|
Chill: I will now be moderating this thread heavily. Some of the ways people are talking down to each other in here are completely unacceptable. |
On March 08 2011 06:48 Chill wrote:
I don't mind the change. I would even like to see it as an upgrade that increases the regeneration rate of energy, as opposed to the starting energy. That would make templar more recyclable, but would also force them to have to be warped in a short time before combat.
Regardless, I will now be moderating this thread heavily. Some of the ways people are talking down to each other in here is completely unacceptable.
Totally agree, that was a suggestion I was contemplating.
If the amulet is being removed to stop instant storm on mineral lines, that is still going to happen, just with templar from the base that have the energy already.
Having templar late game against T is a must with whatever other unit comp you have, you still need templar. Removing the KA altogether is really a bigger nerf than a lot of people think. There are so many ramifications of that proposal that I think reconsidering tweaking it in place of removing it is wiser.
|
I still get the feeling that not may people are addressing the main issue with the removal of KA. Sure drops, will be slightly harder to deal with, but whatever, that just takes a little adjusting. I'm more worried about the windows after big fights where the protoss is extra susceptible to being completely roflstomped by any small group of units.
Most protoss here have to know that unless you outright win the battle, it's relatively hard to go into a terran base and do too much damage. Most of the time a terran will have at least one pf up (after all, this is relatively far into the game), and their unit producing structures will still be going on full tilt, making it relatively hard to attack any outer expansions without taking at least moderate damage and nullifying any advantage you mightve gained by winning the battle.
In the meantime, if the terran wins a large fight, he will walk into a largely undefended base, and take his pickings. Yes i know, put down cannons blah blah, but seriously, you're not going to have cannons all over your base, and any decent terran will just pick up his units in the one or two dropships with them and move to somewhere less defended. The time it takes for a small group of units to take out a vital tech structure is really not that much.
I just don't know how you can entirely remove the KA upgrade and not hurt p's ability to defend against counter attacks. That's the real issue here, not the drops.
|
Calgary25981 Posts
On March 08 2011 07:14 jaiiiii wrote:
I still get the feeling that not may people are addressing the main issue with the removal of KA. Sure drops, will be slightly harder to deal with, but whatever, that just takes a little adjusting. I'm more worried about the windows after big fights where the protoss is extra susceptible to being completely roflstomped by any small group of units.
Most protoss here have to know that unless you outright win the battle, it's relatively hard to go into a terran base and do too much damage. Most of the time a terran will have at least one pf up (after all, this is relatively far into the game), and their unit producing structures will still be going on full tilt, making it relatively hard to attack any outer expansions without taking at least moderate damage and nullifying any advantage you mightve gained by winning the battle.
In the meantime, if the terran wins a large fight, he will walk into a largely undefended base, and take his pickings. Yes i know, put down cannons blah blah, but seriously, you're not going to have cannons all over your base, and any decent terran will just pick up his units in the one or two dropships with them and move to somewhere less defended. The time it takes for a small group of units to take out a vital tech structure is really not that much.
I just don't know how you can entirely remove the KA upgrade and not hurt p's ability to defend against counter attacks. That's the real issue here, not the drops.
That's just the dynamic of the game. The same is often true for Zerg vs anyone; however, when you are more mobile than your opponent, you often get to dictate when and where the battle occurs. If you win a big battle, you don't have to kill Terran, you can expand. The way Terran operates means they can't move out without a really large army, so your expansion will be really safe.
|
On March 08 2011 07:14 jaiiiii wrote:
I still get the feeling that not may people are addressing the main issue with the removal of KA. Sure drops, will be slightly harder to deal with, but whatever, that just takes a little adjusting. I'm more worried about the windows after big fights where the protoss is extra susceptible to being completely roflstomped by any small group of units.
Most protoss here have to know that unless you outright win the battle, it's relatively hard to go into a terran base and do too much damage. Most of the time a terran will have at least one pf up (after all, this is relatively far into the game), and their unit producing structures will still be going on full tilt, making it relatively hard to attack any outer expansions without taking at least moderate damage and nullifying any advantage you mightve gained by winning the battle.
