|
the ultralisk is waaay more useful with the build time buff
it's still not all that good though. I look forward to seeing pros use them in games that aren't already won. As is, they are amazing as a "get out" unit, or something to punish someone who doesn't know how to counter them.
stalker collossi is a good situation for ultra ling infestor, zealot archon will destroy ultra ling infestor with absolutely insane cost efficiency though. (i've been maxed with better upgrades and ultra ling infestor, and I'll trade army for army vs a 120 food zealot archon toss.)
|
On September 28 2011 18:02 LoneWolf.Alpha- wrote:
warp prisms suck, not just because they die too easily, but because whatever units you harass with, it's pretty much a one way ticket. "wow lolol we can warp in so many units into the prism energy field" .... "oh shit, they are surrounded by zerglings within 1 second, and there's not enough room in the prism to help them escape.".
how exactly is harassment viable when you only have one-way transportation? Would anyone do muta harassment if mutas can only fly towards but not away from the enemy?
Now there is the second question... what unit do you harass with... exactly? zealots can't hit fleeing scvs. stalkers have dps worse than probes. i'm not even joking. a warpprism full of probes will do more damage in a straight up fight than a warp prism full of stalkers. what's left... collosus? prism+collosus is a pretty expensive combo to be shut down by 1 viking.
on the other hand, you have terran who can have one dropship of marauders kill your nexus before you can even get your army halways back to yourr base. oh, and they have dropships anyways in their army so why not use them...
only way to balance warp prism with terran dropships is to make high templar into a flying unit and able to carry 6 supply, and give it 150 hp. if that sounds ridiculous, it's because it is. welcome to the protoss equivalent of a terran unit.
as it stands currently, buffing the hp on warp prism doesn't do a damn thing. it totally misses the point. the design behind it seems to completely lack an understanding of what the unit needs to be able to do...
There is this cool unit called a high templar that can go into the warp prism (doesn't need to fly). If you put at least 2 into a prism you can take out a whole mineral line using this cool spell they have called psi-storm.
There is this other cool unit called a dark templar that you can warp in using the prism and then even leave it in the base while you fly away with your warp prism causing much frustration to your opponent (and perhaps a win).
You seem to lack understanding and are using hyperboles all throughout your post sir.
Also, protoss shouldn't be able to do everything that terran or zerg can do.
|
We wanted to try to bring in a unit that’s rarely used back into the action in order to potentially create new viable strategies for protoss. In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership.
That is the only part about the situation report that I found really annoying. I'm a huuuge fan of the carrier and that they choose the mothership instead is really depressing. ;__;
|
On September 29 2011 02:14 willoc wrote:
There is this cool unit called a high templar that can go into the warp prism (doesn't need to fly). If you put at least 2 into a prism you can take out a whole mineral line using this cool spell they have called psi-storm.
There is this other cool unit called a dark templar that you can warp in using the prism and then even leave it in the base while you fly away with your warp prism causing much frustration to your opponent (and perhaps a win).
The main problem seems to be that the Warp Prism is available and has such potential in the midgame, but the fact that all the options for it are either gimmicky or really high-tech/lategame means that you can only use the Warp Prism realistically when you are on 3 bases plus. Because there is no low-tech harassment option (Zealots are melee and slow before Charge, Stalkers are... well, Stalkers, Sentries are gas intensive and required for defense), Protoss can only use the Warp Prism later in the game.
And especially in PvT, the problem is often reaching the lategame with the 1-1-1.
|
I use to be okay with all the TvT in code S because mech play made it really fun to watch. Now its boring ass mass marines again.
I just want to vent my frustration that all we every see are those fucking marines.......
|
On September 29 2011 02:22 MaderA wrote:Show nested quote +We wanted to try to bring in a unit that’s rarely used back into the action in order to potentially create new viable strategies for protoss. In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership. That is the only part about the situation report that I found really annoying. I'm a huuuge fan of the carrier and that they choose the mothership instead is really depressing. ;__;
My problem here is why did they have to make a choice at all? If both units aren't useful or cost effective in most situations, therefore they don't see the light of day very often. Why not make changes to both of them? It's silly to say "well both units are broken but we decided we only feel like fixing one of them"
|
On September 28 2011 17:13 pezit wrote:Show nested quote +On September 26 2011 13:27 TimeFlighT wrote:* Mothership acceleration increased from 0.3 to 1.375.
We wanted to try to bring in a unit that’s rarely used back into the action in order to potentially create new viable strategies for protoss. In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership. lol nice joke blizzard. you might as well remove carriers in the next patch. terrans are incorporating battlecruisers in their late game. zergs are incorporating brood lords with infestor for late game. what about carriers? if blizzard can't see this problem, then i only hope for HotS. To fix the carrier blizzard will have to remove the colossus. They fill the same role and are countered by the same thing, so why would you ever swap from one to the other? You wouldn't, instead you just build more of the stronger one(colossus), this is one of many things that makes protoss so predictable - "oh no, he swapped from colossus to carrier! I guess I'll keep producing vikings". The design is the entire backbone of the balance, they can keep fiddling with numbers but it'll never solve the real problems.
