Massive units are not affected by concussive shells. If you think they are, you are wrong. It's SPORE crawlers that are being changed, not SPINE. Please read carefully.
On April 27 2011 04:32 bokeevboke wrote: I so hoped they would change nydus worm, nukes and warp-prisms and make static defense stronger. That would make the game much more entertaining.
I'm so tired of a-move ball to ball fights...
Static defense stronger, you are kidding, right? If something they should be weaker. Even late game 3/3 zerglings have a hard time against mass cannons.
Zerglings are not supposed to break static defense. There are special units like broodlords or ultralisks. General concept of any RTS is that every unit has its own purpose.
We need to have defender's advantage in order to see more strategical play, where players try to trick each other and attack multiple locations with different kinds of army.
I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
On April 27 2011 11:43 vitaum88 wrote: So here are my two cents...
I've seen a LOT of people complaining about how Terrans are not as gas heavy as other races and stuff like that, and with the ghost changes (200/100) things will bla bla bla....
We also know that in many cases MMM can win you the game, but then again, let's face it: a lot of people complain that terrans win with "tier 1/1.5 units alone". Terrans eventually had to start dealing with things that MMM just won't cut. That will make them get into their heavier gas units (mech/air or both).
On TvP, you need ghosts for mech to excel, and you must also worry about how immobile the bulk of a mech army is... Planetary fortress, sensorial towers, etc, will be "somewhat of a gas sink", or else you'll be walked around and caught with your tanks out of position.
As you can see, gas starts to get very slim due to extra needs apart from the army itself (upgrades, PFs, sens towers, rebuilding, repairing, etc). Reducing gas will help that a lot.
Terran is also the only race without a macro mechanic that helps gas mining.
Chronoboost and spawn larvae just get you more workers, period. You can use them on minerals, on gas, whatever.
But MULEs are mineral only. In terms of actual workers, Terran will always be behind Z and P, so assigning those workers to gas is a bigger sacrifice for them.
Terran is also assumed to bring SCVs into battle. The fact that Terran SCVs are occupied while constructing every building, are required to repair mechanical units, and are the only melee units in the army makes the MULE a requirement to stay on equal footing in many cases.
HasuObs showed us the real end-game threat of protoss. Once a protoss player is maxed, the game is essentially over. Every second the Protoss stays maxed the worse off you are. HasuObs actually had like 35-40 warpgates, maybe more. To replenish 60-80 supply worth of units in 5 seconds, and then have a 120-140 supply army in less than 45 seconds after you lose your whole army is just straight up broken. No way around that.
Protoss actually has an effective Infinity Supply Push. Once they have enough warpgates to remax there is no way to win the game. This game is a perfect example as he was up against one of the best players in the world.
How in the world is Blizzard gonna fix something THAT broken?
Except in Bomber versus WhiteRa, Bomber built a ton of orbital commands for mules, sacked all of his SCVs except for those mining gas, and was able to have a 180 supply army compared to WhiteRa's 140 supply army, and his destroyed WhiteRa's almost instantly without WhiteRa having a chance. Those 40 units warped in immediately afterwards wouldve likewise melted instantly to overwhelming terran numbers.
On April 27 2011 12:36 lambchops wrote: I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
This. Zerg is much better in this regard because you get something like 12 larvae per hatch whereas protoss it's 1 cooldown per 150 minerals. On top of that to be at full strength protoss gateway armies require sentries, sentries have energy, energy takes time to build thats equal to or greater than most build times, similar concept with high templar.
On April 27 2011 12:36 lambchops wrote: I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
No, not every race can do it. T/Z are constrained by build time. WG are not (realistically). In late game scenario: P - Gateway units constrained only by number of WG. Z - Constrained by build time. T - Constrained by both build time AND production buildings.
Speaking purely about macro mechanics P >>>>> Z >>>>>> T in LATE game.
On April 27 2011 12:36 lambchops wrote: I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
This. Zerg is much better in this regard because you get something like 12 larvae per hatch whereas protoss it's 1 cooldown per 150 minerals. On top of that to be at full strength protoss gateway armies require sentries, sentries have energy, energy takes time to build thats equal to or greater than most build times, similar concept with high templar.
not sure if this means you agree but it definitely puts things into perspective doesn't it? i'm pretty sure a 40 wg army vs a 40 barrack army in terms of replenishing speeds/micro battles, terran would come out on top with stim and what not. and hydra/roach pretty much decimates any protoss tier 1/1.5 unit if there are no good forcefields placed.
On April 27 2011 12:36 lambchops wrote: I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
No, not every race can do it. T/Z are constrained by build time. WG are not (realistically). In late game scenario: P - Gateway units constrained only by number of WG. Z - Constrained by build time. T - Constrained by both build time AND production buildings.
Speaking purely about macro mechanics P >>>>> Z >>>>>> T in LATE game.