In the meantime, if the terran wins a large fight, he will walk into a largely undefended base, and take his pickings. Yes i know, put down cannons blah blah, but seriously, you're not going to have cannons all over your base, and any decent terran will just pick up his units in the one or two dropships with them and move to somewhere less defended. The time it takes for a small group of units to take out a vital tech structure is really not that much.
I just don't know how you can entirely remove the KA upgrade and not hurt p's ability to defend against counter attacks. That's the real issue here, not the drops.
This is more my concern as well. Terran can do so much damage with 400 minerals worth of marines and even worse is the strength of their mid-size army vs. my mid-size army. Often after a clash that's what is left. I think its going to revert into the pre-nexus HP buff feeling where terrans could base their entire strategy around sniping my nexus and ignoring my army because I couldnt kill his units quite quick enough to save the building.
To ween myself off of KA i've been skipping it intentionally on the ladder. Its very very impacting and I honestly don't see myself getting storm very often, if ever. The cost of getting storm is much greater than the spells of the HT's counterparts and I just can't see it paying off except in some obscure situations. HTs were something I preferred as a metagame choice over colossus in both PvT and PvZ, but now there won't really be a metagame choice because colossus will always be better regardless of how easy they are to counter. Its not just because they can continue to do damage, its also they that are just a hell of a lot cheaper. I'd be better off dropping 4 robo facilities and banking money than going the storm route in terms of cost effectiveness and the time it takes for the units to be useful. At least with the robos I would have a little more flexibility to switch in resposne to the marauder/viking im bound to face. Of course, a couple ghosts will take care of that.
I don't know I guess the change took me off guard a bit because PvT win rates are almost identical at the upper levels. The other day when i checked even the GSL winrate was exactly 50-50 this season in the matchup, but that might have changed in the last few days. I think my playstyle is going to have to involve keeping their numbers low by being super aggressive and if they turtle up i'll double forge double robo and get charge or something. Seems like a solid approach.
Maybe a nice direction on this thread would be discussing the aftermath of this. How will you protoss respond to the lack of metagame choices available to you with the now limited high templar? This threads not gonna change whether or not they take it out, so what's the plan moving forward thats going to prevent Protoss from being super predictable.
|
On March 08 2011 01:54 IIDynamicII wrote:
How you ever can complain that we coud harras your mineralline , when terran has blue flam helions that are annihilating to minerallines + you can get them much earlyer in the game. How you ever can come across with suche an argument!?
User was warned for this post
Tell me when Hellions can shoot flames from a high ground where they are not visible and hit the entire mineral line.
Not even talking about balance/complaining I was bringing up a point and then you QQ'd =]
Also nice post ;]
|
KA feels more to me like what PF is for terran. Zerg kind of has it built in with the ability to store larva and remax so fast, but basically a way to defend your outer bases after losing an even fight. If terran has any leftover MM at all after a small battle they will be able to roll your outer expos since everything that comes out of a warpgate beside storm gets blown away by stim+conc bio without the colo/storm backup.
|
On March 02 2011 04:11 Ponyo wrote:
Storms used on marines without medivacs is super powerful. On the other hand Not really adressing your op, i wonder how you stop mass Banshee now that you can't warp in storm.
make some cannons and warp in those stalkers
also, when you see mass banshees get phoenixes
they got a nice buff
|
On March 08 2011 09:42 STenSatsu wrote:
KA feels more to me like what PF is for terran. Zerg kind of has it built in with the ability to store larva and remax so fast, but basically a way to defend your outer bases after losing an even fight. If terran has any leftover MM at all after a small battle they will be able to roll your outer expos since everything that comes out of a warpgate beside storm gets blown away by stim+conc bio without the colo/storm backup.
I really try to stray away from the "if / then" type of arguments because it essentially just turns into each side of the argument conjuring a scenario that supports their side of the argument.
The KA is a mechanic that late game Toss has been using forever so it will obviously sting at first, but Blizzard has identified a problem, both offensively, and defensively with the amulet and several on this thread have offered their opinions for or against it, but Toss certainly has some ample ways to recover and protect an expansion in a late game scenario post battle.
