|
On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is?
Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade.
|
On January 24 2016 12:28 Empirimancer wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is? Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade.
Evenly matched? What? They are the same price yes but a marauder will kill an adept easy.
|
On January 24 2016 17:23 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 12:28 Empirimancer wrote:On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is? Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade. Evenly matched? What? They are the same price yes but a marauder will kill an adept easy.
No, the adept actually beat marauder. Their stats are pretty much the same but marauder shoot 2 shorts so since adept has +1 armor it get reduced to 8. While Adept shot goes from 10 to 9 due to marauder +1 armor. Factor in adept more HP and mobility with shade and adept stronger and more versatile. You can argue stim but then I can argue adept attack speed upgrade too so it pretty much even out when factoring in medivacs in actual engagements.
But the whole adept vs marauder is pointless because both unit takes ages to kill each other so it pointless. They both take atleast 15 attack to kill each other. So saying marauder counter adept easily is not really true
|
On January 24 2016 19:00 SheaR619 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 17:23 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 12:28 Empirimancer wrote:On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is? Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade. Evenly matched? What? They are the same price yes but a marauder will kill an adept easy. No, the adept actually beat marauder. Their stats are pretty much the same but marauder shoot 2 shorts so since adept has +1 armor it get reduced to 8. While Adept shot goes from 10 to 9 due to marauder +1 armor. Factor in adept more HP and mobility with shade and adept stronger and more versatile. You can argue stim but then I can argue adept attack speed upgrade too so it pretty much even out when factoring in medivacs in actual engagements. But the whole adept vs marauder is pointless because both unit takes ages to kill each other so it pointless. They both take atleast 15 attack to kill each other. So saying marauder counter adept easily is not really true
Just tested it mate. Marauder wins with 26 HP left if it fights an adept. It also deals with mid to late game unites better because they are mostly armored. It has stim and slow and can be healed etc.
Terrans are just not used to thinking and changing their playstyle since WoL beta and doing anything but mass marines.
|
Netherlands1385 Posts
On January 24 2016 21:00 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 19:00 SheaR619 wrote:On January 24 2016 17:23 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 12:28 Empirimancer wrote:On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is? Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade. Evenly matched? What? They are the same price yes but a marauder will kill an adept easy. No, the adept actually beat marauder. Their stats are pretty much the same but marauder shoot 2 shorts so since adept has +1 armor it get reduced to 8. While Adept shot goes from 10 to 9 due to marauder +1 armor. Factor in adept more HP and mobility with shade and adept stronger and more versatile. You can argue stim but then I can argue adept attack speed upgrade too so it pretty much even out when factoring in medivacs in actual engagements. But the whole adept vs marauder is pointless because both unit takes ages to kill each other so it pointless. They both take atleast 15 attack to kill each other. So saying marauder counter adept easily is not really true Just tested it mate. Marauder wins with 26 HP left if it fights an adept. It also deals with mid to late game unites better because they are mostly armored. It has stim and slow and can be healed etc. Terrans are just not used to thinking and changing their playstyle since WoL beta and doing anything but mass marines.
But what units besides the (imho) boring MMMM style +libs can terran play on high level? that's exactly what the problem is and the reaspon why people like to see F.e. mech getting viable. So we dont see the 5 year old comp with libs for another 5 years.
