EPTThe current state of PvP? - Page 8
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
StormsInJuly
Sweden165 Posts
| ||
|
Pepe-
Germany87 Posts
Just registered for this  Already posted a thread on a german forum with suggestions for PvP, but people even disagreed that PvP is the most boring matchup :S 2 issues: -warpgates -colossus Problem with first one is, it eliminates nearly every defender advantage a defender always should have. protoss doesnt have a queen, free bunkers or spinecrawlers being allowed to build after pool. The first cannon costs 300 minerals and is even weaker than a spinecrawler just because it is able to attack air. So you can get a defending building that is able to defend against everything but not well against what you want (and could need it in PvP) for. So there are just 2 ways to fix, give protoss any defending mechanic in early game or put warpgates later in tech (I think council would be the right place). I dont see a chance to fix PvP otherwise. I know, later warpgates would change balance so much, but since PvP is so bad we should start thinking if its not worth trying it. sentries / stalkers would really need a buff to make protoss able to defend (I prefer stalker) terran and zerg rushes. In addition to this cost of blink and warpgate should increase from 150 to 200 and 50 to 100 (but of course warpgate research time could be reduced) to not make the council tech too strong. Also charge cost could maybe be reduced from 200 to 150 to give protoss a chance to defend against marauders. This would also make protoss to make better decisions ( and scouting!) all game long because he cant just warp in 3 stalker in his base to defend against some early surprisingly appearing banshees / voidrays / mutas in his base. protoss also would have more scouting opportunities because he isnt "wasting" first 140 seconds of his core on warpgate upgrade and so could get hallucinations. Thats the first issue, but what about those colossi? Well, I would like to see the archon as an own unit instead of this recycling only unit. council vs robo tech would look like archons to block the damage and kill zealots, and blink stalker microing around trying to kill colossi while colossi try to avoid getting attacked. But with this archon again a problem occurs, he can cost 100/300, 175/275 or 250/250... this means you can nearly only get zealots with that archons, wouldnt change anything... so I think a reduced cost of the dark templar could make it... something like 125/100, 150/100, ...... instead of this 125/125. Dark templar would also be less of an allin unit and more of a "punish the ones not scouting" unit in all matchups. I mean, I also always have an observer with me for any burrow or whatever. But when the archon would get buffed in damage or whatever, the archon-warp would need to last at least 20 seconds (I like a little bit more) to not make storm into archon too strong. By the way, in my opinion dark templar are really strongest in PvP just because zerg and terran nearly never die to it. PvZ archon would be strong, but still easy countered by fungal (low range) or NP. Even mutas could be microed in little battles against it. PvT archon would seriously need to be immune by concussive shells, or maybe as an upgrade with additional protection to grav beam, fungal(or NP? but really not both) and thor stun(not its ability damage). Archon would also give protoss a weaker way to tank tanks while its much less countered by EMP. (Which protoss wouldnt like anything against EMP?). Terrans thor would still be a way to counter archons cause of his high single target damage. Also to make stargate openings more useful in PvP, what would you guys think about increasing phoenix damage from 5+5 light to somethine like 6+4 or 7+3? At the moment phoenix just feels for me (700-800 diamond) as an anti muta and worker harass unit. This sucks... | ||
|
Kratisto
United States199 Posts
In the midgame (if you ever get there) it's frustrating that Robo tech is so dominant. | ||
|
NB
Netherlands12045 Posts
seriously, if you guys playing on US sever and most of your games has been PvP, its bc the rating you guys are in is dominated with Protoss. i have been there when i bought the game late and climb up from 0. I had been there again when i was sleepy and lose 8 games in a row and drop to "that rating". To be honest and no offends, Protoss players at "that rating" are garbage mostly. As soon as you have a soild idea about what is going on in the game, you should be able to roll over anyone just fine. Dont even mention changing stat for units in this thread! PvP is a MIRROR MATCH UP! What ever reason u are using, you are using at a wrong place! | ||
|
onionchowder
United States137 Posts
| ||
|
Slunk
Germany768 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:15 Pepe- wrote: So there are just 2 ways to fix, give protoss any defending mechanic in early game or put warpgates later in tech (I think council would be the right place). I dont see a chance to fix PvP otherwise. Bring back shield battery? This would make the races even again in terms of their static defenses and help against both 2gate and 4gate rushes. | ||
|
Pepe-
Germany87 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:41 Slunk wrote: Bring back shield battery? This would make the races even again in terms of their static defenses. I didnt play much bw and i nearly never used it :D but maybe this could work. | ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:41 Slunk wrote: Bring back shield battery? This would make the races even again in terms of their static defenses and help against both 2gate and 4gate rushes. imagine a 4gate push with 1-2 shield batterys at the proxy pylon. not fun at all. would destroy zvp and not change much about pvp. and might cause even more problems with immortals suddenly having almost unlimited hardened shields. | ||
|
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
| ||
|
Knee_of_Justice
United States388 Posts
| ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:51 Knee_of_Justice wrote: Well they could just scrap the near useless sentry hallucination and give it a much more interesting shield regeneration ability. Some people who use it to scout might complain for a while, but a shield regeneration spell would be really useful in tons of circumstances. The HT had a spell like this once, but it was scrapped for the phase shift and later feedback. what would this change about pvp? and having a semi medic for evry P unit sounds horribly OP to me. | ||
|
onionchowder
United States137 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:51 Knee_of_Justice wrote: Well they could just scrap the near useless sentry hallucination and give it a much more interesting shield regeneration ability. Some people who use it to scout might complain for a while, but a shield regeneration spell would be really useful in tons of circumstances. The HT had a spell like this once, but it was scrapped for the phase shift and later feedback. IMO hallucination is under-used, not useless. Perhaps pylon power fields could boost shield regeneration rate, and/or warp-in vulnerability time be extended? EDIT: or how about this; pylon power fields add +1 to Protoss shields, and the effect stacks (along with this reduce all Protoss shields by around 20%, to balance). This way, there is a significant defender's advantage granted to the Protoss, as well as adding functionality to offensive warp prisms or pylons. | ||
|
jungle
United States31 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:33 onionchowder wrote: I'm not a Protoss player by any means, but can you wall-off your main with buildings (or a zealot) to stop the pylon-ing probe? its the scouting probe that makes the pylons. very hard to stop this. | ||
|
Pepe-
Germany87 Posts
On August 14 2010 23:15 onionchowder wrote: EDIT: or how about this; pylon power fields add +1 to Protoss shields, and the effect stacks (along with this reduce all Protoss shields by around 20%, to balance). This way, there is a significant defender's advantage granted to the Protoss, as well as adding functionality to offensive warp prisms or pylons. Wouldnt change anything since pylons near minerals are best anyway, so both get it. | ||
|
SCvanTango
Switzerland64 Posts
(I never had an opponent do this to me, so I dunno, but checked the timeing with the build order tester and I had 3 zeals when I would start the pylons for the 4 warpgate, and 5 zeals, when the first 4 zeals would get warped in. that plus some probes, plus that, you can damage the subsequent zeals while they're warping is surely enough to stop that kinda thing, assuming you don't get the gas too early and make a 3rd or so gate after the 2nd one finishes, no?) it's just, I personlaly don't think, that the PvP is some sort of lucky rock paper scissors, where you cant' even scout in time. I usually go 10 gate, 12 gate and save chrono for the zeals as standart opening, and scout with my 10 gateprobe, which usually is more than enough time, to figure what my opponents up to, after that, there's the usual zealot-only early aggression phase and whoever can transition into stalker and higher tech/expansion earlier without dying usually slowly but surely gets the upper hand. going 10/12 proxygate will lose against it, and I THINK it's would also an ok answer vs. the 4 warpgate (but again, never had that one done to me, so *shrug*). Also, it seems, people have just figured out, that a mass of zealots early are just that strong, so basically you can expect the match to start that way anyway and plan accordingly. I mean, noone is complaing that in a ZvZ everyone gets zerglings first, right? So why shouldnt you get a bunch of zealots in a PvP? well, at least that's my experience with that MU. (btw, I'm only a 570 gold for the time, but I don't play more than 4-8 ladder games per day either (I'd guess, I'd be plat if I played a little more, but surely not diamond, but that's just my guess), so make of it what you want) | ||
|
Qzy
Denmark1121 Posts
On August 14 2010 22:51 Knee_of_Justice wrote: Well they could just scrap the near useless sentry hallucination and give it a much more interesting shield regeneration ability. Some people who use it to scout might complain for a while, but a shield regeneration spell would be really useful in tons of circumstances. The HT had a spell like this once, but it was scrapped for the phase shift and later feedback. And how are you gonna scout terran, going bio, then? You don't have a robo facility. | ||
|
Geiko
France2058 Posts
On August 14 2010 08:17 stroggos wrote: i don't see how pvp is that broken. 4 gate all in is definitely not broken, as you can easily prevent the probe from ever building a pylon by 10gating..chronoing an offensive zealot then stalker-> then transitioning into something else. They cannot get to the stage of building pylons inside your base this way. ^ this The 4-chronoed WG rush is psi capped at 18/18 for a long time. If you send an ofensive zealot early, you force your opponent not only to get a zealot, but also another pylon. That leaves enough time to kill the scouting probe with stlaker before any pylon warp in. (700 diamond btw) | ||
|
GhostFall
United States830 Posts
If you 10 gate, chrono zealot and stalker, you're going to get lose everytime against 2 gate/zealots. No amount of micro or skill you have is going to stop them from rolling you. this is what people are maining complaining about. | ||
|
Daimai
Sweden762 Posts
Well, then time to practice some korean 4gate. | ||
|
StarBrift
Sweden1761 Posts
My current beef with PvP is that every single game that goes beyond this zealot wg all in goes into 1 base colossus. Trying to go expand into colo? Too bad, you had 2 less zealots and lost everything. Trying to go mass stalkers? Too bad, you can't get to the colossu without losing your entire army even with blink. Trying to go voidrays? Too bad, the colossus will have killed your zealots before the voids get charged up and then they will get cleaned up by reinforcing stalkers. Basically anyone that tries to expand before the colossus gets run over by the first colossus push. Anyone that tries to deviate in tech gets run over as long as the colo player has the right composition of units. Edit: Oh and I have 200 games played with protoss as 900pt diamond on europe. | ||
| ||