To address a specific point: The KA amulet has morphed into a "serve all" upgrade and that is why you're associating it with the PF, but the PF is Terran's supply independent ground to ground static defensive structure. It basically fills the role of the canon.
|
Honestly, i don't think that the issue is with the energy upgrade.
Warpgates as a mechanic are just plain better than larva or standard production buildings once you reach a certain level of ability where you actually know how to macro.
Even ignoring the fact they build units faster, the front loaded nature of the build time with warp gates makes playing protoss a lot less difficult because you can react to something, like harassment, without committing any resources to defense.
It is also a superior macro mechanic because you don't have to wait for your units to physically regroup when building units. That makes things like the 4gate a lot scarier because essentially they don't suffer much from a long rush distance so you will not have much of a defensive advantage.
|
On March 08 2011 11:42 kawazu wrote:
Honestly, i don't think that the issue is with the energy upgrade.
Warpgates as a mechanic are just plain better than larva or standard production buildings once you reach a certain level of ability where you actually know how to macro.
Even ignoring the fact they build units faster, the front loaded nature of the build time with warp gates makes playing protoss a lot less difficult because you can react to something, like harassment, without committing any resources to defense.
It is also a superior macro mechanic because you don't have to wait for your units to physically regroup when building units. That makes things like the 4gate a lot scarier because essentially they don't suffer much from a long rush distance so you will not have much of a defensive advantage.
But whether it's better or worse doesn't really matter (though I agree). Macro mechanics are most likely not going to change at this stage of the game. What can be changed is abilities that are broken because of those macro mechanics... like KA.
|
On March 08 2011 11:42 kawazu wrote:
Honestly, i don't think that the issue is with the energy upgrade.
Warpgates as a mechanic are just plain better than larva or standard production buildings once you reach a certain level of ability where you actually know how to macro.
Even ignoring the fact they build units faster, the front loaded nature of the build time with warp gates makes playing protoss a lot less difficult because you can react to something, like harassment, without committing any resources to defense.
It is also a superior macro mechanic because you don't have to wait for your units to physically regroup when building units. That makes things like the 4gate a lot scarier because essentially they don't suffer much from a long rush distance so you will not have much of a defensive advantage.
I would argue that 4-gate is scary solely because of the large number of Protoss units on the field. Essentially, switching from an end loaded to front loaded systems gives a temporary spike in units, equal to one round of production. Combine this with Protoss's temporary ability to shorten build times, it causes a huge spike in units at about 5:45-6:00 gametime.
You can argue that Protoss is easier due to the way the build times are ordered, but because of the way the other two races are designed they receive a similar bonus. Terran, for example, have only 1-2 units they would really want to be producing from any production building at once. Terran also have units that are much more multipurpose (marines and marauders) then the ones Protoss can build. Zerg have the ability to turn all of their production to army at a time (it's like if I could turn my CC, factories, and starports to barracks temporarily).
I think a large problem with warpgates is that they need researching, honestly. The timing push when warpgates come will be dangerous basically whenever it comes, as later the Toss player will have more gateways to exploit. Of course, removing this would cause all hell with early timing pushes, so I don't really know what should be done.
I liked the suggestion of faster regen as well. I think if they modified all +initial energy upgrades to be +100% faster regen, all the casters would see more use, and it would really give the best of both worlds to Protoss and their counterparts in the other races.
|
On March 08 2011 11:42 kawazu wrote:
Honestly, i don't think that the issue is with the energy upgrade.
Warpgates as a mechanic are just plain better than larva or standard production buildings once you reach a certain level of ability where you actually know how to macro.
Even ignoring the fact they build units faster, the front loaded nature of the build time with warp gates makes playing protoss a lot less difficult because you can react to something, like harassment, without committing any resources to defense.
It is also a superior macro mechanic because you don't have to wait for your units to physically regroup when building units. That makes things like the 4gate a lot scarier because essentially they don't suffer much from a long rush distance so you will not have much of a defensive advantage.