|
On January 24 2016 21:00 ProtossMasterRace wrote:Show nested quote +On January 24 2016 19:00 SheaR619 wrote:On January 24 2016 17:23 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 12:28 Empirimancer wrote:On January 24 2016 09:39 ProtossMasterRace wrote:On January 24 2016 08:00 aksfjh wrote:On January 24 2016 05:00 CheddarToss wrote:
Watching the uThermal vs PtitDrogo series I can't help but feeling the urge to throw up. Liberators are such an imbalanced unit, it's not even funny. Adepts are the definition of balance in comparison. A unit/build that can be hard countered by going stargate is imbalanced? The build even requires Terran to sacrifice the economy (to an extent) to perform. This is in contrast to the "quick 3rd expansion behind adept-warp prism harass that usually kills the Terran." It's actually quite hilarious, if you seen casts of the adept harass. "[Terran] really shut that harass down! Was all over his base and just seemed impenetrable! [Protoss] wasn't able to do any meaningful damage and lost his adepts! Meanwhile, [Protoss] took his 3rd and Terran finally feels confident enough to move out and take his." There's no mention of "He really needed to do damage with that attack..." or "BUT AT WHAT COST?!" It basically boils down to "Protoss attack failed, now we can continue the game on equal footing." Adepts get hard countered by anything that is not light, tanks marauders etc. So your point is? Adepts and marauders are actually evenly matched. And of course you can close on tanks with the shade. Evenly matched? What? They are the same price yes but a marauder will kill an adept easy. No, the adept actually beat marauder. Their stats are pretty much the same but marauder shoot 2 shorts so since adept has +1 armor it get reduced to 8. While Adept shot goes from 10 to 9 due to marauder +1 armor. Factor in adept more HP and mobility with shade and adept stronger and more versatile. You can argue stim but then I can argue adept attack speed upgrade too so it pretty much even out when factoring in medivacs in actual engagements. But the whole adept vs marauder is pointless because both unit takes ages to kill each other so it pointless. They both take atleast 15 attack to kill each other. So saying marauder counter adept easily is not really true Just tested it mate. Marauder wins with 26 HP left if it fights an adept. It also deals with mid to late game unites better because they are mostly armored. It has stim and slow and can be healed etc. Terrans are just not used to thinking and changing their playstyle since WoL beta and doing anything but mass marines.
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem.
|
On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem.
I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat.
|
On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat.
Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats.
In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat.
But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against.
|
On January 25 2016 20:34 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat. Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats. In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat. But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against.
I agree that the shade needs to be nerfed. It does not matter how fast a unit can theoretically kill adepts as long as they can jump around all of your bases and kill workers at incredible rate. First they should make it so that you can´t cancel the shade. At this point you can force your opponent to split their army and then decide whether to cancel the shade.
|
On January 25 2016 22:14 RaFox17 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 20:34 Big J wrote:On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat. Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats. In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat. But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against. I agree that the shade needs to be nerfed. It does not matter how fast a unit can theoretically kill adepts as long as they can jump around all of your bases and kill workers at incredible rate. First they should make it so that you can´t cancel the shade. At this point you can force your opponent to split their army and then decide whether to cancel the shade.
You can argue that the shade is currently the problem, but once you nerf this ability - the adept becomes practically useless, and once you nerf the adept, protoss falls apart.
Ill try to explain why the adept shade is so important, even though it gets so much hate.
Terran and Zerg units are much faster than protoss (stimmed bio & creep), and attacking with slower units results in losing everything.
Another important part is snowballing, for example - is that if P moves out with 8 zealots, and Zerg has commited to units - Protoss wont trade 800 minerals worth of stuff for them.
Now this leaves protoss with 2 options to deal significant damage.
1. Use faster units and dont commit. *blink stalkes and adepts, this excludes harrasment units like the oracle or WP
2. Commit and All in your opponent.
So, the adept is the only unit besides the Stalker that you dont need to All in with, or you rely on recall.
|
On January 25 2016 23:14 weikor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 22:14 RaFox17 wrote:On January 25 2016 20:34 Big J wrote:On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat. Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats. In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat. But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against. I agree that the shade needs to be nerfed. It does not matter how fast a unit can theoretically kill adepts as long as they can jump around all of your bases and kill workers at incredible rate. First they should make it so that you can´t cancel the shade. At this point you can force your opponent to split their army and then decide whether to cancel the shade. You can argue that the shade is currently the problem, but once you nerf this ability - the adept becomes practically useless, and once you nerf the adept, protoss falls apart. Ill try to explain why the adept shade is so important, even though it gets so much hate. Terran and Zerg units are much faster than protoss (stimmed bio & creep), and attacking with slower units results in losing everything. Another important part is snowballing, for example - is that if P moves out with 8 zealots, and Zerg has commited to units - Protoss wont trade 800 minerals worth of stuff for them. Now this leaves protoss with 2 options to deal significant damage. 1. Use faster units and dont commit. *blink stalkes and adepts, this excludes harrasment units like the oracle or WP 2. Commit and All in your opponent. So, the adept is the only unit besides the Stalker that you dont need to All in with, or you rely on recall.