Wait now, so to fix carriers, remove colossus? I'm not sure if you're being serious. Newsflash: in SC1 carriers AND reavers existed. now are you gonna tell me colossus are stronger than reavers? Keep in mind that SC1 carriers > SC2 carriers.
The only reason I can see colossus being removed is if they, blizzard, heavily buff gateway units.
|
I'd take a better ultralisk pathing over a build time buff anyday.
Ultras are still inferior as a late game unit compared to broodlords.
|
On September 29 2011 02:28 SeaSwift wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2011 02:14 willoc wrote:
There is this cool unit called a high templar that can go into the warp prism (doesn't need to fly). If you put at least 2 into a prism you can take out a whole mineral line using this cool spell they have called psi-storm.
There is this other cool unit called a dark templar that you can warp in using the prism and then even leave it in the base while you fly away with your warp prism causing much frustration to your opponent (and perhaps a win).
The main problem seems to be that the Warp Prism is available and has such potential in the midgame, but the fact that all the options for it are either gimmicky or really high-tech/lategame means that you can only use the Warp Prism realistically when you are on 3 bases plus. Because there is no low-tech harassment option (Zealots are melee and slow before Charge, Stalkers are... well, Stalkers, Sentries are gas intensive and required for defense), Protoss can only use the Warp Prism later in the game. And especially in PvT, the problem is often reaching the lategame with the 1-1-1.
I'm pretty sure the point of the change was to make protoss prism harass more effective and viable. I think the patch succeeded. The original poster in my quotes said there were no units to put in the prism. There are. I don't think the point of the change was to make prism harass available during the early game or to balance the 1-1-1 strategy but good points on THAT problem.
|
These are always so awesome. They don't always make the right decisions but they sure prove that they are in touch with the community!
|
I am still shocked at the carrier vs mothership statement by Blizz... Just shocked.
It's almost as bad as the constant bunker changes we've seen in the past.
I've been trying to work in Carriers a lot lately.. and it's just not good. period. I mean, I should clarify, that perhaps carriers are just more difficult to use than collosus/HT tech, but that seems unlikely.
I just dont get why they dont do anything about carriers. All you would need to change is what liquid'Tyler was saying a few SOTG's ago... That the need the SC1 interceptor AI. Where tey only fly back to the carrier once out of range... the way it is now is if you issue a move command, many of those interceptors just fly back to the carrier muuuuuch earlier than in sc1, so ther isn't any carrier micro.
It's just so sad they went with the mothership change instead. So sad.
|
I think that thors having energy is stupid because its not necessary for balance. I mean, plox, how often do you see a thor being feedbacked? But mostly it is because the thor does not feel like a "mana-unit", lulz if u know what I mean. Leik, just for balance, they could like give the ultralisk (if it was strong lol) a useless ability that costs 500/500 to research and then a bunch of mana. But it would feel stupid and lame. Ok?
|
On September 29 2011 05:18 sagefreke wrote:
I'd take a better ultralisk pathing over a build time buff anyday.
Ultras are still inferior as a late game unit compared to broodlords.
many people have suggested allowing Ultras to "walk over" Zerglings, much like the collossus do with protoss units(even though, obviously, collosi have the tall legs)
would help with a lot of the pathing issues...
|
On September 24 2011 22:16 doko100 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 19:35 Mysticesper wrote:On September 24 2011 19:09 theBizness wrote:
Agree. If they don't want to reduce the versatility of basically every Terran unit, they could simply make specialized add-ons so you can't just keep switching them around whenever it suits you. Or make the other races have that same versatility, which is (hopefully) to come in the upcoming expansions, unfortunately. Zerg lacks diversity, Protoss is rather predictable (which is part of their current downfall) I have to completely disagree. Terran already has the hardest time in dealing with Zerg lategame tech switches and there is nothing more frustrating than having to deal with mass warp ins. Yes you are right, terran can swap add ons, but what most people forget is that 1 tech building(cyber core- dark shrine - archives) gives you access to an almost infinite amount of dark templars, stalkers and high templars, only limited by the amount of ressources and warp gates. If terran wants to go for mass banshees they are limited because they can only produce them off starports, which are expensive and high tech, same goes for factory units, the only similar unit that works like protoss units in production is the ghost (1 ghost academy - only limited by amount of barracks with add on), that's why it's so hard for terran to deal with lategame tech switches. It's even a bigger problem against zerg, 1 tech building gives you access to an almost infinite amount of every unit, only limited by larva and ressources. Zerg can tech switch from mass air, into mass tier 1 into mass tier 3 in less than a minute, it's already next to impossible for terran lategame to adjust to these tech switches, if you take away the ability to swap add ons to for example quickly produce mass vikings or mass marauders, etc... it's going to be absolutely impossible. If for example the zerg goes for mass broodlord and you have to get vikings, and you then need to build the reactors instead of swapping them with your barracks it would be pretty much game over. Terran lategame tech switches are by far the slowest in the game, even with add on swapping, take that away from terran and there is no way on earth they will ever beat zerg lategame ever again and it will be very very problematic against protoss, if not impossible aswell. What most people forget is that terran add-ons actually are really expensive, larva (which is the same thing essentially) is for free though and like I said, protoss can build units only limited by the amount of warpgates. So you see, both other races use similar mechanics, for zerg it is even easier. Even Protoss robotics units use similar mechanics, immortals dont need an add-on, collossus need 1 robo bay and are then only limited by the amount of robos, same goes for carriers for example. I think it's funny that Z and P players complain about add-on swaping when their races don't even require add-ons and can use the same game mechanic for essentially free. Larva even might be overpowered for all we know, there are no zerg who really perfectioned larva usage and tech switches, in years they might have to nerf larva because it might be too hard for terran and maybe protoss to keep up with zerg lategame tech switches.