The front loaded nature of the units is what makes macroing on protoss harder than on T, but that makes decision making on P easier since you can be more reactive. Theres nothing easier about playing protoss other than the powerful 4 gate. That is essentially what people are saying when they deem protoss is easy. Protoss has an incredibly powerful easy to execute all-in. The race itself, is plenty difficult when you face opponents that don't lose to 4 gate everytime. It requires perfection in multiple stages of the game. If it were any different protoss would dominate every tournament, which they obviously dont.
|
On March 08 2011 11:42 kawazu wrote:
Honestly, i don't think that the issue is with the energy upgrade.
Warpgates as a mechanic are just plain better than larva or standard production buildings once you reach a certain level of ability where you actually know how to macro.
Even ignoring the fact they build units faster, the front loaded nature of the build time with warp gates makes playing protoss a lot less difficult because you can react to something, like harassment, without committing any resources to defense.
It is also a superior macro mechanic because you don't have to wait for your units to physically regroup when building units. That makes things like the 4gate a lot scarier because essentially they don't suffer much from a long rush distance so you will not have much of a defensive advantage.
I honestly think there should be a build time penalty for using warp gates rather than a build time bonus. Right now there's no decision, you just get the upgrade and turn all of your gateways into warp gates. It would be more interesting if the warp gate upgrade gave a build time bonus to gateways and also let you turn them into warpgates (which don't have the cooldown bonus).
|
On March 09 2011 06:36 Novembermike wrote:
I honestly think there should be a build time penalty for using warp gates rather than a build time bonus. Right now there's no decision, you just get the upgrade and turn all of your gateways into warp gates. It would be more interesting if the warp gate upgrade gave a build time bonus to gateways and also let you turn them into warpgates (which don't have the cooldown bonus).
i as protoss thought similar.
if you understand Protoss Design, you need to realize that Protoss Gateway Units are balanced around the time after Warpgate conversion.
every minute protoss stays on gateways your enemy gets more and more ahead in supply.
(and P units are already the less efficient of all 3)
The front loaded system equals that out for the first warp-in so the supply counts are even and after that stay even when P macros perfectly (on similar Eco/Production capacitiy)
Macroing with P means, always warpin units when possible.
That it self is already a important task, cause we don't have queues, we can't stack production cycles and we have to move the screen to macro. unlike both other races.
who can micro and macro at the same time, Protoss just can not.(how is that fair  ?)
Also Warpgates are what keeps P at least alittle mobile.
Most P Units have 2.25 speed that is the speed of Hydras off Creep.(which Zergs QQ so much about)
Now try to cover multiple base with such an army, it is not possible.
Marauder Drops are the scariest thing in the game it is not funny how fast they can kill buildings with taking almost no losses.
Warp-In HTs don't kill drops, they forces them do micro and thus reducing their insane damage output and giving your army the chance to deal with them costeffciently.
|
On March 09 2011 06:58 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 06:36 Novembermike wrote:
I honestly think there should be a build time penalty for using warp gates rather than a build time bonus. Right now there's no decision, you just get the upgrade and turn all of your gateways into warp gates. It would be more interesting if the warp gate upgrade gave a build time bonus to gateways and also let you turn them into warpgates (which don't have the cooldown bonus). i as protoss thought similar. if you understand Protoss Design, you need to realize that Protoss Gateway Units are balanced around the time after Warpgate conversion. every minute protoss stays on gateways your enemy gets more and more ahead in supply. (and P units are already the less efficient of all 3) The front loaded system equals that out for the first warp-in so the supply counts are even and after that stay even when P macros perfectly (on similar Eco/Production capacitiy) Macroing with P means, always warpin units when possible. That it self is already a important task, cause we don't have queues, we can't stack production cycles and we have to move the screen to macro. unlike both other races. who can micro and macro at the same time, Protoss just can not.(how is that fair ?) Also Warpgates are what keeps P at least alittle mobile. Most P Units have 2.25 speed that is the speed of Hydras off Creep.(which Zergs QQ so much about) Now try to cover multiple base with such an army, it is not possible. Marauder Drops are the scariest thing in the game it is not funny how fast they can kill buildings with taking almost no losses. Warp-In HTs don't kill drops, they forces them do micro and thus reducing their insane damage output and giving your army the chance to deal with them costeffciently.