There is a reason, why recall only costs 50 energy. The protoss has this "get back to base and take little damage"-cart and he can use it quite often, if microed right. I dont like the recall, as its band aid, but protoss is the band aid fixing race and thus it has its point, like PO and other wired stuff to fix out all the protoss design problems. With these band aids out of the MSC, protoss is not ment to be mobile like terran or zerg.
Just make shade a spell, that is risky. At the moment, canceling shade reduces the risk of using the ability by almost 100%. Enemy runs after your shades? Cancel. Enemy stays at your adepts? Dont cancel. Remove the ability to cancel the transfer to the shade and alot of people will stop saying it is out of balance point. Because now they dont need x2 of the army to stop you from harassing them.
|
The siegetank has to be buffed today! Blizzard must hurry before every last remaining terran leaves.
That was quite an overstatement... but I want this to be patched.
# This is the idea:
Blizzard should make the tanks become unsieged when picked up in medivacs. There is just no way that a sieged tank should be able to fly in a medivac!
The tankivac is an insult to the siegetank. The siegetank should not be able to boost around faster than a stimmed marine! This completely destroys the identity of the siege tank and should be reverted.
Then Blizzard should add the good old maelstorm rounds back as an upgrade at the techlab which costs 150/150 (or 100/100) that increases the damage dealt by the tank.
Maelstorm rounds:
Siege Tank's Crucio Shock Cannon deals +40 damage to primary target. Splash damage remains the same.
They should also make the tank shoot a projectile (like the marauder) so they will overkill targets slightly. That would make tanks more effective in small numbers while not making them completely overpowered in large numbers.
Sorry for bad English. I am crying for this to happen and I will not start to play again until I know I can trust the tank against the new threats: adepts, ravagers, ...the list goes on.
It was not me that came up with all these ideas but I think they are good ideas so I will share them here!
This will make tanks good again and bring the positional mech back!
Thanks for reading!
// _Croc
EDIT: mealstorm rounds and unsigned tanks... I wasn't quite paying attention when writing this. I have now fixed the spelling mistakes.
|
On January 25 2016 23:14 weikor wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 22:14 RaFox17 wrote:On January 25 2016 20:34 Big J wrote:On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat. Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats. In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat. But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against. I agree that the shade needs to be nerfed. It does not matter how fast a unit can theoretically kill adepts as long as they can jump around all of your bases and kill workers at incredible rate. First they should make it so that you can´t cancel the shade. At this point you can force your opponent to split their army and then decide whether to cancel the shade. You can argue that the shade is currently the problem, but once you nerf this ability - the adept becomes practically useless, and once you nerf the adept, protoss falls apart. Ill try to explain why the adept shade is so important, even though it gets so much hate. Terran and Zerg units are much faster than protoss (stimmed bio & creep), and attacking with slower units results in losing everything. Another important part is snowballing, for example - is that if P moves out with 8 zealots, and Zerg has commited to units - Protoss wont trade 800 minerals worth of stuff for them. Now this leaves protoss with 2 options to deal significant damage. 1. Use faster units and dont commit. *blink stalkes and adepts, this excludes harrasment units like the oracle or WP 2. Commit and All in your opponent. So, the adept is the only unit besides the Stalker that you dont need to All in with, or you rely on recall.
What you are talking about is really only a problem in PvZ. Stimmed bio is not that mobile, since you can't afford to stim it to run around and even when you stim it's only a little more than stalker speed. In PvZ Zerg can really just jump on you if you are anywhere on the map, but in PvT it's a matter of overextending when the stim advantage matters.
The real mobile part of bio is medivacs, but there is no critical relationship about shades to defend or keep up with them.
But I fully agree that if the adept didn't have the shade at all with its current stats it wouldn't be good enough, especially not in PvZ. Countering light units is much less critical than countering armored ones and the adept with its "2010 standard movement speed" is terribly slow in the context of HotS/LotV speed-buffed units.
