|
On June 14 2010 12:42 kcdc wrote:
DT's aren't bad at all. They're pretty commonly used. They make a nice transition for a fast blink build. You don't tech DT's hoping your opponent won't have observers yet leading to an automatic win. You make DT's for map control and for harass. Observers are also gas-expensive and easily sniped with blink.
The current argument against that is that you will need your own observer to snipe theirs, which means you have to get a robotics facility yourself.
|
I have an idea. How about when you open for DTs, you get some Cannons up at home as well. If your DT push fails, then fall back with whatever you can and pump out some more DTs, some Stalkers, and maybe research Blink. When he comes knocking on your door, poke at his army with a DT to see if he remembered to bring his Observer along, and if he did, try to draw it back until you can see it with your cannons and pick it off with your Stalkers. If you succeed, then his entire army is vulnerable to your DTs.
The followup to defending that attack would be to expand and get up a Robo for some observers of your own. I'm sure anyone could figure something out from there.
The key point to this strategy is to take out his observer without having one of your own so you can hold off his counter-attack long enough to tech switch and/or expand.
Of course, getting Blink and DTs at the same time might not be practical or even possible. I'm not sure. Perhaps before you do your initial push with your DTs, you could set up a forward Pylon and a couple cannons to draw his first Observer back to and not have to wait for his counter-attack. Once again, the key is to take out his observer without your own since getting both techs is not an option.
|
On June 14 2010 12:42 kcdc wrote:
DT's aren't bad at all. They're pretty commonly used. They make a nice transition for a fast blink build. You don't tech DT's hoping your opponent won't have observers yet leading to an automatic win. You make DT's for map control and for harass. Observers are also gas-expensive and easily sniped with blink.
A fast Blink build in PvP isn't very good. If he went 1 gate Robotics and built an Immortal, your build is shut down. And your DT follow-up isn't very good because he already has the Robo and is probably expecting DTs when he sees Blink. Blink stalkers are good for 1 thing in PvP, and that's to counter Void Ray builds. Their late-game use is cool, but as an opening I don't really favor it. I'd rather go Chargelots or something instead of Blink.
If you don't tech to DTs to exploit lack of detection, what's the point of them even being cloaked? I don't mean that in a condescending way, but DTs sans-cloak are just beefed up Zealots.
DTs should be an instant win if you skipped detection, in the same way that cloak Banshees will end your game if you didn't get Observers (or a retarded amount of cannons).
This is about PvP though.
I want to clarify that I do use DTs, and often, but not in any way that plays to their real strength. They are great to dump money into if your macro slips (as mine often does), and make a good support/high damage unit in your army. They just don't seem to excel at any particular thing, and for a tier 3 unit that takes so long to build, it's a bit out of sorts.
DTs are like the Ultralisks of Protoss in that regard.
|
right now i think the pvp mu is too 2D. with just gates and robo bo's used, a change to dts would be a good way too spice up the mu but i dont think its gonna happen since changing one thing affects all of the other mu's.
|
As a non-Protoss player in both BW and SCII, I say HELL NO! DTs were too imba to begin with >:0
|
I still don't see why they don't just fuse the templar archives and dark shrine. As you mentioned just put DT upgrade on templar archives and adjust cost/build time accordingly.
So these are the current stats for the 2 buildings
+ Show Spoiler +
dark shrine
min 100
gas 250
build time 100
templar archives
min 150
gas 200
build 60
Take dark shrine out and put it as an upgrade on templar archives. Takes 60 seconds to upgrade and costs 100/100. So overall a DT rush would cost more resources and chronos, but it would cheapen the transition and time it takes to do so.
|
I completely agree with what you're saying TT1.
I feel that PvP in BW is more open to other variable strategies than in SC2. It's just so stupid. I don't know what Blizzard was thinking when they decided to separate the two.
When I was playing SC2 Beta, I was playing to discover and explore different tactics and strategies. Needless to say, any kind of DT strategy I pulled in PvP utterly failed except for 1 or 2 games. I really want the tech to be fused into one building, or just as an upgrade like you're saying.
Blizzard should seriously consider doing some tweaking with the DT tech. I mean, they're trying hard to diversify ZvZ and change it from what it used to be like in BW, so they should do the same for PvP T_T.
|
United States10774 Posts
On June 14 2010 09:54 PJA wrote:Show nested quote +On June 14 2010 09:13 LaLuSh wrote:
The problem with posting shit on the sc2 forums. 80% will argue against points you actually didn't make.
You're all right. There's no problem with every single PvP game revolving around 4+ gateways with the occasional robo mixed in. The next two years will hold lots of fun times... Just because that's the only style currently dominating doesn't mean it's the only viable option. PvZ in BW changed completely from 1 base to FE without any additional patches. 95% of the posts complaining about SC2 are from people who are bad or think that the top SC2 players now would even be able to compete against the top players 2 years from now.
i don't see how the play will be able to divert much when there are fundamental issues within other styles
|
PvP isn't one dimensional. In BW noone could ever use stargates. Now stargates are actually viable so the main argument to make DTs more viable is a false assertion.
|
for me, PvP always rolling around scouting it is 3 gates tech/4gates/robo play
most of the time (depend on map), i will go 3 gates->proxy pylon to contain the other guy's nature while im expanding. this will put him on pressure to put more money to army which make his DT tech delay as well as his 3rd and 4th gas. by the time being, my nature should be up and running when his first wave of DTs come out. Assuming i have no robo atm, my army should be big enough to block the entrance while my canon + robo is getting up for most of the map.