Without warpgates the way it is, Protoss's ability to defend against the higher mobility of the other two races (in terms of army movement speeds) will be greatly reduced. I think warpgates the way they are now, however broken it may or may not seem, is necessary at this point in the game. I mean, half of the beta was focused around balancing the warpgate mechanic...
Still, this thread is getting a little sidetracked. KA needs a nerf; I can't think of any high level player who would argue otherwise. However, nerfing it by flat out removing KA will make Protoss play just way too one-dimensional. HTs are already less favored over colossi so I really don't understand why they would nerf it so heavily. Removing KA will pretty much be equivalent to removing HTs from the game.
|
I can see why terrans are supporting this change. Warp in storms are deadly.
But each race must have its deadly weapon. Just look at the terran army.
There are only 2 things terrans are scared of protosses in this matchup: Storm and colossus.
If this change goes through, terrans won't have to worry about over-producing vikings, as long as they have 3-4 ghosts. Because what you see happening already at the higher levels is templars being entirely nullified by well placed EMPs (maybe getting off 1-2 storms) and protoss being reliant on the new warp-ins for AoE. The game is already balanced even with warp-in-storms. Without the extra 3-4 storms, the balanced could be shifted.
What I'm trying to say is, warp-in storms is not a "OMG IMBA MECHANIC" but rather a good AOE option that keeps the protoss army functional. This view was also widely accepted: it just seems that once blizzard announced it, people started hopping on the bandwagon.
This bandwagon stuff could also have been influenced by casters too. Before, artosis would say "Khaydarin amulet is the most critical upgrade if you are trying to incorporate high templar". After blizzard released the patch notes, it turns into "KA is pretty ridiculous if you think about it". And this has happened to the majority of the people here.
GSL 1-4 stats:
PvT 72-91 44.2%
|
It is sad that Blizzard is making it so Protoss only has one viable tech pattern.
|
On March 09 2011 07:28 W2 wrote:
This bandwagon stuff could also have been influenced by casters too. Before, artosis would say "Khaydarin amulet is the most critical upgrade if you are trying to incorporate high templar". After blizzard released the patch notes, it turns into "KA is pretty ridiculous if you think about it". And this has happened to the majority of the people here.
GSL 1-4 stats:
PvT 72-91 44.2%
Well perhaps it is because it really is ridiculous? Everyone think that every change has to related to balance.
But why? Sometimes its not about balancing, but about making game better by changing mechanics - Blizzard was *forced* to add some interesting mechanics to SC2, because there were already thousands of RTS games. Nobody except really hardcore gamers would buy SC2 if it was like some game from 1998 with that UI, mechanics and everything, just better graphic and new story. But it doesnt mean that everything new they added to game is something good to balance game around.
On March 06 2011 11:15 Sek-Kuar wrote:
There is very important and fundamental question to ask.
Lets say, that Zergs have problems with banshee (or VR) builds. So there are 2 approach to this, harder and easier.
Harder way to balance would be changing banshees and/or queens, based on relations with other units too, leading into better balanced state, where zerg could defend it easier.
Easier way would be to remove part of planning & decision making - one of most important aspects of RTS gaming - and simply make queen build time 5 seconds, starting energy 100 for couple of transfusions, maybe increase range/regen rate... And it would became seemingly balanced too.
The problem with this easier approach is that it is bad for game. It makes game less about planning, less about decisions making, even less about scouting - killing core fundaments of RTS gaming.
This is something I noticed while ago, and what frankly isnt so sumprising to me - when I said that removing amulet is good thing, a lot people OFC responded that protoss need it - but when I said that storm could be rebalanced around removed amulet, they simply didnt want it.
Because its always better to have weaker storm, that can be used well even if you make several mistakes, miss key timings, plan poorly and make a lot of bad decisions...
...compared to stronger storm, which is more skill-dependent and requires better understanding to game.
