|
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 29 2011 07:50 unsaid wrote:that's really bad... i think warpgates should have exactly the same build time always  [[. its annoying , i got used to warpgates in all cases and now ill have to choose between gateways and them . HATE it
it adds another dynamic to the game though. adding choices etc. seems to be nearly universally good.
|
On April 29 2011 07:50 unsaid wrote:that's really bad... i think warpgates should have exactly the same build time always [[. its annoying , i got used to warpgates in all cases and now ill have to choose between gateways and them . HATE it
I'm not sure what you mean? Warp gate build time hasn't changed, and you would still use warp gate as soon as it's finished because it allows 5 free seconds in the cooldown of the next round. Blizzard intended all players to use warpgates only. There are really no reasons why you wouldn't.
|
yes there will not be to paths to cose betvine warp gates and gateweys... warp gate is still bether then gateweys....like eny upgread is +1 armor bether than +2 :D... only now you can rush oponent with 2 gate proxy = 6 pooll zerg ..and not with 4 gate...that is only diferenc....
this patch is good begining of sc2 patchis they finaly have guts to change things hope stim nerf is on the wey and some mecha buffs or something....
|
What do you guys think of the idea that warpgate being slower build time than an actual gateway, like messing with the numbers a little bit of course. Then you get the advantage of being able to warp in anywhere, but the disadvantage that it takes a couple (game) seconds longer. Then, there's this huge metagame around gateway vs warpgate, instead of just getting warpgates.
That makes sense to me. The only reason "warp" is in the game is just like day9 said - "Wouldn't it be "cool" if Protoss units could warp in to pylons1111!!!!". So why not make gateways viable.
Imo, the variation would help toss some.
|
On April 29 2011 10:34 Aeneous wrote:
What do you guys think of the idea that warpgate being slower build time than an actual gateway, like messing with the numbers a little bit of course. Then you get the advantage of being able to warp in anywhere, but the disadvantage that it takes a couple (game) seconds longer. Then, there's this huge metagame around gateway vs warpgate, instead of just getting warpgates.
That makes sense to me. The only reason "warp" is in the game is just like day9 said - "Wouldn't it be "cool" if Protoss units could warp in to pylons1111!!!!". So why not make gateways viable.
Imo, the variation would help toss some.
Simply put, it would complicate things. I'm sure there was a time when Blizzard was toying with the idea of gateways vs warpgate decision making, but I think they made the right decision by defining warpgates as a clear cut upgrade.
If you did it the way you described, players would simply keep things as gateways while turtling, and then morph when harassing/attacking. It doesn't add much dimensionality to it except a brief moment of vulnerability during the conversion. Seeing players morph gateways back and forth isn't exciting, its just fiddly -- and more likely to lead to some embarrassing games where players are caught in an unlucky situation.
|
On April 26 2011 11:23 jaiBing wrote:
salvage change plus spore crawler is huge....... actually everything is lol
Are you serious? the salvage change is nothing.... that money you lose is like 1/3 of a marine... this is such a joke that they would even change it it is so small
|
I'm really liking the massive archon change. This just might give a little more variety to PvP--archons in front can tank colossus fire as well as break apart forcefields. Will have to see what happens soon.
I still hope to see 4gates being used in PvP (as well as the other matchups), even though warpgates are a bit slower.
|
On April 29 2011 12:26 KimboS1ice wrote:Show nested quote +On April 26 2011 11:23 jaiBing wrote:
salvage change plus spore crawler is huge....... actually everything is lol Are you serious? the salvage change is nothing.... that money you lose is like 1/3 of a marine... this is such a joke that they would even change it it is so small
Well, it was just plain silly when you could get more money back by finishing a bunker + salvage than cancelling it...
I actually love how salvage doesn't fully refund bunkers now. You may think it's tiny, but this does help...especially during early game rushes, where minerals are low...
|
Feels like this patch is a buff for Protoss. I am starting to worry as a Terran player. I thought since we had a slight advantage early it evened out the late game... but now I don't know anymore. We'll see.
|
On April 29 2011 12:40 DooMDash wrote:
Feels like this patch is a buff for Protoss. I am starting to worry as a Terran player. I thought since we had a slight advantage early it evened out the late game... but now I don't know anymore. We'll see.
