There's nothing random about forgoing detection. If you don't want to build spores that's your choice, you're rolling the dice and hoping DTs don't kill you.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
Isn't this one of the main reasons the Blizzard Dev team said recently that they want to get rid of the overseer. It is uninteresting and just a horrible detection unit in my eyes. Unfortunately I have no idea how they are going to implement changing them. Until then, I think 1 spore and 1 spine at each base is required after the protoss get their 3rd base up and 2 overseer in their army when you know they have the ability to make them.
They want to get rid of the overseer because it's a dull unit. Not because it's Zerg's detector. In fact that's the only thing going for it.
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
Well if Zergs want ovie detection because BW had that, then I want archons that kick ass and easy DTs. Oh and reavers too pls.
It's a silly argument of course, just as "I need ovie detection because BW had it" is. Different games. This is just silly theorycrafting, no Protoss is dominating with some DT strat.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
your basically adding up all the costs of complete dt protection to make a big intimidating number thats misleading. firstly you have to remember that Zerg unlike other races can make all drones or all units or a mix of the two depending on the build orders chosen so if your not bare minimum 16 drones ahead by the 4th hatch your larvae decisions are wrong. Both races need static defense so to say that Protoss has a huge resource lead just because they can make DT's is ignoring the static defense required to hold off zerg pushes and harassment and is biased.
On June 07 2011 06:30 Yaotzin wrote: They want to get rid of the overseer because it's a dull unit. Not because it's Zerg's detector. In fact that's the only thing going for it.
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
Well if Zergs want ovie detection because BW had that, then I want archons that kick ass and easy DTs. Oh and reavers too pls.
It's a silly argument of course, just as "I need ovie detection because BW had it" is. Different games. This is just silly theorycrafting, no Protoss is dominating with some DT strat.
Lategame DT's as harass + mix into your army is almost standard PvZ, this isn't really theorycrafting...
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
your basically adding up all the costs of complete dt protection to make a big intimidating number thats misleading. firstly you have to remember that Zerg unlike other races can make all drones or all units or a mix of the two depending on the build orders chosen so if your not bare minimum 16 drones ahead by the 4th hatch your larvae decisions are wrong. Both races need static defense so to say that Protoss has a huge resource lead just because they can make DT's is ignoring the static defense required to hold off zerg pushes and harassment and is biased.
My point is not so much that DTs are unfair, more that Zerg's detection options both kind of suck. I scout a dark shrine, then either dump all my minerals into static defense + extra overseers or I spend a 500-600 gas on overseers that (many times) just get sniped anyway.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
On June 07 2011 06:30 Yaotzin wrote: They want to get rid of the overseer because it's a dull unit. Not because it's Zerg's detector. In fact that's the only thing going for it.
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
Well if Zergs want ovie detection because BW had that, then I want archons that kick ass and easy DTs. Oh and reavers too pls.
It's a silly argument of course, just as "I need ovie detection because BW had it" is. Different games. This is just silly theorycrafting, no Protoss is dominating with some DT strat.
Lategame DT's as harass + mix into your army is almost standard PvZ, this isn't really theorycrafting...
I mean that the idea that this is a problem is theorycrafting. In practice, results don't back it up. Until/unless someone abuses the shit out of it and demonstrates that there is actually a problem, I say Zerg detection is just fine.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
On June 07 2011 05:53 DusTerr wrote: question: would giving changelings detect be OP or "fix" the "problem"?
This is actually a great idea and it wouldn't change the balance of the game too much. In the early to mid game, changelings are mainly used as sneaky scouts. Most good players can spot them and snipe them as they come/drop. Adding detection wouldn't change anything in this stage of the game unless you were hiding DTs in your base. Defensively, this doesn't give Zerg a big early advantage since you needed an Overseer to make changelings anyway.
This change will only really impact the late game. Changelings can be very easily disguised in large battles. Think back to Game 6 of Idra versus MC, where there was 50 Blink Stalkers + DTs versus45 Hydras + Infestors. Any Overseers stood no chance at that moment. MC could have sacrificed 12 Stalkers to snipe Overseers and the DTs would still force Idra to retreat or GG. At this point, if Overseers could spawn changelings that can also detect and move with the army, then Idra could have mobile, temporary detection that is not as easy to snipe in a large late-game battles.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
Scans cost 300 minerals, more than a spine and a spore.
I hate this comparison. A scan does not equate to a sudden loss of 300 minerals, merely that you lose the ability to mine an extra 300 minerals in the next minute or so. MULEs make bases last a shorter time, so in the context of lategame comparisons scans are obviously much more convenient than anything Zerg has to offer.
On June 07 2011 06:30 Yaotzin wrote: They want to get rid of the overseer because it's a dull unit. Not because it's Zerg's detector. In fact that's the only thing going for it.
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
Well if Zergs want ovie detection because BW had that, then I want archons that kick ass and easy DTs. Oh and reavers too pls.
