|
On June 05 2010 06:13 NATO wrote:
I propose adding speed enhancement to the charge upgrade. It doesn't have to be as big as in sc1, but this would definitely make zealots more viable lategame, as they could actually retreat, be more mobile, and not always get stuck behind stalkers when you a-move.
There's already passive speed enhancement on charge; it's just less than it should be.
|
On June 05 2010 06:13 NATO wrote:
I propose adding speed enhancement to the charge upgrade. It doesn't have to be as big as in sc1, but this would definitely make zealots more viable lategame, as they could actually retreat, be more mobile, and not always get stuck behind stalkers when you a-move.
I dont support this. your zealots do not get stuck behind stalkers if you put them in a controll group. and they are also not designed to retreat at all. I like the charge mechanic. its very powerfull as a offensive ability but doesnt help much as a defensive one. this forces the zealot user to commit to a attack and do it right from the first second on.
I have done quite some tests with different unit compositions and chargelots are insanely effective in small scale battles. this is why you cant compare it to stim for example. stimpack only gets more effective than charge if you reach a certain supply count.
(I made tests with roughly equal supply and ress TvP armies to compare compositions and stim/charge upgrades)
This is why I say: let the tech and reduce the cost drasticaly.
|
really think its fine. esp when comparing stim and charge costs.
dont forget that T has to spend way way more gas on upgrades and production buildings then P ( a fac/port with addon costs 125-150 gas). so i really dont think the cost is a problem since overall P still spends way way less gas on upgrades and basic production.
and blizz seems to kinda agree on that. cause obv stim is very powerful but they didnt reduce the cost cause it was too expensive for the ability itself but cause of the overall gas heaviness of T early game.
|
On June 05 2010 06:32 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
really think its fine. esp when comparing stim and charge costs.
dont forget that T has to spend way way more gas on upgrades and production buildings then P (dont forget a fac/port with addon costs 125-150 gas). so i really dont think the cost is a problem since overall P still spends way way less gas on upgrades and basic production.
and blizz seems to kinda agree on that. cause obv stim is very powerful but they didnt reduce the cost cause it was too expensive for the ability itself but cause of the overall gas heaviness of T early game.
You should really do the math on what you just stated. Lets do the math on both protoss and terran getting cloaked units starting from the gateway/barracks...
150/0/50 Cyber --> 150/100/50 TC --> 100/250/100 Shrine
Total: 400/350/200
vs
50/25 tech lab can be constructed on any prior building and lift-off replace
150/100/50 --> 150/100/50 --> 150/150/120
Total: 500/375/220
Yup.. how is this way more?
You spend 50/25 that you would have gotten no matter what game you play in, so that is kind of a sunk-cost. The opportunity cost is much greater for Protoss, because he could have gotten Immortals or Collosus or Voidrays or Phoenixes... instead, we can only build darktemplars in addition to our gateway units.
Terran on the other hand, now has access to tanks, hellions banshees, ravens vikings... just b/c they went cloak banshees, they get MORE options... Protoss deciding to get Dark Templars, has ZERO options...
Do you see any problem here at all?
|
Terran early game is gas heavy? Um... how are you playing out the early game? Terran's most basic combat units (marine/marauder/hellion) cost almost no gas whereas Protoss's (zealot/stalker/sentry) are much thirstier. Protoss has lots of expensive upgrades, and Robotics + Stargate both cost a fair bit of gas, as do the units they produce.
Obviously if you go 1/1/1 and try to get all your tech at the same time, you'll be strapped for gas on only one base, but every race has that problem.
|
On June 05 2010 06:41 Paramore wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2010 06:32 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:
really think its fine. esp when comparing stim and charge costs.
dont forget that T has to spend way way more gas on upgrades and production buildings then P (dont forget a fac/port with addon costs 125-150 gas). so i really dont think the cost is a problem since overall P still spends way way less gas on upgrades and basic production.
and blizz seems to kinda agree on that. cause obv stim is very powerful but they didnt reduce the cost cause it was too expensive for the ability itself but cause of the overall gas heaviness of T early game. + Show Spoiler +You should really do the math on what you just stated. Lets do the math on both protoss and terran getting cloaked units starting from the gateway/barracks...
150/0/50 Cyber --> 150/100/50 TC --> 100/250/100 Shrine
Total: 400/350/200
vs
50/25 tech lab can be constructed on any prior building and lift-off replace
150/100/50 --> 150/100/50 --> 150/150/120
Total: 500/375/220
Yup.. how is this way more?
You spend 50/25 that you would have gotten no matter what game you play in, so that is kind of a sunk-cost. The opportunity cost is much greater for Protoss, because he could have gotten Immortals or Collosus or Voidrays or Phoenixes... instead, we can only build darktemplars in addition to our gateway units.
Terran on the other hand, now has access to tanks, hellions banshees, ravens vikings... just b/c they went cloak banshees, they get MORE options... Protoss deciding to get Dark Templars, has ZERO options...
Do you see any problem here at all?
why the hell do you compare cloaked units?
On June 05 2010 06:43 Severedevil wrote:
Terran early game is gas heavy? Um... how are you playing out the early game? Terran's most basic combat units (marine/marauder/hellion) cost almost no gas whereas Protoss's (zealot/stalker/sentry) are much thirstier. Protoss has lots of expensive upgrades, and Robotics + Stargate both cost a fair bit of gas, as do the units they produce.
