|
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 05:44 terranghost wrote:
I like the patch notes overall.
But just out of curiosity can someone explain why so many protoss are liking the archon change in PvP. Its obvious to see why they would like it in tvp but in PvP? Out of all the pvp's I watch it starts with 4 gate and ends with collosus. Changing the archon to massive imo doesn't help with that the only units in the protoss arsenal that would be affected by that are the phoenix and the void ray. Phoenix because graviton beam won't work on the archon anymore and the void ray because now the archon theoretically should get to do bonus damage to the archon.
The void ray damage vs the archon seems especially odd because the archon is supposed to be the only unit that is not affected by any type of bonus damage due to being psionic. But o well its the only MU that would affect would be PvP and of course IMO you can't have imbalance in a mirror MU.
To answer your response, massive breaks forcefields, opening up the window to gateway armies without Collosi in PvP, because currently its impossible in the late game because forcefields will rip it apart.
|
difference between 100% and 75% really isnt even that much if you keep into consideration the cost of a bunker itself
|
On April 26 2011 11:39 `ChroMaTe_ wrote:
Anyone realize that the pylon radius change will mess up Protoss wall-ins against Zerg? 7.5 was just enough to fit the Cybercore between the Gateway and Pylon, now the Pylon will be in the way due to the radius ..
Omg this pylon change is going to be soooo bad. Wallins, building placement, cannon placement vs mutas, and worst of all warping in stalkers is going to make me sick. Pylon pwer is so fucking annoying already i hate it. Cramped start locations are much worse. And i already have to build A warpin pylon at my natural. Now goning to be worse. Not to mention covering space for nydas backdoors just got worse. How about let puylons move like a spinE crwlawler.
|
I am most concerned with the timings of all other warpgate based builds. Three gate sentry expand, three gate pressure expand, and DT rush could all be delayed from this patch.
So in general, this could make it harder for the Protoss to expand, and lead to more cheesy aggressive openings by the Protoss due to the lack of an effective builds that rely on warpgate tech. Protoss is suffering a huge nerf here, and gaining access to quicker gateway units (and gateways are only used at the start of the game). Forge openings will still be viable on maps that have a natural that is conducive to them.
|
The more i'm looking at the notes the more i'm thinking this is going to end up being really good for protoss.
1. Lower build times on units from gateway means less susceptible to cheese in pvt and pvz and easier to hold cannon rush.
2. Smaller pylons means korean 4 gate not viable (yay!)
3. archons massive means archons are viable in pvt and pvp yay!
4. Warp gate nerf means protoss can probably safely go 2 gate robo expand and possibly 3 gate expand.
|
On April 27 2011 05:39 rbx270j wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 05:12 Jayrod wrote:On April 27 2011 05:07 rbx270j wrote:On April 27 2011 05:06 Jayrod wrote:On April 27 2011 04:45 shockaslim wrote:On April 27 2011 04:28 Jayrod wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On April 27 2011 04:02 KimJongChill wrote:On April 27 2011 03:53 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 03:15 j3i wrote:
I was expecting a way for zerg to deal with forcefields, but I still like these changes. Maybe next time they'll make spine crawlers "massive." Burrow, ultras, air units, keeping sentry energy low through applying pressure, engaging in more open areas. There I gave you 5+ ways and I didnt even have to patch the game god i hate when people say ultras to deal with ff's, How are ultras not one of the many ways I listed to deal with forcefields? Or are you another one of those zergs that doesn't care about balance or appreciate the fact that without forcefields Protoss would never be able to compete. Pylon>Gateway>Cybernetics Core = Sentries(400/100) Spawning Pool>Lair>Infestation Pit>Hive>Ultralisk Cavern = Ultralisks (considerably more) You lose to the 1 sentry push much? Please don't ignore the multitude of ways in which a zerg has to deal with forcefields. I didn't even include sidestepping in my list... do you know how fucking powerful it is to win by simply avoiding direct battles with a player. It works in ZvP and ZvT. Source: personal experience Forcefields are not such a big problem late in the game - that's the point. This is wrong on so many levels. I can tell you as a protoss player unless ive made a switch to mass upgraded blink stalker in the late game I completely live and die by the forcefield no matter what the stage of the game is... Do zerg players really think this? Maybe thats why they are doing so poorly. If you really think a Zerg defending a 5-6 gate sentry-heavy timing has the same or less difficulty as a late-game sentry-heavy timing, I will do what I can to explain my point. A Zerg with few to no infestors, few to no mutas, no ultras and 2 mining bases has way more trouble with forcefields than a Zerg who has those options available. This is hugely compounded by the fact that a proxy pylon allows the Protoss to have near-instant access to all reenforcements and can cut Zerg reenforcements in half by force-fielding the ramp.
