|
On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). 
This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically.
Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play.
Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch.
|
On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch.
Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups.
Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face.
That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins.
|
On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins.
I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it.
Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked.
I just don't get it.
People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak.
Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong.
Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong.
|
|
|
On April 23 2014 11:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins. I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it. Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked. I just don't get it. People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak. Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong. Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong.
As I wrote in my earlier post, early to mid, yes, Protoss warp-tech based attacks absolutely negate defender's advantage.
Least mobile army is pushing it - Terran mech is the least mobile. With somewhat recent buffs (Warp Prism speed, Observer build-time, Hallucination research) a Protoss that can only move in a ball and not make multi-pronged aggression; or being a race with map control/scouting issues are a relic of the past.
Anyway, you still haven't defended why making defender's advantage apply to Warp-tech be would suddenly make Protoss play any more passive than Terrans or Zergs.
|
Call protoss immobile is ..... you have bloody recall.
|
On April 23 2014 12:22 plogamer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 11:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:On April 23 2014 09:33 Gingy wrote:
What does everyone think about a change for protoss in which the cooldown on warp in was dependent upon the distance between the warping gate and the warp in location? I think this would be great because most peoples' problem with the mechanic is that it makes Protoss incredibly difficult to punish for being out of position or for excess early game aggression, this way if you wanted potent aggression, you would need to proxy your warpgates, making you vulnerable, and punishable to and by counter attacks. Thoughts please :D I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins. I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it. Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked. I just don't get it. People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak. Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong. Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong. As I wrote in my earlier post, early to mid, yes, Protoss warp-tech based attacks absolutely negate defender's advantage. Least mobile army is pushing it - Terran mech is the least mobile. With somewhat recent buffs (Warp Prism speed, Observer build-time, Hallucination research) a Protoss that can only move in a ball and not make multi-pronged aggression; or being a race with map control/scouting issues are a relic of the past. Anyway, you still haven't defended why making defender's advantage apply to Warp-tech be would suddenly make Protoss play any more passive than Terrans or Zergs.
That's Hider not me who made the argument about passive play. My argument is that its a dumb system to have different builds times for different versions of the same unit spread across all buildings.
It makes no sense lore wise
It makes no sense Starcraft wise
Its overall a bad idea with no benefit except to make protoss less unique and more similar to the other two races.
Terrans and Zergs already have defenders advantage. Right now, as we speak. So when you talk about "giving defenders this and defenders that" you sound outright ridiculous because you say it as if there is no defenders advantage in the current system as is.
Heck even your argument that Terran mech (a rarely used comp in comparison to bio) is slower while your examples of a mobile protoss army is Observers and Hallucinations. Thats just ridiculous. You're essentially telling us that at least protoss is faster moving than the composition composed of units that remove their movement speed entirely.
Protoss has a lot of issues, they really do.
Terran has a lot of problems, they really do.
Even Zerg has a bunch of problems.
Terran problems have nothing to do with protoss players required to click for every gateway unit they want to build (current discussion) or that protoss have units that can harass (previous discussion)
Protoss were not OP in WoL despite having a buffed (unnerfed) Warp-In tech. You are attempting to solve a non-problem which is the problem with your suggestion.
I understand the sentiment, I really do. Protoss is winning a lot of games. Their army does not look sexy when they win, their units don't move fast, don't have quick maneuvers, etc...
All those things are irrelevant on a balance discussion thread. Maybe you can make a "How do I make this game look more sexy" thread--but if you want to talk about balance, there is no balance issue with Warp Ins. Protoss did not suddenly start winning more often just because Blizz nerfed warp tech twice.
|
On April 23 2014 13:39 Mutineer wrote:
Call protoss immobile is ..... you have bloody recall.