So suddenly warpgates aren't production buildings? if we're speaking late game, the terran can afford to send 20 scvs to build 20 barracks if he has amassed a number of orbitals to cover for them with mules. economically speaking, if the p trades armies with the t, the t comes out economically ahead
//edit - on the note of build time, warp gates basically just have it backwards, we're constrained by a cooldown, which in essence is the same as build time, only backwards. the only time the complaint of 40 warpgates being unfair is if there is a blatant proxy pylon in front of all your buildings, clearly 40 units warping in to wreck your base isn't fun. but leaving a proxy pylon there is the players fault, right?
On April 27 2011 11:43 vitaum88 wrote: So here are my two cents...
I've seen a LOT of people complaining about how Terrans are not as gas heavy as other races and stuff like that, and with the ghost changes (200/100) things will bla bla bla....
We also know that in many cases MMM can win you the game, but then again, let's face it: a lot of people complain that terrans win with "tier 1/1.5 units alone". Terrans eventually had to start dealing with things that MMM just won't cut. That will make them get into their heavier gas units (mech/air or both).
On TvP, you need ghosts for mech to excel, and you must also worry about how immobile the bulk of a mech army is... Planetary fortress, sensorial towers, etc, will be "somewhat of a gas sink", or else you'll be walked around and caught with your tanks out of position.
As you can see, gas starts to get very slim due to extra needs apart from the army itself (upgrades, PFs, sens towers, rebuilding, repairing, etc). Reducing gas will help that a lot.
Terran is also the only race without a macro mechanic that helps gas mining.
Chronoboost and spawn larvae just get you more workers, period. You can use them on minerals, on gas, whatever.
But MULEs are mineral only. In terms of actual workers, Terran will always be behind Z and P, so assigning those workers to gas is a bigger sacrifice for them.
Having more workers does not help with gas mining. You max out on 6 workers per base for gas anyways, what is having more workers going to do to help your gas intake? Gas mining rate is number-of-bases-based, not worker-based.
I do not think that PvP changes will change anything below tip top Masters/GM league. I just got through playing a lot of PvP with my friend (he's masters) on the PTR. I was able to win a huge majority of the games going 4 gate while he tried a multitude of builds and I am currently in Plat.
Our conclusion was that unless you are tip top masters or Grandmaster, the changes meant to fix 4 gate do not. For the vast majority of players it will still be 4 gate or die.
Blizzard has shown in the past that they will balance for the lower leagues. They are going to have to make additional changes if they want to change the face of PvP below GM league. You heard it here first (maybe not).
If someone has any ideas on how to not 4 gate and not die I'd love to hear them and test them out. We ran out of ideas after trying robo and twilight builds.
We played a lot more games than just these. Most of the games I lost (I was the one 4 gating) were due to macro mistakes or early micro losses with the initial zealot/stalker. I am not including the games where glaringly obvious mistakes were made that cost either of us the game.
Ray, like a lot of other Protoss, is not familiar with non 4 gate builds PvP. It is highly possible that poor build order efficiency could be the reason why we did not have any success. However, it is important to remember the context of the OP. "These changes do not change anything for anyone below tip top masters and GM league"
The fact that you can still warp in units over the forcefield is the biggest reason why 4 gate will still be a dominating build PvP at diamond and below.
This is a buff for Protoss in my eyes (high diam), except that you have to make warp gates later. Yes you now have to travel across the map but you are probably getting those units faster. That is more worrisome to me as Zerg than that units could get warped in close to my base. I'm not QQing about it, I'm just saying that I do think it opens up new threats which I will have to learn to account for. But we'll see how it plays out, I could be totally wrong about this.
I think the whole warpgate timing nerf is not needed especially at the highest skill levels, even the lower skilled players will eventually learn how to deal with a 4gate. There are many builds being devised now to stop a 4gate. Such a massive revamp of the game is toatally unecessary, it will change all match ups. As a result everyone will have to change their style of play, which is extremley annoying. Yesterday i watched the root guys streaming team games, while playing they discussed the new changes and were irritated because of that fact. Even now on SotG, the general consensus is that such change in timing is not needed. In yesterday's GSL, neither player 4 gated in the Trickster anypro game.
The pylon radius nerf was to prevent low ground pylons warping on the high ground i think? A much better solution that immediately comes to mind would be making it impossible to warp units into another players psionic matrix. Maybe having only warp prisms be able to do this to encourage fun warp prism drop play. This would be a change exclusive to the PvP match up, the match up which blizzard "feels" is most broken.
Blizzard, let the game grow... Every month the metagame changes and new builds are looking real strong cause no one's seen them before. Several weeks later people know the counters and it goes on...
Oh man, 2 rax gasless FE is pretty sick now in TvP, P cant really pressure you without their 4 gate, I get my expo stupid fast and now with ghosts being cheaper I can get viking/ghost much quicker. These changes finally have helped my TvP
On April 27 2011 13:43 taldarimAltar wrote: The pylon radius nerf was to prevent low ground pylons warping on the high ground i think? A much better solution that immediately comes to mind would be making it impossible to warp units into another players psionic matrix. This would be a change exclusive to the PvP match up, the match up which blizzard "feels" is most broken.