I dont think its the same or less difficulty. I think zergs should fear the forcefield all game long as its incredibly powerful. I also don't think that everything in this game fits into nice little timing attacks. Until you have + 3 attack blink stalkers a protoss army without sentry is much much weaker than one with them...
|
On April 27 2011 05:47 BronzeKnee wrote:
I am most concerned with the timings of all other warpgate based builds. Three gate sentry expand, three gate pressure expand, and DT rush could all be delayed from this patch.
So in general, this could make it harder for the Protoss to expand, and lead to more cheesy aggressive openings by the Protoss due to the lack of an effective builds that rely on warpgate tech. Protoss is suffering a huge nerf here, and gaining access to quicker gateway units (and gateways are only used at the start of the game). Forge openings will still be viable on maps that have a natural that is conducive to them.
I don't understand how it can be delay ??? the buff for the GW unit was to prevent delay of the warp gate. The only thing the patch have done is like protoss already start with the warpgate but can't warp the unit where he want
|
omg these are amazing! hopefully they know what they are doing with toss...
|
great changes i play protoss by the wey but i like that changes.... hope they buff siege tanks once agean...
sige tanks plz : from 50dps to 60dps ....simply sige tanks sucks now... hope this will hepen...also thor speed buff would be great....
|
25% less power coverage per pylon. :/
How will walloffs on maps with wide ramp look like.
Anyone with access to the North American Private Test Realm care to post some pictures?
|
So on the large maps, banshees will be literally worthless vs zerg and bunker pressure into expansion will be worthless, I guess 14 CC and building a wall not even jinro could match is the way to play on maps like tal'darim now
|
On April 27 2011 05:46 Skank wrote:
To answer your response, massive breaks forcefields, opening up the window to gateway armies without Collosi in PvP, because currently its impossible in the late game because forcefields will rip it apart.
Templar -> Archon in the back, then stalkers, then zealots could be a fantastic unit organization.
Storm as zealots charge, FF to protect your stalkers, then break the fields after the archons are morphed.
I'm just glad there's a reason not to build colossi in every single game. Gets boring.
|
On April 27 2011 05:54 Niruz wrote:
So on the large maps, banshees will be literally worthless vs zerg and bunker pressure into expansion will be worthless, I guess 14 CC and building a wall not even jinro could match is the way to play on maps like tal'darim now
dude, what are you even talking about
spore crawler root time
that's the amount of time it takes to root a sproe crawler that you are moving from one spot to another
and why will bunker pressure be worthless?
if you get the bunker up it probably already succeeded, and if you do have to salvage it then you've lost 25 minerals, OMG!
let's just complain about anything and everything we can possibly find to complain about
|
Everything seems quite fine, I am a protoss myself, and these changes will severly impact my earlygame in a very good way, however
Pylon power radius has been decreased from 7.5 to 6.5.
This makes me very, very sad 
|
I just played about 15 games of pvp on the ptr with a bunch of strats, while it is true that 4 gate can now be held by 3 gate robo. Every game is decided by colossus. Whoever expands first looses even when you're ahead. Whoever has the better colossus count on 1 base wins. That's pretty much how every game went.
|
well bunkers are now taxed
darn that starcraft government.
|
On April 27 2011 05:57 travis wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2011 05:54 Niruz wrote:
So on the large maps, banshees will be literally worthless vs zerg and bunker pressure into expansion will be worthless, I guess 14 CC and building a wall not even jinro could match is the way to play on maps like tal'darim now dude, what are you even talking about spore crawler root time that's the amount of time it takes to root a sproe crawler that you are moving from one spot to another and why will bunker pressure be worthless? if you get the bunker up it probably already succeeded, and if you do have to salvage it then you've lost 25 minerals, OMG! let's just complain about anything and everything we can possibly find to complain about
I agree
|
Blizzard tends to nerf things in chunks. Okay, so your nerfing warpgate 40 seconds, that's all in needs. Not an additional nerf to the pylon, too. I don't like nerfing the same thing in two different ways in one patch.
Same thing happened with the reape: build time was increased, then in the next patch they made the rax require a depot and moved the upgrade to the fact.
|
This pylon range change has to go, seriously. Maybe it's not as bad as I think but if it is I need to buy some keyboards in advance...
|
Maybe (hopefully) they are just testing the pylon change and the warpgate change and not actually planning to implement both.
So, has anyone tested making different types of walls with the pylon change yet? Does it screw any of it up? I sure hope not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