At least for lower players.
As I said before, people overrate balance. Give me 10 seconds, let me make patch, it will have single line of patch changes, and game will be 100% balanced. But nobody will play it anymore.
Balance is not as important as mechanics around which is established.
Warp-in and KA combo is bad mechanics. One of them, either KA or warp-in, has to go. And this is true, no matter whether it is going to imbalance or balance game.
People dont want to hear about KA removal even when it would be eventually followed by Storm buff - and why?
Because it would simply make lategame harder - but not necessarily because of changing efectivness, but because of changing preparation, scouting, decision etc. requirements.
Its easy now - if Protoss comes with HTs in PvT, and Terran doesnt have enough Ghosts, Protoss has exact chance to win, based on competitive preparation for this final moment. But if Terran comes with Ghosts in TvP, and Protoss doesnt have enough HTs, he can instantly fix his mistake and Warp-In more - saving mostlikely 60-90 seconds that Terran would need to fix his wrong decision.
So why the hell are you talking about balance?
Assuming that lategame HTs are balanced right now, then this - nerf - is OFC going to make game imbalanced. Even then, it is still good for this game.
And Storm can be buffed later...
But ability to fix so many wrong decisions in 5 seconds is not good for any RTS game.
|
On March 09 2011 08:31 Sek-Kuar wrote:
Its easy now - if Protoss comes with HTs in PvT, and Terran doesnt have enough Ghosts, Protoss will mostlikely win. But if Terran comes with Ghosts in TvP, and Protoss doesnt have enough HTs, he can instantly fix his mistake and Warp-In more - saving mostlikely 60-90 seconds that Terran would need to fix his wrong decision.
i guess Protoss is warping the gas needed for HTs from the mothership eh?
Protoss is already limited by gas on 2 bases, and going HT from 2 bases is a huge risk.
even 3 Base is debateble.
Just because Warpgate allows such things doesn't mean you can do it everytime.
Why shouldn't Terran have to scout and play properly and adapt i don't get it.
Watch Dreamhack finals for godsake, Despite Mana having Colossus & HT he barely survived against Naamas Bio/Tank/Ghost it is just pure bullshit, that warp-in storms = gg
http://sc2casts.com/cast1614-MaNa-vs-Naama-Best-of-5-DreamHack-Finals
here day9 also proves you wrong...Mass Marines against Storms and it works very well.
http://day9tv.blip.tv/file/4807584/
So Storm isn't the Problem not even Warp-In is the Problem, it is the player that refuses to adapt that is the problem.
|
On March 09 2011 08:38 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 09 2011 08:31 Sek-Kuar wrote:
Its easy now - if Protoss comes with HTs in PvT, and Terran doesnt have enough Ghosts, Protoss will mostlikely win. But if Terran comes with Ghosts in TvP, and Protoss doesnt have enough HTs, he can instantly fix his mistake and Warp-In more - saving mostlikely 60-90 seconds that Terran would need to fix his wrong decision.
i guess Protoss is warping the gas needed for HTs from the mothership eh? Protoss is already limited by gas, and going HT from 2 bases is ALL-IN even 3 Base is debateble. Just because Warpgate always such doesn't mean you can do it everytime. Why shouldn't Terran have to scout and play properly and adept i don't get it. Watch Dreamhack finals for godsake, Despite Mana having Colossus & HT he barely survived against Naamas Bio/Tank/Ghost it is just pure bullshit, that warp-in storms = gg http://sc2casts.com/cast1614-MaNa-vs-Naama-Best-of-5-DreamHack-Finalshere day9 already proves you wrong... http://day9tv.blip.tv/file/4807584/Mass Marines against Storms and it works very well. So Storm isn't the Problem not even Warp-In is the Problem, it is the player that refuses to adapt that is the problem.
To make you and other who believe that this change is about balancing game happy - I changed what I wrote.
So now it is that when Protoss comes, he has exact chance to win based on his level of preparation, compared to enemy level of praparation - ultimately this is competitive game. But when Terran comes, its no longer true, competitive or not, Protoss can adjust his win chance in last moment.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
