EPTOn April 05 2011 03:27 arterian wrote:
I wish Blizzard would address PvP.
I wish Blizzard would address PvP.
Removing warp-in is necessary to do that imo and they won't remove warp-in.
Warp in is the single biggest mistake in Starcraft 2.
Situation Report: Patch 1.3 - Page 6
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Gigaudas
Sweden1213 Posts
Removing warp-in is necessary to do that imo and they won't remove warp-in. Warp in is the single biggest mistake in Starcraft 2. | ||
|
dekuschrub
United States2069 Posts
they are sooo lame | ||
|
OverZero
United States271 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:22 pureball wrote: nice, so 3 gate proxi rush and 4 gate is TOTALY viable and ok, even when it is on a huge map totaly negating any disadvantages that should be suffered from it being such a large map but a BUNKER placement which requires your opponent not to scout or not to micro well is OP and needs nerfing ? stim rush which i havent seen work in counltess games needs a nerf but the ammount of options protoss have early and late game with proxi's all over the map are perfectly fine ? i wouldnt be to bothered about all this if protoss couldnt just warp in units anywhere on the map giving reinforcements where needed etc, ESPECIALY DT's on large maps which totaly contains a terran giving the protoss a huge advantage, it just seems that terran has constantly having to react to what the P is doing, the ONLY thing p really need to hard counter is cloak banshee but that is IT apart from that they can go fast expand and gateway units and robo early game i have to watch out for proxi gateway, proxi pylon 3 gate rush, proxi 4 gate all in, proxi voidrays, DT rush, phoenix rush how on earth is this even when i literaly cannot put ANY early pressure on a P ? i lol'd when i saw the bunker and stim nerf but atleast amulet got a change... but as i said that is not the whole problem, splash damage on colossus rape before vikings can counter them well the only time you see a 200/200 fight with a t comming on top is when the P completley screws the attack up, forcefields and colossus splash is just to much to handle, i NEVER see a terran come back from a game they are losing but i've watched countless games where proxi pylons etc have gave a P an easier time getting back into the game thgat they may be losing, MC's style is just another thing that P's are comming up with which is showing in tournament results as it is slowly getting dominated by P totaly reminds me of dawn of war with eldar having so many abilities which raised the skill cap above the other races -_- What?!?!? Since when could Terran not proxy? How is it that you can't put on any early pressure? You can get to P's front door with a marine and a marauder with concussive when they have a 1 stalker and 1 zealot out... You really have some serious pent up anger or something. Your entire argument refuses to acknowledge the other side. Example: Ghosts early game are insanely good. One good EMP and P has no forcefields and no shields. You really need to open your eyes and see this from both sides. | ||
|
kzn
United States1218 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:22 syllogism wrote: No, they didn't say it was "fine", but that they are always careful about these things so they didn't want to do both at once. Considering they said both HTs and colossi are slightly overpowered, I'd say it's more likely than not that colossus gets nerfed eventually. Of course, nothing is confirmed at this point, just a possibility. What they actually said was: We felt late game protoss splash damage was slightly overpowered. This applies both to high templars and colossi. This doesn't mean they thought both were overpowered. It means precisely what it says - they thought the splash damage available to Protoss lategame was too strong, so they adjusted that. If anything, what they've said and done suggests that if Colossus get nerfed, that will come with a return of Khaydarin Amulet and/or a significant buff elsewhere that moves Protoss away from splash damage entirely. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:31 zanmat0 wrote: I have in mind the KA nerf in particular, and how they decided to shut down an entire tech tree and force protoss to go Colossi instead, which everyone agree are overpowered and boring to use. Essentially, they are dulling down the game. When Blizzard created each SC2 unit, I'm sure they wanted each one of them to at least get some usage and for original strategies to be designed around such units. No one will use HT now except very situationally. The same is true of reapers after they received their huge nerf. More units will suffer this fate in the future, if their current hack & slash balancing continues. Even with colossi fulfilling the splash requirement, HTs are still critical for defending expos from drops, and killing banshee play - the KA nerf hardly affects these functions. I'm positive people will begin adding them back into their play at appropriate times. People are simply too used to using storm as an on-demand and throw away weapon rather than keeping their templar alive. | ||
|
Alphasquad
Austria505 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:09 andrewlt wrote: The more I think about it, the more I think that warpgates shouldn't have made it past beta. Negating defender's advantage removes one of the cornerstones of any strategy game. And the balancing Blizzard did to compensate (weak gateway units, colossus) has had a bad effect on the game. Nearly every single problem in any vP match-up is caused directly by warpgates or the balancing Blizz did to compensate for warpgates. i disagree with you on warpgates for the reason that the advantage of the defender would be extremely huge (im a zerg player) as zerg you could easily move speedlings to the reinforcement path and starve the protoss army and a terran already have bunkers, planetary fortress and siege tanks and easily the best defence and with 2-3 reactor barracks support the protoss would be outmassed hard and fast i dont know about nerfing the colossus because how would protoss deal with terran and zerg armies?gateway units will not work in macro games, ht got nerfed already and carriers are a less appealing option due to long production time - in my logic a nerf to colossi would require a change within the other mass destruction units | ||