Obviously if you go 1/1/1 and try to get all your tech at the same time, you'll be strapped for gas on only one base, but every race has that problem.
evrything but pure MM play requires a fairly fast tech. and you want medivacs rather soon,ghosts or whatever.
and even then youll need atleast 300 gas (2 techlabs,stim,shields,shells). while P needs warpgate tech and a robo or a starport (or pure warpgate...) which is 200 at max.
and P can stay for ages on just warpgates + 1 robo while T needs Fac/port fairly fast + addons + fac/port related upgrades very soon.also once out P HAS the tech and usually only adds more warpgates since one boosted robo/stargate is usually enough. while T has to add more production buildings which ALL cost gas. from 25 for a techlabbed rax to 150 for a reactored fac.
really no matter how you look at it. T needs way more gas for tech/production buildings to have a equally strong overall army.
|
I'd prefer nerfing the EMP over buffing Charge. It's just a quiete cheap super-psi-storm for T against P. Nerfing EMP would buff Zealot's in the lategame and you could stick to 200/200 Charge.
|
I find mech play very annoying for protoss. Zealots still get raped by tank support, and yes, you can use phoenixes to disable, but meh ... Also, tanks kill any chance of storm drops at their base, which REALLY sucks.
If charge goes for 200, I would say to make it more fun, make zealots invincible during the period while their charging ...
It might make it too overpowered, but then again, in a sense, not really since most of zealots die after they charge. It's still the same thing, but they just sorta get in your face. It's probably the only way right now against mech terran .... =/ especially when you let them get that insane huge amount of buildings produced and its just almost unstoppable.
|
On June 05 2010 07:25 CruelZeratul wrote:
I'd prefer nerfing the EMP over buffing Charge. It's just a quiete cheap super-psi-storm for T against P. Nerfing EMP would buff Zealot's in the lategame and you could stick to 200/200 Charge.
ive never seen someone EMP on chargelots instead on templars/immortals.
|
knowing that zealots are the only toss ground unit that could ever counter marauders with stim/concussive cost-effectively if they manage to get a good surround, it should be a no-brainer to lower the charge upgrade costs in some way
|
charge should be reduced to 150/150 and have a build time of about 90-100. That would make a it a more reasonable upgrade. As it is now, I have trouble justifying that upgrade until I have a really strong econ and am unable to spend all resources so I buy the charge just to keep my money low.
|
United States47024 Posts
Silly idea, but suppose Charge was changed to also make Zealots immune to Marauder's slow?
|
On June 05 2010 07:41 101TFP wrote:
knowing that zealots are the only toss ground unit that could ever counter marauders with stim/concussive cost-effectively if they manage to get a good surround, it should be a no-brainer to lower the charge upgrade costs in some way
ya heard colloxen,storm,sentries,immortals are all get countered by rauders and are useless vs em!
|
On June 05 2010 07:32 clickrush wrote:Show nested quote +On June 05 2010 07:25 CruelZeratul wrote:
I'd prefer nerfing the EMP over buffing Charge. It's just a quiete cheap super-psi-storm for T against P. Nerfing EMP would buff Zealot's in the lategame and you could stick to 200/200 Charge. ive never seen someone EMP on chargelots instead on templars/immortals.
Ok, i should have said it would buff Protoss lategame and make a buff to Charge obsolete. Anyway, due to the one-controle-groupe-syndrom -according to Day9-, it is very likely to hit at least a few Zealots in the balled units when an engagement occurs.
|
On June 05 2010 00:29 Paramore wrote:When you go 7-rax early game vs a Protoss, what would the proper response really be? If you tech too fast you get rushed at 4-rax stage and its game-over. I don't care how many times you forcefield your ramp because by the time you produce a Collosus (which by the way also costs gas, so mass forcefield cuts into your gas, he will be miles ahead of you economically with his fast expo.
3 gate robo+obs should let you scout him in time. gateway units can stop early rush and colossi+gateway units can stop bigger bio balls. i never used blink+charge vs bio and had no problems at all. now mech was a different story.
|
On June 05 2010 00:41 arb wrote:
id say make it 200/200 myself..i cant even get charge alot of times until semi late because of the cost of it, especially when blink makes an otherwise useless unit capable of some sick ahrass(with good micro) and is alot cheaper..
i think lowering it to 150/150 or even 100/100 would be reasonable
Agreed, 150/150 would be a nice solution while not breaking the balance
|
They need to remove the Dark shrine, and just move both the templar tech buildings into the templar archives. I think that no one gets the Twilight Council because the tech after it is too split up/expensive/situational compared with the other two options. Not only that, it just makes sense. (You really want us to make a 100/250/100 building that unlock one unit, and has no upgrades? Really?)
If not that, then they should at least make charge 150/150/110. It seems like more of a band-aid fix than my first suggestion, but it would get the job done.
|
oh you poor blind protoss user. wah wah wah
|
I have always thought that charge was way too expensive. But now that I research it every single game, I admit it has to cost that much because it gives a whole new life to your most basic unit.
Whenever you are falling behind in the army size and feel the game could get out of reach quickly, most of the time researching charge and spamming zealots out of your warpgates can turn the tide of the game. Charge lots are not to be underestimated.
|
You didn't have a 'make Terran upgrades more expensive again' option. That would be best.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
