|
Updated:
PTR 1.3.3 has changed so that Warpgate tech is 160 seconds now, up from 1.3.2's 140 seconds. Zealot/stalker gateway build times back to originals. Pylon power still the same as PTR 1.3.3 original change, making it smaller.
But the main reason I'm updating this is there is a big change in the PvZ dynamic after a recent GSL code S game between NesTea and Anypro shows that cannon expands are even more risky against Zerg than originally thought. Pylon power reduction going to make this so risky, it's going to be not an option on these open choke natural maps, IMO. Is this too much to take away from Protoss?
As for the NesTea Spine strategy, you rush to lair, then send 3 drones to build spine crawlers on creep that overlords puke out near the natural nexus early enough that air units and gateway units can't stop it. Nexus and other buildings are destroyed.
Link to game:
http://www.gomtv.net/2011gslsponsors3/vod/65228
----
I was worried about the new pylon radius and building placement. Specifically cannons for mineral line harassment determent. So tell me if you can guess which cannons are still usable in the 1.3.3 PTR from this screenshot of a 1.3.2 game. Further down the post will have the pictures to back up my concerns.
1.3.2 here:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/g7XSm.jpg)
Notice that I have the pylon as close to the nexus as possible, without blocking gas or minerals. It's slightly different on every map of course, but nothing Tl can't grasp.
And let's not forget that turrets don't have this placement restriction problem. Depots don't get in the way of building units at home. Spores and spines are no problem either since creep covers your whole mineral line. And creep tumors don't block your zerglings on defense.
So do you think you can guess on the cannon placement changes? I'll give a hint... you won't be able to defend much of your mineral line with one pylon. I like to get two cannons with one pylon when I'm taking a 3rd or 4th, but placement options are slim. On some maps it looks like to put cannons where I like them I'll need the pylon and both cannons in the minerals, which just blocks too much. So I guess I'm going to two pylons on either side or I'll have to not put cannons where I used to put them. I hate it.
So I believe that reducing the pylon range by 1 is going to be really annoying, especially on your 3rd and 4th base when you don't want to waste extra pylons. Being able to cover 3 or 4 sides of a nexus with one pylon is huge. 1.3.3 PTR has taken that away! Seriously, the pylon range change is going to be terrible for Protoss on many levels. Wall-ins at a natural after a fast expand. Wall-ins against Zerg. Warp-ins for fat stalkers. Cannon rushing. Countering cannon rushing with your own cannons. Dark templar warp-ins. Voidray and gateway warpins. And of course offensive 4 gating.
The next picture shows the two still valid cannons circled, and another screen with the pylon radius indicator on so you can see what's what.Then a screen of 1.3.3, or as I like to call it, the patch that is changing every Protoss matchup and build order.
1.3.2 with two valid cannons here:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/NfhcE.jpg)
1.3.2 with radius:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/M4e6K.jpg)
1.3.3 with it's pitiful radius:
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/3XPQl.jpg)
That last one says it all to me.
|
I dont see why its such a big deal that protoss now has to think a bit when placing their buildings??
Its never going to happen that you are running 10 cannons of 1 pylon anyway, and if you are... enough said.
|
Nice visual guide to the new pylon radius, looks alot smaller hahaha
|
I feel like this might not be as big of a deal as you are making it seem. I'm a little worried about the wall-in repurcussions of the change, but I don't think that having to use two pylons to defend a nexus is that big of a deal. If you are on three or four bases, can you honestly say that every pylon you placed has an important purpose and couldn't be placed behind a mineral line instead?
|
If you read my post, you'll see I like to place 2 cannons with 1 pylon. The 10 cannons is just to demonstrate where you COULD put them, not where any sensible player would put a billion cannons around a nexus in a circle.
But I do see Genius and Huk put 8 cannons at an expansion base, all lined up in two rows. The pylon change affects where they can put the 2 rows of cannons now.
|
How about...behind the center of mineral line...?
Edit: Not trying to be facetious, but it just seems like you would want to place your pylon closer to where you want your cannons to be, so behind center of the mineral line seems smart if you want cannons in the mineral line. And if you want cannons around the front (south position) then you'd put a pylon in the middle of there.
|
pylons and probes bro... now you have more reason to not supply block yourself
|
That is a huge reduction. Though Blizzard specifically is trying to STOP the 4gate in the PvP Matchup. This will force pylons closer to walls and in range of units.