i suggest DT as a mid game play after both side has secured the 2nd base and aiming for a macro game. DTs will screw your enemy over aa mid game tech, not as "rushing"
|
On June 14 2010 11:28 Swede wrote:Your poll is silly. Whether or not you played Brood War is irrelevant. Not having BW experience shouldn't invalidate your opinion if it is reasonably backed up. Starcraft 2 is NOT Brood War. If you want everything to remain the same as it did in Brood War then play that instead. Like several people (and myself) have said, Dark Templars are high tier units in Starcraft 2 (one might even say top tier), and high tier units cannot be rushed effectively in the early game (providing your opposition is capable). This was the same in Brood War too. To me, this is your argument in a nutshell: Dark Templars don't work early game, I want them to work early game, Therefore, they should work early game My problem isn't with the proposition that Dark Templars should be more viable, but with your badly constructed "argument". If you actually presented a constructive argument which made points outside of "I want this" and "Brood War had this", then maybe people would be more inclined to listen.
uhhh you still have no idea what my argument is, the dt itself is irrelevant to this discussion, you have no knowledge of the subject so when you see the word DT in a sentence you immediately just make bullshit assumptions.. even after 7 pages your still clueless and this is why the poll was made the way it was
also the poll was not made to justify if im right or wrong, i know im right because i play the game and i know what im talking about.. u still dont even understand what the topic is, the poll is asking gamers if they would be for or against this type of a b.o in sc2 PvP because as it is this style of PvP DOES NOT EXIST IN THE GAME
|
LOL, so much elitism in this community now.
|
Err call me crazy, but isn't the DT rush of SC2 basically identical to SCBW?
Assuming you get your GW and CC out at similar times in both games
SCBW: Citadel of Adun (60) + Templar Archives (60) + Dark Templar (50) = 170 seconds
SC2: Twilight Council (50) + Dark Shrine (100) + Dark Templar (5) = 155 seconds
Assuming you've got Warp-Gate tech.
Isn't it kind of obvious why the Dark Shrine is a separate building, with a long build time, now? Warp Gate tech is a huge, huge difference in Protoss GW unit construction timings.
|
@ Bibdy
What, if anything, does build time have to do with the fundamental problem pointed out in the OP?
It's been suggested many (many) times throughout the thread that if merging the buildings makes DTs come out too fast, then to add an upgrade to the Templar Archives that allows you to build DTs to cover that gap.
The problem isn't how fast they come out, it's that there is no follow-up that doesn't leave you quite far behind.
|
On June 15 2010 06:21 kajeus wrote:
LOL, so much elitism in this community now.
there is no elitism, when your answering basic fundemental questions rather than getting to the meat of the topic it kinda starts pissing you off after a while
|
On June 15 2010 06:28 yarkO wrote:
@ Bibdy
What, if anything, does build time have to do with the fundamental problem pointed out in the OP?
It's been suggested many (many) times throughout the thread that if merging the buildings makes DTs come out too fast, then to add an upgrade to the Templar Archives that allows you to build DTs to cover that gap.
The problem isn't how fast they come out, it's that there is no follow-up that doesn't leave you quite far behind.
He wants teching DTs to be safe. Speed is an important factor in how safe something is. If it took a full minute longer than the SCBW version, then I'd call it unsafe. But, since its basically identical, why is it not safe? Because a Protoss who opens Robo in T2 is going to counter you? Why would you then complain about lack of strategic variety when someone going Robo beats someone going DT, someone going DT beats someone going 4-Gate push, someone going 4-Gate push beats someone going Void Rays and so on.
And an upgrade to allow a unit isn't really a Protoss construction mechanic. The Spire->Greater Spire upgrade is more of a Zerg thing. It would be just as good to make the Dark Shrine require the Templar Archives to be built and just build faster as a result (50, instead of 100), but that's neither here nor there. Just a way to slow things down, although admittedly, I'd prefer either of those over the current system.
I really wouldn't go around calling it a 'fundamental problem', either. Its more a preference of style. He just wants to feel cool being the guy who figured out that DT-rushing is the only safe way to fast expand. Worked great in SCBW, because Observers come out slow, forcing someone to make Cannons (thereby allowing you to expand), but doesn't work in SC2 anymore. Why does that mean it needs fixing? That's kinda boring, isn't it?
|
o god
"I brought this point up in another thread because i feel like this is a topic that needs more attention. As of now, the thing that worrys me the most about protoss is how inefficient dt techs are in pvp because its impossible to transition into a safe macro build(i.e fast expansion) due to the build time and cost of both the dark shrine and templar archive(impossible to get storm before dying), imo this makes the mu very 1 dimentional, essentially its handicapping it by removing a whole tech branch."
1st paragraph
"The difference is unlike individual unit imbalances the problem lies within the building mechanics, which is much more worrisome because it can easily effect the balance of other mu's if u try tweaking it around."
2nd paragraph
|
On June 15 2010 06:28 iamtt1 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2010 06:21 kajeus wrote:
LOL, so much elitism in this community now. there is no elitism, when your answering basic fundemental questions rather than getting to the meat of the topic it kinda starts pissing you off after a while
just ignore and go on!
I think its time to ask the counterquestion (nobody did so far):
Why did blizzard split the templar tech?
If we find a good answer to this then we maybe come to better conclusions about the problem itself.
|
United States10774 Posts
Bibdy could you pls stop posting? Thanks
|
On June 15 2010 06:39 OneOther wrote:
Bibdy could you pls stop posting? Thanks
No.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