In my opinion adepts, if they were completely without the shade, would need a movement speed that can keep up with hellions or zerglings.
|
On January 25 2016 23:55 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 23:14 weikor wrote:On January 25 2016 22:14 RaFox17 wrote:On January 25 2016 20:34 Big J wrote:On January 25 2016 19:15 apocom wrote:On January 25 2016 13:53 SheaR619 wrote:
My bad, I forgot to factor into attack speed and you are correct on who wins. But the main point still stands, it is that adept vs marauder are pointless because they take too long to kill each other and they both don't counter each other. A counter would be adept vs marines or marauder vs stalker. Adept vs marauder is basically a draw since they both take so long to kill each other, the realistic view is what is actually going to kill the adept or marauder faster is what going to win the engagement. This come down to protoss AOE choice vs liberators.
We can discuss X units vs Y units but we will probably won't go anywhere. You forget to mention that protoss has a much faster third which opens up more options to to them and allows them to get more units. So even if marauder>adept, the econ advantage would sway the situation in protoss favor. Which is what is probably the main problem. I think you can't even claim marauder>adept. The adept can be warped in everywhere you have a powerfield (the reason why gateway units are not great combat units) and he has a great ability build in. Both are factors which makes the adept less cost efficient in direct combat. Not really. Blizzard balancing doesn't work like that. Numbers just happen because they work out, not because they are comparable to other unit stats. In the case of the adept there were a lot of patches in the beta. Blizzard didn't take the marauder stats as a direction, it just so happened that they are very similar now but the marauder barely wins out in direct combat. But that's the big problem right now. The adept has a very, very powerful ability that makes it strong at harassment, more mobile and completely bypasses the units range-deficits. But the stats are not lower than those of a plain combat unit to balance that out. Given that noone wants Protoss to be pidgeonholed into robo/templar turtling again, I think the correct solution are some drastic nerfs to the psionic transfer. But if we are unlucky, the -1 damage works out and Protoss keeps another gimmick tool that everybody hates to play against. I agree that the shade needs to be nerfed. It does not matter how fast a unit can theoretically kill adepts as long as they can jump around all of your bases and kill workers at incredible rate. First they should make it so that you can´t cancel the shade. At this point you can force your opponent to split their army and then decide whether to cancel the shade. You can argue that the shade is currently the problem, but once you nerf this ability - the adept becomes practically useless, and once you nerf the adept, protoss falls apart. Ill try to explain why the adept shade is so important, even though it gets so much hate. Terran and Zerg units are much faster than protoss (stimmed bio & creep), and attacking with slower units results in losing everything. Another important part is snowballing, for example - is that if P moves out with 8 zealots, and Zerg has commited to units - Protoss wont trade 800 minerals worth of stuff for them. Now this leaves protoss with 2 options to deal significant damage. 1. Use faster units and dont commit. *blink stalkes and adepts, this excludes harrasment units like the oracle or WP 2. Commit and All in your opponent. So, the adept is the only unit besides the Stalker that you dont need to All in with, or you rely on recall. What you are talking about is really only a problem in PvZ. Stimmed bio is not that mobile, since you can't afford to stim it to run around and even when you stim it's only a little more than stalker speed. In PvZ Zerg can really just jump on you if you are anywhere on the map, but in PvT it's a matter of overextending when the stim advantage matters. The real mobile part of bio is medivacs, but there is no critical relationship about shades to defend or keep up with them. But I fully agree that if the adept didn't have the shade at all with its current stats it wouldn't be good enough, especially not in PvZ. Countering light units is much less critical than countering armored ones and the adept with its "2010 standard movement speed" is terribly slow in the context of HotS/LotV speed-buffed units. In my opinion adepts, if they were completely without the shade, would need a movement speed that can keep up with hellions or zerglings.
It's my experience that if the Protoss doesn't want to fight, Terran is usually okay stimming to catch up because he knows that he'll win the fight in a landslide.
Protoss has always had issues being around the map. Especially against Zerg but also against Terran. PvZ you can't be anywhere without a Mothership and PvT only Stalkers are allowed outside your base.