Moving once every few minutes is not what I would call mobile...
|
On April 23 2014 13:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 12:22 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 11:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:
[quote]
I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins. I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it. Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked. I just don't get it. People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak. Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong. Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong. As I wrote in my earlier post, early to mid, yes, Protoss warp-tech based attacks absolutely negate defender's advantage. Least mobile army is pushing it - Terran mech is the least mobile. With somewhat recent buffs (Warp Prism speed, Observer build-time, Hallucination research) a Protoss that can only move in a ball and not make multi-pronged aggression; or being a race with map control/scouting issues are a relic of the past. Anyway, you still haven't defended why making defender's advantage apply to Warp-tech be would suddenly make Protoss play any more passive than Terrans or Zergs. That's Hider not me who made the argument about passive play. My argument is that its a dumb system to have different builds times for different versions of the same unit spread across all buildings. It makes no sense lore wise It makes no sense Starcraft wise Its overall a bad idea with no benefit except to make protoss less unique and more similar to the other two races. Terrans and Zergs already have defenders advantage. Right now, as we speak. So when you talk about "giving defenders this and defenders that" you sound outright ridiculous because you say it as if there is no defenders advantage in the current system as is. Heck even your argument that Terran mech (a rarely used comp in comparison to bio) is slower while your examples of a mobile protoss army is Observers and Hallucinations. Thats just ridiculous. You're essentially telling us that at least protoss is faster moving than the composition composed of units that remove their movement speed entirely. Protoss has a lot of issues, they really do. Terran has a lot of problems, they really do. Even Zerg has a bunch of problems. Terran problems have nothing to do with protoss players required to click for every gateway unit they want to build (current discussion) or that protoss have units that can harass (previous discussion) Protoss were not OP in WoL despite having a buffed (unnerfed) Warp-In tech. You are attempting to solve a non-problem which is the problem with your suggestion. I understand the sentiment, I really do. Protoss is winning a lot of games. Their army does not look sexy when they win, their units don't move fast, don't have quick maneuvers, etc... All those things are irrelevant on a balance discussion thread. Maybe you can make a "How do I make this game look more sexy" thread--but if you want to talk about balance, there is no balance issue with Warp Ins. Protoss did not suddenly start winning more often just because Blizz nerfed warp tech twice.
I don't agree with that. Balance issues can arise through many things and it's not often just one thing you can pin it on. So much of the Protoss gimmickyness and the vast number of bullshit builds rely on the fact that warp gates are present. You didn't scout *insert random Protoss former all in that's not an all in*, you're probably dead cause you didn't have the right defenses up. It's like that with every race, but it's so much more prevalent with Protoss. I think what everyone's arguing is if you can fix the fact that Protoss's warp gates are harder to use, and that they don't completely negate defender's advantage, you can start to balance and design the game in a much better and easier way.
|
On April 23 2014 13:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 12:22 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 11:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:
[quote]
I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins. I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it. Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked. I just don't get it. People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak. Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong. Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong. As I wrote in my earlier post, early to mid, yes, Protoss warp-tech based attacks absolutely negate defender's advantage. Least mobile army is pushing it - Terran mech is the least mobile. With somewhat recent buffs (Warp Prism speed, Observer build-time, Hallucination research) a Protoss that can only move in a ball and not make multi-pronged aggression; or being a race with map control/scouting issues are a relic of the past. Anyway, you still haven't defended why making defender's advantage apply to Warp-tech be would suddenly make Protoss play any more passive than Terrans or Zergs. That's Hider not me who made the argument about passive play. My argument is that its a dumb system to have different builds times for different versions of the same unit spread across all buildings. It makes no sense lore wise It makes no sense Starcraft wise Its overall a bad idea with no benefit except to make protoss less unique and more similar to the other two races. Terrans and Zergs already have defenders advantage. Right now, as we speak. So when you talk about "giving defenders this and defenders that" you sound outright ridiculous because you say it as if there is no defenders advantage in the current system as is. Heck even your argument that Terran mech (a rarely used comp in comparison to bio) is slower while your examples of a mobile protoss army is Observers and Hallucinations. Thats just ridiculous. You're essentially telling us that at least protoss is faster moving than the composition composed of units that remove their movement speed entirely. Protoss has a lot of issues, they really do. Terran has a lot of problems, they really do. Even Zerg has a bunch of problems. Terran problems have nothing to do with protoss players required to click for every gateway unit they want to build (current discussion) or that protoss have units that can harass (previous discussion) Protoss were not OP in WoL despite having a buffed (unnerfed) Warp-In tech. You are attempting to solve a non-problem which is the problem with your suggestion. I understand the sentiment, I really do. Protoss is winning a lot of games. Their army does not look sexy when they win, their units don't move fast, don't have quick maneuvers, etc... All those things are irrelevant on a balance discussion thread. Maybe you can make a "How do I make this game look more sexy" thread--but if you want to talk about balance, there is no balance issue with Warp Ins. Protoss did not suddenly start winning more often just because Blizz nerfed warp tech twice.