The problem with that would be if the opponent sneaks pylons into your base, restricting your warp-in locations, possibly putting you into an unwinnable situation.
On April 27 2011 13:43 taldarimAltar wrote: The pylon radius nerf was to prevent low ground pylons warping on the high ground i think? A much better solution that immediately comes to mind would be making it impossible to warp units into another players psionic matrix. This would be a change exclusive to the PvP match up, the match up which blizzard "feels" is most broken.
The problem with that would be if the opponent sneaks pylons into your base, restricting your warp-in locations, possibly putting you into an unwinnable situation.
If the opponent is sneaking pylons into your base, you probably need to worry about scouting before balance
On April 27 2011 13:43 taldarimAltar wrote: The pylon radius nerf was to prevent low ground pylons warping on the high ground i think? A much better solution that immediately comes to mind would be making it impossible to warp units into another players psionic matrix. This would be a change exclusive to the PvP match up, the match up which blizzard "feels" is most broken.
The problem with that would be if the opponent sneaks pylons into your base, restricting your warp-in locations, possibly putting you into an unwinnable situation.
If the opponent is sneaking pylons into your base, you probably need to worry about scouting before balance
I meant like aggressive push-ins, like if a army runs in, fights, then a probe sneaks in and throws down like four pylons, if you turn around to fight that off, and fight the army off, then you deserve a metal. Let's be honest, not everyone can react fast enough to kill the probe.
On April 27 2011 13:43 taldarimAltar wrote: The pylon radius nerf was to prevent low ground pylons warping on the high ground i think? A much better solution that immediately comes to mind would be making it impossible to warp units into another players psionic matrix. This would be a change exclusive to the PvP match up, the match up which blizzard "feels" is most broken.
The problem with that would be if the opponent sneaks pylons into your base, restricting your warp-in locations, possibly putting you into an unwinnable situation.
If the opponent is sneaking pylons into your base, you probably need to worry about scouting before balance
Yea, this. But in all honesty, they probably don't/didn't consider the psionic matrix canceling each other out thing 'cause of potential issues in 2v2, 3v3, 4v4s. And we all know how important those are /sarcasm.
On April 27 2011 12:36 lambchops wrote: I don't see how everyone is talking about wg being broken late game. The fact that we can build 40 warpgates endgame doesn't mean a terran can't have 40 barracks by endgame. like kinetik_inferno said, if a zerg can stall a protoss for half a minute, they would have the hydra/roach pop needed to fight if off, likewise if the terran went 40 barracks to be on par with a protosses 40 gateways, they would just have to stall half a minute to have a sizeable army again. the only difference is that protoss units cost significantly more than terran/zerg units, so a 40wg pop would be more or less a one time thing before they run dry of resources, making the other like 30 warpgates useless. i don't see why people complain about the endgame 40 warpgates, they cost money to make, and if they reacted by building the same amount of production, they churn out the same amount of units. warp gates aren't 'fundamentally broken' what hasuobs demonstrated was just a new way to spend your resources and replenish your army far quicker in the endgame. any other race can do the same with more hatcheries or more barracks.
as for that tsl game against boxer, the reason hasuobs had the ability to make so many extra gateways by the end of the game was because he was just that far ahead, there is no protoss imba bullshit or anything, boxer was just further behind, i'm sure if he had the resources to do it, boxer would also make 24 barracks to churn out units simultaneously and quickly.
This. Zerg is much better in this regard because you get something like 12 larvae per hatch whereas protoss it's 1 cooldown per 150 minerals. On top of that to be at full strength protoss gateway armies require sentries, sentries have energy, energy takes time to build thats equal to or greater than most build times, similar concept with high templar.
The difference is that WGs produce then cooldown. Zerg/Terran have to train for 20-50 seconds then have travel time to get units grouped together. Protoss get to warp in instantly all at the nearest pylon significantly cutting down on the time it takes to reinforce.
Either way I don't know if I'd say it's a big deal, but the 30-40 WGs and the orbital command economy replacement both kinda remind me of Ragnarok from Age of Mythology lol.
Fixed a bug where Ghosts could not quickly EMP the same location. Is there a reason why you would want to EMP the same location twice?
Yes there is a reason. You EMP twice when you want to drain 200 energy.
EMP drains only 100 shields and 100 energy, so like he said, when it has more than 100 energy and you want to get rid of it all, or if it has more than 100 shields like an archon.
EPT
but it definitely puts things into perspective doesn't it? i'm pretty sure a 40 wg army vs a 40 barrack army in terms of replenishing speeds/micro battles, terran would come out on top with stim and what not. and hydra/roach pretty much decimates any protoss tier 1/1.5 unit if there are no good forcefields placed.