|
Toadvine
Poland2234 Posts
On April 05 2011 01:35 Mommas Boy wrote: We felt this upgrade reduced strategic choice. When combined with stalker or charge zealot warp-ins, this upgrade made it nearly impossible to do any sort of harassment attack anywhere there was a pylon. We didn’t like the reduction in strategic options, as the opponent could only fight major battles with protoss in the late game. It's great that they finally understand how Warpgates reduce strategic choice and stop small-scale harassment in a late-game scenario. They also allow for ridiculous timing attacks and make it impossible for anything coming out of a gateway to be any good. Expecting removal any day now.  We felt late game protoss splash damage was slightly overpowered. This applies both to high templars and colossi. We felt that if we were to nerf both of these units protoss may end up too weak in the late game. Therefore, we decided to adjust high templars first and see how the game plays out. As we’ve mentioned many times before, we feel it’s safer to take small steps in making balance changes than making drastic changes to an entire race. The fact that they consider KA removal a "small step"... On the other hand, I do hope they overnerf the Colossus and the shitty design of Protoss becomes clearly visible to everyone. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:35 Gigaudas wrote: Removing warp-in is necessary to do that imo and they won't remove warp-in. PvP just needs some sort of improvement to defender's advantage. A shield damage bonus to cannons, say. I'm sure creative people could think of better ones. Maybe bring back the shield battery! | ||
|
arb
Noobville17921 Posts
On April 05 2011 02:13 village_idiot wrote: Thank god they're going to nerf the colossus I hope so. Then i can make a post like in beta from a zerg perspective "Revenge is sweet". Though i cant even begin to imagine protoss like it was in beta, they nerfed them every patch and protoss still is called op as shit remember when colossus did like 22x2 an attack? ridiculous | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
| ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
Why do people hate colossi so much? (as a unit, not related to OPness or whatever). | ||
|
Ribbon
United States5278 Posts
I think the reasoning of Templay over Colossus was thus: "If we nerf the templar, then harass against Protoss becomes a lot more viable. Then maybe it won't matter as much if nothing can take the protoss death ball head on, because Zerg and Terran can harass the Protoss to death by hitting where the Death Ball isn't." In other words, they wanted to nerf the templar by nerfing it, and see if they could nerf the Colossus by giving Z and T another option of handling deathballs (in addition to the fungal buff). I don't think they thought it would surely happen, but maybe they figured it was worth a shot. If not, I expect to see some of the Colo damage changed to just bonus to light, so that Colo still crush hydra (since little else P has does), but isn't so good against the roach half of the army. That's my prediction. EDIT: Given that the 1.4.11 notes made a joke about how no one used carriers, I imagine the Colo nerf will come with a carrier buff, to make all three lategame P options kind of good. | ||
|
eot
146 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:09 andrewlt wrote: The more I think about it, the more I think that warpgates shouldn't have made it past beta. Negating defender's advantage removes one of the cornerstones of any strategy game. And the balancing Blizzard did to compensate (weak gateway units, colossus) has had a bad effect on the game. Nearly every single problem in any vP match-up is caused directly by warpgates or the balancing Blizz did to compensate for warpgates. Succinct, but true. Couldn't agree more. | ||
|
ciaNo
Italy123 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
floor exercise
Canada5847 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:51 Yaotzin wrote: Everyone was stronger in beta tho. 1 supply roaches, 60 dmg tanks etc etc. Why do people hate colossi so much? (as a unit, not related to OPness or whatever). Because it requires basically zero micro and dictates the flow of every match up. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
| ||
|
L3gendary
Canada1470 Posts
| ||
|
entropius
United States1046 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:45 Yaotzin wrote: PvP just needs some sort of improvement to defender's advantage. A shield damage bonus to cannons, say. I'm sure creative people could think of better ones. Maybe bring back the shield battery! I think defender's advantage should exist without any sort of investment in static defense. An interesting change to warpin would be to make the warpgate cooldown based on the distance from the warpgate to the warp location, so proxy warpins require a longer cooldown than in-base ones. It would also encourage P to spread warpgates around their bases, which would be interesting. Warpin is an interesting mechanic, but there should be some penalty for proxy warpins -- in this case, that you have to build more warpgates to warp in at the same rate as the defender. | ||
|
Daralii
United States16991 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:47 arb wrote: I hope so. Then i can make a post like in beta from a zerg perspective "Revenge is sweet". Though i cant even begin to imagine protoss like it was in beta, they nerfed them every patch and protoss still is called op as shit remember when colossus did like 22x2 an attack? ridiculous To be fair, P was widely considered underpowered until the last season of GSL. MC and other pros arguably make the race seem more powerful than it is. | ||
|
MisterTea
United Kingdom1047 Posts
On April 05 2011 03:36 dekuschrub wrote: please god nerf collosi they are sooo lame avoid them or focus them they're not that bad | ||
| ||