I think it means that pure bio in TvP late game just isn't viable AT ALL anymore. The patch is an great attempt to push Mech play in PvT.
Thorzain really showed us that Thors are underused against Protoss. It's just going to take a while until the terran deathball is figured out 
|
On April 29 2011 11:03 mousepad wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 10:34 Aeneous wrote:
What do you guys think of the idea that warpgate being slower build time than an actual gateway, like messing with the numbers a little bit of course. Then you get the advantage of being able to warp in anywhere, but the disadvantage that it takes a couple (game) seconds longer. Then, there's this huge metagame around gateway vs warpgate, instead of just getting warpgates.
That makes sense to me. The only reason "warp" is in the game is just like day9 said - "Wouldn't it be "cool" if Protoss units could warp in to pylons1111!!!!". So why not make gateways viable.
Imo, the variation would help toss some. Simply put, it would complicate things. I'm sure there was a time when Blizzard was toying with the idea of gateways vs warpgate decision making, but I think they made the right decision by defining warpgates as a clear cut upgrade. If you did it the way you described, players would simply keep things as gateways while turtling, and then morph when harassing/attacking. It doesn't add much dimensionality to it except a brief moment of vulnerability during the conversion. Seeing players morph gateways back and forth isn't exciting, its just fiddly -- and more likely to lead to some embarrassing games where players are caught in an unlucky situation.
I disagree so much. Not to mention you've drawn some pretty specific conclusions already about the future metagame. The last sentence is particularly meaningless. See a player chrono a CyberCore 3 times isn't "exciting" either, but that's not the point. The point would be greater strategic variety. I'm not sure how observing buildings became an argument. And "embarrassing games" are not limited to if players transform Gateways at an inopportune time seriously where are you even coming from?
|
On April 29 2011 08:01 RavenLoud wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 07:50 unsaid wrote:that's really bad... i think warpgates should have exactly the same build time always [[. its annoying , i got used to warpgates in all cases and now ill have to choose between gateways and them . HATE it I'm not sure what you mean? Warp gate build time hasn't changed, and you would still use warp gate as soon as it's finished because it allows 5 free seconds in the cooldown of the next round. Blizzard intended all players to use warpgates only. There are really no reasons why you wouldn't.
There's now a choice of how fast to get warpgate, though. Do you start the research ASAP, or do you use the gas to tech. Do you chrono boost it? How many times? Etc. etc.
I doubt we'll see non-gimmicky builds that get Hallu before Warpgate or something crazy like that, but we'll see some builds that start the research and don't CB it, or even builds that hold off on researching Warp Gate to get a sentry out a little faster etc etc etc.
|
On April 29 2011 10:34 Aeneous wrote:
What do you guys think of the idea that warpgate being slower build time than an actual gateway, like messing with the numbers a little bit of course. Then you get the advantage of being able to warp in anywhere, but the disadvantage that it takes a couple (game) seconds longer. Then, there's this huge metagame around gateway vs warpgate, instead of just getting warpgates.
That makes sense to me. The only reason "warp" is in the game is just like day9 said - "Wouldn't it be "cool" if Protoss units could warp in to pylons1111!!!!". So why not make gateways viable.
Imo, the variation would help toss some.
The only reason anything is in the game(and in BW) is "wouldn't it be cool if X had Y".
The whole thing that many people are mentioning about the decision between gateway and Warpgate is just an artificial and mindless decision making mechanism that doesn't add much depth to the game, sorry but I don't think its a good design choice just to add stuff just because it can be added.
|
On April 29 2011 11:03 mousepad wrote:Show nested quote +On April 29 2011 10:34 Aeneous wrote:
Simply put, it would complicate things. I'm sure there was a time when Blizzard was toying with the idea of gateways vs warpgate decision making, but I think they made the right decision by defining warpgates as a clear cut upgrade.