This is a really dumb post. Remember BL/infestor era? Nothing was actually changed on those 2 units but BL/infestor late game still became OP. It was because the Queen buff and overlord speed which strengthened the zerg early game which allowed the zerg to get to that composition much safer.
2 rax was never an issue if the zerg opened pool first. But opening pool first put the zerg pretty behind vs macro terran builds. Every build has its counter but that doesn't mean we shouldn't look at how effective they are.
So the idea that just because warp gates weren't a problem in WoL automatically makes it not a problem in HoTS is way to simplistic. Fine, don't touch the warp gate, just nerf the oracle, MsC so protoss players don't make them anymore, is that what protoss players want? When you add in new units, sometimes you need to re-adjust other units/mechanics. Having widows mines and fast medivacs made mutas need regen.
And I think you are confused about terrans/zergs asking to nerf warp gate in WoL. It was the protoss players complaining about gateways armies being weak and zealots/stalkers needed a buff. But if they were buffed, warp gates would need a nerf or else every gate would just before 4 gates. So it wasn't about nerfing the warp gate straight up, it was just if gateway units were buffed (which is what a lot of protoss players wanted), then other things would need a nerf.
And since Protoss armies have gotten stronger in HoTS, it might not be a bad idea to take a look at warp gates. I don't necessarily think that is the solution but it is definitely something that should be discussed.
It is pretty obvious that terrans are having problems from looking that the Code S representation. Protoss had the same issue in 2011, but GSL were monthly events back then while they last 3 months now. So just having terrans under represented in 2 seasons means 6 months. Protoss was never this under represented in 6 months even back in the GOMTvT days.
|
SO much whine here.
The only problem with Terran is that Protoss and Zerg keep on expanding their knowledge of their race, the metagame is not favoring Terran and the maps are big and defensive, while Terran NEEDS offense to win.
It's incredibly hard to find a decent buff.
|
Infestor fungal was changed before the queen patch...
It was the biggest reason why zerg experimented with infestor double ups lings style and discovered broodlord infestors.
And if I am not wrong, it was more agreed on a tl thread that hatch first is safer against 2 rax than pool first due to more minerals and faster creep.
Warpgate is fine.
I would argue time warp is way too strong and currently some builds are greedy and too difficult to punish.
2 base blink is strong only because of blink mechanics.
Arguably if terran can readjust their builds and not needing to prepare against both Oracle and blink stalker, we should see terran do just fine in tvp as they can have more rooms to design a build.
|
On April 23 2014 14:59 ETisME wrote:
Infestor fungal was changed before the queen patch...
It was the biggest reason why zerg experimented with infestor double ups lings style and discovered broodlord infestors.
And if I am not wrong, it was more agreed on a tl thread that hatch first is safer against 2 rax than pool first due to more minerals and faster creep.
Warpgate is fine.
I would argue time warp is way too strong and currently some builds are greedy and too difficult to punish.
2 base blink is strong only because of blink mechanics.
Arguably if terran can readjust their builds and not needing to prepare against both Oracle and blink stalker, we should see terran do just fine in tvp as they can have more rooms to design a build.
Nestea showed that hatch first was good against 2 rax back in 2010 iirc. The bonus larva + minerals is just too strong.
|
On April 23 2014 13:43 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 13:39 Mutineer wrote:
Call protoss immobile is ..... you have bloody recall. Moving once every few minutes is not what I would call mobile...
Warp ins to handle small harass, photon overcharge to handle harassment, recall, blink stalkers to move around circumnavigating terrain, storm drops.
