at a time units? The mothership is a quite good example of a well made one at a time unit, its abilities do scale very well with army sizes and it is nothing special in terms of combat strength per cost any longer.
Basically it is a way to keep really strong spells in the game without making them spammable. And it is balanced since as I said since the motherships spells are just to support/disrupt the armies it is not like it is imbalanced with small amounts of units or worthless with large amounts of units.
|
I share the feelings of the people that are saying this is a beta and the entire point is to test balance issues. Whining is worthless and a bit hilarious.
In regards to the mothership, I never liked the idea of the unit to begin with. It feels far too much like a hero unit to me. I'd much rather have it in the "misc unit that doesn't see play in normal games but has the potential to pop up and be cool" sort of like the queen in SC1 or something. I personally don't want to see any single unit that causes such a game breaking effect on the game.
|
On February 28 2010 12:23 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2010 07:18 Archerofaiur wrote:
The real funny thing is how many times has a Blizzard designer in an interview said something like "Were really trying to seperate the multiplayer experience from single player expeirence. They have different considerations and we want to make sure that the units/mechanics are appropriate for each."
Everytime I hear something like that I want to shout out "No you dont!!!!! If you did the mothership wouldnt be in multiplayer! That unit has got more singleplayer in it than Jim Raynor's vulture bike!" Why do it scream singleplayer? One race having a one at a time limited unit can lead to even more diverse matchups than what we got in sc1. I mean, who decided that you can't have one at a time units? The mothership is a quite good example of a well made one at a time unit, its abilities do scale very well with army sizes and it is nothing special in terms of combat strength per cost any longer. Basically it is a way to keep really strong spells in the game without making them spammable. And it is balanced since as I said since the motherships spells are just to support/disrupt the armies it is not like it is imbalanced with small amounts of units or worthless with large amounts of units.
Oh you mean really strong spells like this unit had?
![[image loading]](http://media.moddb.com/images/mods/1/11/10696/arbiterrender.jpg)
The mothership was from day one a "hero" unit. It was described in the opening trailer as the ultimate weapon. Since then it has fallen from superunit to fat arbiter and in the process lost almost everything impressive it started with. If you want to say that its still cool cause "hey its got 350 hitpoints and you can only make one" than fine. But from the perspective of a unit that was better suited for singleplayer (and NOT multiplayer) you wont find a better example than the Mothership.
|
On February 28 2010 11:19 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On February 28 2010 10:23 PGHammer wrote:
Why the Mothership got nerfed - because of those players that basically used it as a single-unit early rush (as opposed to the supersized Arbiter replacement it was supposed to be). Normally, you can't rush Protoss (because of the unit costs); however, the Mothership was rushable (because you only had to stock up somewhat on minerals + gas early; the only prereq is a Fleet Beacon). Never mind that you could (and still can) rush/spam Terrans and Zerg (especially Zerg). The thinking was "Proactive Protoss? Time to slow them down!"
Now, you pretty much would *only* use the Mothership (in the early game) as a defender (too expensive to use as a harass/rush unit by itself); then, once you build proper support (not just air units, like Void Rays and Phoenix, as well as a Carrier or two, but Stalkers, Immortals, Colossi, and possibly High/Dark Templars and Zealots), "counterattack".
There are still those that fear the idea of aggressive Protoss (even though, historically, the Protoss were VERY proactive pre-Tassadar, with the biggest example being Chau Sara). Aggressive Terrans or Zerg are fine, but proactive Protoss? Oh, heck no! It probably did have to do with mothership rushing, but more than just a lore issue of protoss being an aggressive race (if anything, Terran is the race that's supposed to be the most defensive) -- mothership rushing just doesn't seem interesting. There's not much micro to either side of the battle (the Protoss only has one unit to control, and the opponent only has one unit to fire at), and if, heaven forbid, there was a mirror match, it'd basically be a WC3 hero vs. hero fight.
Notice that I didn't say that you can't call in the Mothership early; if your opponent tends to rush, you SHOULD call for Mom as early as possible; however, because of the nerf, the call will be defensive/counter-rush, not to rush yourself.
The nerf also has the side-effect of making Protoss early-game rushes pretty much undoable (Stalkers and Colossi, either mixed or alone, are too expensive to build in groups and too INexpensive to counter; the situation with Void Rays or other air units is even worse). Zealots? Please; too expensive (more expensive than even Marines, let alone Zerglings, and nearly as expensive as Roaches).
I think that the Protoss just took the "most defensive" title away from the Terrans (especially with that big nerf); though patch 2 DID give Mom the Vortex back, the Mothership remains limited (by expense) to defense/counter-rush.
|
can I download the patch somewhere? I can't connect with this incredibly stupid download-tracker. I've downloaded the Game from another Server and have a Betakey, but I can't find a place to download the patch - that's ridiculous!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