It was really hoping the adept would be faster, not slower than the Zealot...
|
On January 25 2016 23:36 _Croc wrote:The siegetank has to be buffed today! Blizzard must hurry before every last remaining terran leaves. That was quite an overstatement... but I want this to be patched. # This is the idea: Blizzard should make the tanks become unsieged when picked up in medivacs. There is just no way that a sieged tank should be able to fly in a medivac! The tankivac is an insult to the siegetank. The siegetank should not be able to boost around faster than a stimmed marine! This completely destroys the identity of the siege tank and should be reverted. Then Blizzard should add the good old maelstorm rounds back as an upgrade at the techlab which costs 150/150 (or 100/100) that increases the damage dealt by the tank. Show nested quote +Maelstorm rounds:
Siege Tank's Crucio Shock Cannon deals +40 damage to primary target. Splash damage remains the same. They should also make the tank shoot a projectile (like the marauder) so they will overkill targets slightly. That would make tanks more effective in small numbers while not making them completely overpowered in large numbers. Sorry for bad English. I am crying for this to happen and I will not start to play again until I know I can trust the tank against the new threats: adepts, ravagers, ...the list goes on. It was not me that came up with all these ideas but I think they are good ideas so I will share them here! This will make tanks good again and bring the positional mech back! Thanks for reading! // _Croc EDIT: mealstorm rounds and unsigned tanks... I wasn't quite paying attention when writing this. I have now fixed the spelling mistakes.
And where do we nerf terran so that the race remains balanced?
|
Out of curiosity. What do you guys generally think the state of the match ups are? Judging by what the balance team has been stating, "TvP is P favored, TvZ is even and ZvP is unknown due to mixed feedback. I generally agree with the balance team's thoughts on balance, but I'm curious to hear input from others in this forum.
|
On January 26 2016 08:02 RavingRaver wrote:
Out of curiosity. What do you guys generally think the state of the match ups are? Judging by what the balance team has been stating, "TvP is P favored, TvZ is even and ZvP is unknown due to mixed feedback. I generally agree with the balance team's thoughts on balance, but I'm curious to hear input from others in this forum.
The most balanced view you'll get is likely " z > p > t > z ". How much each one beats the other is hotly debated, and some of those > turn into = for some people, but that's the gist.
|
What do you call it when the actual results does not match public opinion of the results and then the public whines about it?
|
On January 26 2016 11:08 Thieving Magpie wrote:
What do you call it when the actual results does not match public opinion of the results and then the public whines about it?
Democracy
|
On January 26 2016 00:32 MperorM1 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 25 2016 23:36 _Croc wrote:The siegetank has to be buffed today! Blizzard must hurry before every last remaining terran leaves. That was quite an overstatement... but I want this to be patched. # This is the idea: Blizzard should make the tanks become unsieged when picked up in medivacs. There is just no way that a sieged tank should be able to fly in a medivac! The tankivac is an insult to the siegetank. The siegetank should not be able to boost around faster than a stimmed marine! This completely destroys the identity of the siege tank and should be reverted. Then Blizzard should add the good old maelstorm rounds back as an upgrade at the techlab which costs 150/150 (or 100/100) that increases the damage dealt by the tank. Maelstorm rounds:
Siege Tank's Crucio Shock Cannon deals +40 damage to primary target. Splash damage remains the same. They should also make the tank shoot a projectile (like the marauder) so they will overkill targets slightly. That would make tanks more effective in small numbers while not making them completely overpowered in large numbers. Sorry for bad English. I am crying for this to happen and I will not start to play again until I know I can trust the tank against the new threats: adepts, ravagers, ...the list goes on. It was not me that came up with all these ideas but I think they are good ideas so I will share them here! This will make tanks good again and bring the positional mech back! Thanks for reading! // _Croc EDIT: mealstorm rounds and unsigned tanks... I wasn't quite paying attention when writing this. I have now fixed the spelling mistakes. And where do we nerf terran so that the race remains balanced?
You have poor reading comprehension
|
|
|
|
|
|
1198
1029
182
EPT