I....I don't see where the mobility issue is :S Hell with the exception of templars all your units move pretty damn quickly as well. Where exactly are the mobility issues?
|
On April 23 2014 13:41 Thieving Magpie wrote:Show nested quote +On April 23 2014 12:22 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 11:33 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 11:27 plogamer wrote:On April 23 2014 10:59 Hider wrote:On April 23 2014 10:15 aZealot wrote:On April 23 2014 09:44 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:42 Thieving Magpie wrote:On April 23 2014 09:37 Gingy wrote:On April 23 2014 09:36 royalroadweed wrote:
[quote]
I doubt blizzard will ever change warp gate. If they didn't change something as minor as the dumb +1 range queen, I doubt they'd change something as major as warpgate. I know, but I want to know what people think of it, not how blizzard inevitably would react to it. It sounds like an arbitrarily complicated change to a mechanic that was not good enough to get much if any protoss wins during the first few years of WoL making me think its an overreaction from a subgroup of the community unable to properly gauge their losses on their own weaknesses and instead wants the nerf to be on the only production mechanic that still requires good screen movement as opposed to the other two races who can produce any number of units at a whim without ever removing their screen from following the main army. Wow, came with a productive suggestion, and got shat on by a salty protoss. Well, so long balance thread. Not sure what I expected. Tbh mate, it's not a productive suggestion. Just think about the actual implementation. WG build times would differ in terms of distance from the warp location. That means there are different build times for every area of the map with respect to warpgates. Players would have to take into account which gates are closer to the warpin location to make a few second difference to a warpin. Thinking about using it properly in game (let alone the system requirements) makes my head hurt. Secondly, how would the warpin cooldown work? Does it get preset by telling the relevant WG that you want warpin at a specific location? What if you change your mind because you got dropped and want to warpin closer to home? Does that reset the cooldown timer? Or does the cooldown only work after the first warpin of units? Succeeding waves of reinforcements are much slower (depending on how close they are to the warpin location)? But, does this mean that your WG have to be all idle before any attack or defense? How would you deal with unexpected attacks at your third and your main? Would you have to select the right WG to warp in the right base? All of this seems complicated to even think about, let alone play. Whatever the problems with WG (and in my view they are few), it is currently simple and easy to use. Moreover, your suggestion also seems an incentive to turtle where Protoss simply sits at home, takes advantage of faster warpins right next to their gates and moves out at 200/200. This is even more so as you've also removed any incentive for aggression on the part of Protoss. We already had enough of turtle Toss in WOL. I don't think we need anymore in HOTS/LOTV. Basically, your idea is not a good one. It is overcomplicated and would lead to poor effects on gameplay. Edit/ Happy Birthday, Magpie! Nice to see you posting again (and quite possible playing Devil's Advocate). This so much. I feel like all warpgate redesigns misses the point so much. Like multiple players seem to think you can make protoss more "normal" by nerfing warptech a bit (higher cooldown) and then buff the warpgate units. Like.... that's also just gonna buff protoss deathball in the lategame at the expense of higher infastructure costs basically. Other solutions like a penalty for warping in far from Nexus also is just counterproductive as it deincentiveis warpgates used for pressure plays which also only will result in more passive protoss play. Yes, warptech does lead to probelmatic gameplay at times, but those solutions is only gonna make protoss more boring to play/watch. Having no warptech for Z and T, especially in their mirrors, don't mean that they don't use aggressive play. You still see aggressive styles in non-Protoss matchups. Introducing a mechanic where the cooldown is affected by the warp location's distance to the Warpgate (Except on a Nexus) - means that warp-ins defensively are untouched, while their offensive capacity is now affected by a penalty somewhat similar to what Zergs and Terrans face. That suggestion actually brings Protoss back into the fold of having Defender's Advantage play a factor in their early to mid-game. This doesn't mean warp-tech is gutted - it still negates the need for the units to face the dangers of actually traversing on the map. It's still great for that surprise factor