If you did it the way you described, players would simply keep things as gateways while turtling, and then morph when harassing/attacking. It doesn't add much dimensionality to it except a brief moment of vulnerability during the conversion. Seeing players morph gateways back and forth isn't exciting, its just fiddly -- and more likely to lead to some embarrassing games where players are caught in an unlucky situation. I disagree so much. Not to mention you've drawn some pretty specific conclusions already about the future metagame. The last sentence is particularly meaningless. See a player chrono a CyberCore 3 times isn't "exciting" either, but that's not the point. The point would be greater strategic variety. I'm not sure how observing buildings became an argument. And "embarrassing games" are not limited to if players transform Gateways at an inopportune time seriously where are you even coming from?
I agree that it would add greater strategic variety, but it would be weird to balance. If gateways produce faster right off it would be too strong early game. Or warpgate unit production could be slowed enough that they would be even weaker late game, something really not needed. The other option is to make gateways produce faster after you get the warpgate upgrade, which is somewhat counter intuitive. They'd have to name it "warp technology" or something. Also how much faster do you make the gateways produce units? If it's only a few seconds shaved off then is it really worthwhile to keep them as gateways? You really do need them as warpgates when you push.
I mostly agree with the strategic analysis of Mousepad, it would be a turtle/attack mode situation with the nuance that you would need to re-turtle and make a lot of units for it ever to be worthwhile to change them back. Protoss are already attack mode/defense mode inclined as it is with units being the way they are, they don't need more help being pushed in that direction. I admit it would add strategic elements to being under pressure: "do I start making units out of my new gateways or do I warp form them to get units now?"
I think the added variance would be mostly not that cool, but if Blizzard did make that change it would make it a lot more intuitive to make the new expansion units gateway only. Allowing Blizzard to make the unit stronger because it can't warp in anywhere. Of course seeing more robo/stargate units would also be really awesome.
The patch addresses the problem of gateways sucking so much more than warpgates and will add a much needed variance to protoss openings, especially for PvP as discussed before.
|
I thought the State of the Game cast basically showcased the lines of thought that should be debated. Is it too awkward for pros and players to force them to relearn every PvX intro? I don't think so, but it is close, I mean really close to being very frustrating on blizzards part.
In this case I think it was clear that while the PvP meta-game was evolving it was doing it slowly and it was still very limited. Professional PvP games were just not awe-inspiringly awesome like the ways that PvT could be for example.(TSL thorzain v.s. MC, omfg that was cool.) Tyler had very valid points, but clearly he likes PvP more than most people do. This patch has the chance to make PvP one of the coolest match ups if enough openings become viable.
I also strongly agree with Day 9 in his argument that it is strategically limiting to make gateways sooo terrible in comparison to warpgates. Slightly terrible in comparison will do just fine.
I think that making 2 gate pressure against zerg more viable again is cool as long as they don't nerf the infestor. Zerg need it to be good enough for the late game. Blizzard did terran a favor with the ghost buff and gave terran everywhere a hint: Use ghosts against the infestors, they are powerful, not over-powerful.
I hope Blizzard cuts back with the patches very soon, but I think this is a very nice one.
.....Massive Archons: <3 <3 <3
|
On April 29 2011 07:50 unsaid wrote:that's really bad... i think warpgates should have exactly the same build time always [[. its annoying , i got used to warpgates in all cases and now ill have to choose between gateways and them . HATE it
It still a useful upgrade to get very quickly even if the build times for all gateway units was the same as warpgate units.
It mixes up the production cycle
Terran and zerg
Step 1
Resources are collected
Setp 2
begin producing new unit
step 3
unit finishes
Warp gates
Step 1
Resources are collected
step 2
unit finishes
step 3
Wait for cooldown
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=197571
|
doesnt this mean that thors are gonna suck so bad against mutas? like the game will magic box them for you... maybe well have to see how this mechanic works but this scares me >.< otherwise good ideas 
|
I personally like it, its about time protoss can pressure terran early game like they do with 3 maruaders slow timing.
|
I wonder how these changes will affect ESPORTS, especially PvP. It seems too early to say right now, so I'm not inclined to believe many of you.
|
On April 29 2011 14:43 SolidZeal wrote:
I thought the State of the Game cast basically showcased the lines of thought that should be debated. Is it too awkward for pros and players to force them to relearn every PvX intro? I don't think so, but it is close, I mean really close to being very frustrating on blizzards part.
Blizzard already set a precedent with this when they the patch that required a supply depot/pylon to be built before barracks/gateway
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