It's a silly argument of course, just as "I need ovie detection because BW had it" is. Different games. This is just silly theorycrafting, no Protoss is dominating with some DT strat.
Lategame DT's as harass + mix into your army is almost standard PvZ, this isn't really theorycrafting...
I mean that the idea that this is a problem is theorycrafting. In practice, results don't back it up. Until/unless someone abuses the shit out of it and demonstrates that there is actually a problem, I say Zerg detection is just fine.
I'm not calling for radical balance changes (or balance changes at all, for that matter), I'm just saying that it's VERY ANNOYING to deal with DTs lategame. I would gladly trade overlord detection for archives DTs or stronger archons or whatever.
On April 26 2011 21:21 Zorkmid wrote: I don't really see any problem with Zerg's detection. vT you really only need one in the early game (for cloaked banshees). vP you don't really need detection until late game at which point 150/300 should cover you for the rest of the game.
Even though I think it's stupid to compare the two different games, let's do it......I played BW and DTs in that game were more effective there because zerg didn't have the ability to mass drones, so we couldn't afford spores and sunkens that easily. I seldom saw wraiths, but since they can shoot air and we had no queens, I can see why OLs had detection in that game.
The point is that you can send DTs all over the map for harass, in which case you would need 4-5 overseers or spend a LOT of money (and use up drones) to make spore + spine, which most of the time doesn't even block the DT harass if there are enough. 2-3 overseers are also very easy to snipe: overseers are slow, and very easy to pick off with blink micro. Sacrifice a few stalkers to make DTs invincible vs the zerg army? Hell yes. With the clusterfuck that SCII battles are, it's VERY HARD to fungal all of the DTs.
No, you simply make 2 spores and 2 spines at each base which in the end is actually better for you since it raises how many units you can produce, there is no fundamental flaw with this... This happens in every protoss match up even pvp... You have to build cannons at every base.... So don't suggest that this is only a "zerg problem". Also... i would love to see a protoss blink and kill the overseer that isn't positioned horribly, it may be a problem for people that put them on the same hotkey and attack move across the map.... but no if you control your overseer correctly you are fine.....
Lets see, late game I'm on 4 base and you want me to make 8 spores and 8 spines... that's 2k minerals down the drain just to protect vs DT harass, along with 16 lost drones. No, you don't just sacrifice drones to get a bigger army, because zerg doesn't have a deathball; losing your economy = gg because of how squishy zerg units are. P's that go DT lategame always blink suicide 9-10 stalkers to kill your overseers, because that forces zerg to pull his entire army back.
On June 07 2011 06:16 Yaotzin wrote: Would Zergs trade overlord detection for stronger archons and DTs from templar archives?
I don't know about stronger archons (health increase, attack increase?), but DTs from templar archives is fine by me... as long as my overlords can see them.
On June 07 2011 06:21 Voltaire wrote: Overseers are massively easier to get and use than ravens, that's all I have to say about this. I think the game is completely balanced.
Scans cost 300 minerals, more than a spine and a spore.
They cost "Time" and not 300 minerals ( 240 on long blue, 270 on short blue minerals ) ( Costs the terran player 0 minerals to cast, just as Emp vs a DT = 0 minerals to cast, but it is a unit of "Time" ) It does not require them to use their own minerals from their own mineral count to cast. It's something they can potentially get in the future over 90 game seconds.
btw overlords with detection would mean that banshees will get an air to air attack (or a buff to vikings hehe to make banshee cloak possible vs zerg again). I don't really mind having my wraith back <3. Loved 3 port wraith in bw =)
And i think overlords would get some nerf to be easier to kill for the toss as well, probably would be made armored so voidrays and stalkers can kill them faster.
And no more overseer means no more contanimate or nasty scouts that need the players attention to be killed.
But as always when there is a problem only one races wants to change the game. ^.^ Anyway better detection means drawbacks elsewhere. For example tumors don't provide vision anymore. Or some combat units get weaker. My zerg side doesn't want to give anything up just for a better detection.
As long as the other zergs will struggle more tosses will love those dts and that makes my life as zerg way easier. <3
I'm surprised more protoss don't try to utilize a DT/Pheonix mix in with there army. I've only experienced it once, but the protoss was pretty bad at controlling his units so I still won the game fairly easy. However, with proper control this composition would be devastating. You have no way of keeping detection with your army with a decent amount of pheonix mixed into their army. You're pretty much forced to be defensive and can't really push out.
On June 07 2011 06:49 synapse wrote: I'm not calling for radical balance changes (or balance changes at all, for that matter), I'm just saying that it's VERY ANNOYING to deal with DTs lategame. I would gladly trade overlord detection for archives DTs or stronger archons or whatever.
So this is simply about DTs being annoying bastards? Well I can't argue with that. Dunno why that should be changed though, lots of things are really annoying to deal with.
EPT