when you sneak a pylon and send zealots into an enemy expansion - it just requires a bigger commitment to snowball with just warp-ins. I was unaware that Protoss did not have a defenders advantage, and apparently needs more of it. Protoss already have the least mobile army in the game, now you want them to match their lack of mobility with an inability to easily fortify their far off bases? While Zerg have complete map awareness + fastest units in the game and Terran have mobile buildings + high number of dropships to allow for quick reinforcing while the base has an ability to escape from being attacked. I just don't get it. People asked for warp gates to be removed in WoL because they thought Protoss Units were too weak. Now they ask for Warp Gates because Protoss Army is too strong. Protoss had Warp Gates when they were a crappy race, they have warp gates now that they win often. The warp gates was not what made them strong. As I wrote in my earlier post, early to mid, yes, Protoss warp-tech based attacks absolutely negate defender's advantage. Least mobile army is pushing it - Terran mech is the least mobile. With somewhat recent buffs (Warp Prism speed, Observer build-time, Hallucination research) a Protoss that can only move in a ball and not make multi-pronged aggression; or being a race with map control/scouting issues are a relic of the past. Anyway, you still haven't defended why making defender's advantage apply to Warp-tech be would suddenly make Protoss play any more passive than Terrans or Zergs. That's Hider not me who made the argument about passive play. My argument is that its a dumb system to have different builds times for different versions of the same unit spread across all buildings. It makes no sense lore wise
It makes no sense Starcraft wiseIts overall a bad idea with no benefit except to make protoss less unique and more similar to the other two races. Terrans and Zergs already have defenders advantage. Right now, as we speak. So when you talk about "giving defenders this and defenders that" you sound outright ridiculous because you say it as if there is no defenders advantage in the current system as is. Heck even your argument that Terran mech (a rarely used comp in comparison to bio) is slower while your examples of a mobile protoss army is Observers and Hallucinations. Thats just ridiculous. You're essentially telling us that at least protoss is faster moving than the composition composed of units that remove their movement speed entirely. Protoss has a lot of issues, they really do. Terran has a lot of problems, they really do. Even Zerg has a bunch of problems. Terran problems have nothing to do with protoss players required to click for every gateway unit they want to build (current discussion) or that protoss have units that can harass (previous discussion) Protoss were not OP in WoL despite having a buffed (unnerfed) Warp-In tech. You are attempting to solve a non-problem which is the problem with your suggestion. I understand the sentiment, I really do. Protoss is winning a lot of games. Their army does not look sexy when they win, their units don't move fast, don't have quick maneuvers, etc... All those things are irrelevant on a balance discussion thread. Maybe you can make a "How do I make this game look more sexy" thread--but if you want to talk about balance, there is no balance issue with Warp Ins. Protoss did not suddenly start winning more often just because Blizz nerfed warp tech twice.
Wow. Why does it not make sense lorewise? The time it takes to warp one unit from Aiur to the Gateway would be the time it takes to build in one unit. Then transformed into a Warpgate, Protoss can warp in the unit anywhere they have pylon power. But the further the warp-in from the gateway, the more energy it consumes of the Warpgate and it takes X seconds longer to recharge.
And seriously, I'm not arguing looks at all. It's simply looking at the factor map-distance plays when reinforcing an army. Coming from a person arguing lore in balance discussion as well, that's plenty rich.
/edit
And other posters above have already touched any other issues you raised in your post.
|
On April 23 2014 14:59 ETisME wrote:
Infestor fungal was changed before the queen patch...
It was the biggest reason why zerg experimented with infestor double ups lings style and discovered broodlord infestors.
And if I am not wrong, it was more agreed on a tl thread that hatch first is safer against 2 rax than pool first due to more minerals and faster creep.
Warpgate is fine.
I would argue time warp is way too strong and currently some builds are greedy and too difficult to punish.
2 base blink is strong only because of blink mechanics.
Arguably if terran can readjust their builds and not needing to prepare against both Oracle and blink stalker, we should see terran do just fine in tvp as they can have more rooms to design a build.