As for the cannon placement? Most. Defensive pylons are placed behind the mineral line and canons around them. Even in ZvZ. For the Warp-In Behind the mineral line?
With your placement 1 you cannot warp stalkers behind your minerals, 2 you dont even cover that area. I know you were just trying to show the difference but..seriously.
I agree it is a huge change to toss in general as far as powering buildings, but still you do have warpgate and you get 2 gate Zeal again. So don't complain to much k
|
@ Datum, I know what you mean. And sometimes I would agree if I'm way ahead. But sometimes every 100 minerals counts. And if you are at a risky expansion, you want to spend the least amount of minerals to defend it. On those maps, players may just avoid any cannons and put a pylon far away to warp guys in. I don't know, but I don't like the limited options. Sometimes I like to put 1 cannon near nexus and 1 slightly far away to warp guys in if they drop on my minerals. Or one far away to spot drops. How many pylons do I want to lose if I lose my expansion? If I'm bulding gateways there, then OK, more pylons is fine. But if I'm not... I don't know.
|
On April 30 2011 09:21 RemrafGrez wrote:
Wall-ins at a natural after a fast expand. Wall-ins against Zerg. Warp-ins for fat stalkers. Cannon rushing. Countering cannon rushing with your own cannons. Dark templar warp-ins. Voidray and gateway warpins. And of course offensive 4 gating.
So, you have to place 1 more pylon, and/or wall smarter? Not to mention, u have FF to block ramp.
Didnt know warp in for stalkers was nerfed, my bad u cant go up the wall into enemy P base where he cant reach the pylon (7.5 range).
countering cannon rushing w/your own cannons? bro, idk if u know this, but their pylon has only 6.5 range, too.... So... its no different....? lol
DT warp ins, same as stalker. U can still warp them in. Hell, i see people warping them in w/void prisms. And they have a range of like 2 or something tiny. Seems to work for them.
Voidray warp ins? Last time i checked, voids cant be warped in....?
Offensive 4 gating wont make a difference. You STILL CAN WARP IN. JUST NOT IN RIDIC SPOTS
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
Is it very often you only have one pylon near your nexus? I always see people who place cannons put one behind the center mineral line usually as it's closer to the cannons and out of the way. That's before PTR 1.3.3. The can't actually figure out a timing during the game where you'll have a forge and cannons, yet only one pylon near your nexus. Maybe when you wall in, but the wall will block anything coming to attack your minerals anyway. Hmm.
|
I tried to play a game on the PTR with this and it just made me cry. the saddest nerf ever.
I know its probably worth it the only reason why my drunk 4 gates work is when I warp in the zealots in his base past the wallin.
still gona try it though :p
|
Thx for this. Very useful.
Can you also show us comparisons with how close you must build to warp up on high ground?
Thx.
|
i guess you have to make another pylon.
|
Huh. I was worried that the pylon field change would be bad for cannon placement, but your post actually convinced me this was a good change. You can still cover three sides of a nexus with one pylon, which is really all you need vs harass. The only time you'd want more is as a lategame mineral sink, in which case building additional pylons is nothing.
|
have you ever done experiment? can you please use the same standard while comparing the two situations? (ie build the cannons as much as you can like you did to 1.3.2.)
the obvious change is that if you put a pylon the right side of nexus, the pylon can no longer cover the left side of the nexus(4cannons 'lost'). you always build more than 1 pylon to cover the cannons anyway so i dont see there is a problem plus i dont think anyone would build cannons around nexus like you did >_> (just put in behind min line or something)
|
Lol. I sort of feel like this, in addition to the "high templar is now useless" make all the rest of the Protoss complaints less valid.
Put a damn pylon behind your mineral line and you can have the same cannon placement.
What does supply depot placement have anything to do with this at all?
|
add a 2nd pylon?, i don't see why you'd want 1 pylon to power a bunch of cannons, it can get sniped by mutas/drop easily.
|
You must construct additional pylons.
|
Yay I got it right, 2 cannons.
That said, I think you're bitching too much. You just need to place your pylons in smart positions and you'll be fine, everything's still viable (although perhaps less-so offensive warp-ins), just take more effort and thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