The weirdest things about infestor/broodlord were:
a) The composition was known about by pros as early as early March-April 2011 but was not popular because it was tough to get to (Yugioh was doing it on his stream and basically never losing outside of cheese. It just took a lot longer to get to the composition but once he got there he was untouchable. This was before the fungal patch. This was just before and around the 1.3 patch the halfed the duration of fungal but doubled the the DPS to make the damage equal, before ling/infestor and ling/bane/infestor became a thing)
b) David Kim knew about it fairly early on as well (He commented on it in an interview in mid-2011 saying that he had concerns about the potential of it. Of course people on TL immediately attacked him for saying that and said he was crazy and had other more important things to worry about. Kinda shows how shortsighted some parts of this community are.)
The queen patch (which encompassed both the +2 ground range buff for queens and the speed buff for overlords) enabled the composition because it allowed Zerg to get to the broodlord/infestor composition much, much faster than they previously could have. Before the patch, getting to the composition was not nearly as feasible because it was slowed so significantly by the need to play safer in the earlier parts of the game, usually by opening with two bases and a few getting anti-hellion roaches to allow you to push out and take a third and having to wait until overseer to get a reliable scout. After the queen patch, those roaches and speedlings were no longer needed because queens could easily fill the role of the thing that pushed hellions back, which freed up more larva and more gas. As well, scouting what the opponent was doing was able to be done in a consistent manner much earlier than before. Had the buff not happened, broodlord/infestor probably still would have happened, but not nearly to the extent it did. Before the patch, queen openings did exist but only a few incredibly good zergs were doing them because they were much more difficult to do because of how much more important positioning was (Losira, for example, commonly did the 6 queen in later 2011, well before it became common to see. He had great results with it. If you watch the games you will see that his positioning of queens was quite clever). It was inevitable that the best Zergs would eventually have been able to do some of the same stuff we saw with 5 range queens, with 3 queens, but it likely wouldn't have been as wide spread because only the top Zergs would have been able to pull it off, and not the mid-tier Zergs that we saw mysteriously rise to the top after the patch *cough*Sniper*cough*.
Your TvP comment seems fairly spot on and reasonable. I imagine the matchup will even out over the next bit. Blink is not nearly as much of a threat anymore as it was with the old map pool and oracles are getting handled much better by top tier Terrans now.
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
My thoughts on warpgate:
Right now the best way to produce units is warp gate. Which is fine - but what is the price for this? When you need to produce 2 marines at a time, you have to build a reactor which builds a long time and cost you minerals and gas EVERY time you need it. But warp gate does not have any price. In my view it is "free units" syndrome. Everything in RTS should have a price(Protoss doesn't have free interceptors either, more larva needs more energy/minerals etc.). You want to make units faster and anywhere on the map? Pay the price! And no, research isn't enough when we are talking about something so basic and useful like this.
Basically what I want is to force players to make a decision whether use warp gate or gateway. Right now there's no benefit in using gateway which is wrong.
IMO the best solution is to buff gateways and do not change warp gate(though probably the easiest solution is to nerf a warp gate slightly). This way in PvP defender advantage still works even against warpgate rush, we can make the pylon radius bigger again(because we cannot build gateways next to each other), we can review the MSC and photon overcharge.
We can think about some basic stuff(lowering the time to build units from gateway), some "pricey" stuff(e.g. units from warp gate are 10 % more expensive) or some insane stuff(warp in takes energy from warpgate based on the unit cost - zealot take 15 energy(100 is building max), templar takes 30 energy, stalker 20, sentry 25). Or you cannot chronoboost warpgates where you can gateways. Or some combination, there are so many options what to do.
I know this needs a lot of balance change and some deeper thoughts - LotV is perfect for this change, even with some "Yaaay, we finally find how to enhance gateways!!!" in campaign. There will be alpha, beta and campaign, everything Blizzard needs. But yeah, I know Blizzard won't look at this, because they don't have the resources to do so :-( Please, surprise me, Blizzard.
And now I feel better and can work again ^_^ Thanks for "listening" ;-)
|
After seeing Stephano vs Dimaga yesterday (Dima had won the bo3 but decided to stay passive instead of finishing Stephano which swarmhost turtled into a 1:20 hour won game), I had some thoughts on swarmhosts:
The best solution, if you ask me would be to give swarmhosts energy instead of cooldown and make the energy regeneration just enough to spawn 1 locust at a time but not 2.
As an example: every swarmhost starts with full energy and can spawn 2 locusts at a time, after 2 - 3 waves of 2 locusts he has only enough energy to autocast a single one.
So what would it mean balance and game wise?
+ Swarmhosts could be feedbacked and EMPed -> more value for ghosts and hts vs zerg, e.g. speed-/prism&observer ht drops on swarmhosts would be damaging.
+ Clumping up swarmhosts would be less forgiveable, at the moment the only case where clumping your SHs backslashes you is if you do it in collossus/ht/tank range
+ Swarmhost ZvZ would be more thrilling to watch since players could actually SAVE energy on the SHs to unleash even greater waves of locusts and thus killing off players which only autocast and rally
tl,dr: give swarmhosts energy, make regeneration too slow to spawn 2 locusts at a time, have zerg players micro them more then they do, be happy!
|
On April 23 2014 16:49 Prugelhugel wrote:
After seeing Stephano vs Dimaga yesterday (Dima had won the bo3 but decided to stay passive instead of finishing Stephano which swarmhost turtled into a 1:20 hour won game), I had some thoughts on swarmhosts:
The best solution, if you ask me would be to give swarmhosts energy instead of cooldown and make the energy regeneration just enough to spawn 1 locust at a time but not 2.
As an example: every swarmhost starts with full energy and can spawn 2 locusts at a time, after 2 - 3 waves of 2 locusts he has only enough energy to autocast a single one.
So what would it mean balance and game wise?
+ Swarmhosts could be feedbacked and EMPed -> more value for ghosts and hts vs zerg, e.g. speed-/prism&observer ht drops on swarmhosts would be damaging.
+ Clumping up swarmhosts would be less forgiveable, at the moment the only case where clumping your SHs backslashes you is if you do it in collossus/ht/tank range
+ Swarmhost ZvZ would be more thrilling to watch since players could actually SAVE energy on the SHs to unleash even greater waves of locusts and thus killing off players which only autocast and rally
tl,dr: give swarmhosts energy, make regeneration too slow to spawn 2 locusts at a time, have zerg players micro them more then they do, be happy!
And after the energy is done what then? Protoss walks over and wins. I don´t think nerfing SH without giving something else to zerg is the route. This change would make SH totally useless or you would have to have 40 of them with infinity static defence. I´m not a huge fan of SH but i think they are needed to fight terran mech and toss death ball. (i know you can go mutas, but it´s nice to have other options too)
|
On April 23 2014 16:49 Prugelhugel wrote:
After seeing Stephano vs Dimaga yesterday (Dima had won the bo3 but decided to stay passive instead of finishing Stephano which swarmhost turtled into a 1:20 hour won game), I had some thoughts on swarmhosts:
The best solution, if you ask me would be to give swarmhosts energy instead of cooldown and make the energy regeneration just enough to spawn 1 locust at a time but not 2.
As an example: every swarmhost starts with full energy and can spawn 2 locusts at a time, after 2 - 3 waves of 2 locusts he has only enough energy to autocast a single one.
So what would it mean balance and game wise?
+ Swarmhosts could be feedbacked and EMPed -> more value for ghosts and hts vs zerg, e.g. speed-/prism&observer ht drops on swarmhosts would be damaging.
+ Clumping up swarmhosts would be less forgiveable, at the moment the only case where clumping your SHs backslashes you is if you do it in collossus/ht/tank range
+ Swarmhost ZvZ would be more thrilling to watch since players could actually SAVE energy on the SHs to unleash even greater waves of locusts and thus killing off players which only autocast and rally
tl,dr: give swarmhosts energy, make regeneration too slow to spawn 2 locusts at a time, have zerg players micro them more then they do, be happy!
I believe that Storm does damage burrowed units, so HT can be used against SH just by casting storms over burrowed SH, and ghost it's a shame that snipe is not useful against SH and EMP doesn't reveal burrowed units.
The problem with SH it's that is a boring unit, it doesn't hace any balance issue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