You made me think for a minute... yet Stargates cost 150/150. Starports only cost 175/125 with a tech lab. If you have a sudden need for a raven you can quickly addon swap. Terran has it pretty good. Terran uses so little gas for their main army and have extra minerals per base due to MULEs. So I don't think there is anything harder or more expensive tech switch for Terran than for Protoss. Zerg? Yes they have good tech switch abilities. Is there any surprise that Protoss usually have 4 high templar when Terran has 8 ghosts?
|
On September 29 2011 05:46 B00ts wrote:
I am still shocked at the carrier vs mothership statement by Blizz... Just shocked.
It's almost as bad as the constant bunker changes we've seen in the past.
I've been trying to work in Carriers a lot lately.. and it's just not good. period. I mean, I should clarify, that perhaps carriers are just more difficult to use than collosus/HT tech, but that seems unlikely.
I just dont get why they dont do anything about carriers. All you would need to change is what liquid'Tyler was saying a few SOTG's ago... That the need the SC1 interceptor AI. Where tey only fly back to the carrier once out of range... the way it is now is if you issue a move command, many of those interceptors just fly back to the carrier muuuuuch earlier than in sc1, so ther isn't any carrier micro.
It's just so sad they went with the mothership change instead. So sad.
I dont think carriers are the only problem with stargate units.
In PVT, phoenix are almost useless. People only go phoenix when terran go for some stupid 2port banshee. MC tried to make them viable, but its reaaaaally hard.
When you see void rays if a protoss isnt doing an all in? Never.
In PVZ, zerg learned so fast how to adapt against void ray and phoenix harass, and we never see the cost paying for itself. Infestors and spore crawlers buff made it so easy to defend. After infestors are out, you can even use your phoenix to scout a zerg base anymore. One fungal and everything is gone.
Maybe if phoenix could also hit grounds units, like they were supposed to do, stargate would be so much better. This way, we would have an harass unit and a viable tech tree.
Void rays could be an air to air unit, like phoenix are today.
|
On September 29 2011 05:09 TimeFlighT wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 17:13 pezit wrote:On September 26 2011 13:27 TimeFlighT wrote:* Mothership acceleration increased from 0.3 to 1.375.
We wanted to try to bring in a unit that’s rarely used back into the action in order to potentially create new viable strategies for protoss. In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership. lol nice joke blizzard. you might as well remove carriers in the next patch. terrans are incorporating battlecruisers in their late game. zergs are incorporating brood lords with infestor for late game. what about carriers? if blizzard can't see this problem, then i only hope for HotS. To fix the carrier blizzard will have to remove the colossus. They fill the same role and are countered by the same thing, so why would you ever swap from one to the other? You wouldn't, instead you just build more of the stronger one(colossus), this is one of many things that makes protoss so predictable - "oh no, he swapped from colossus to carrier! I guess I'll keep producing vikings". The design is the entire backbone of the balance, they can keep fiddling with numbers but it'll never solve the real problems. Wait now, so to fix carriers, remove colossus? I'm not sure if you're being serious. Newsflash: in SC1 carriers AND reavers existed. now are you gonna tell me colossus are stronger than reavers? Keep in mind that SC1 carriers > SC2 carriers. The only reason I can see colossus being removed is if they, blizzard, heavily buff gateway units.
Just to explain things for you: The point, he is trying to make, is that Colossi (which are kind of standard) have the same counter as carriers: the Viking and because of that switching from Colossi to Carriers doesn't give you any advantage at all.
Since your SC1 knowledge seems to be pretty good, you might also know that Reavers and Carriers do NOT have the same counter, since Reavers can't be targeted by anti-air.
Furthermore I disagree on Colossi being stronger than Reaver. They fullfill different roles and due to the way they work, they can hardly be compared. If you still do so, I think most people would pick reavers over Colossi any time.
And the reason why people say "Remove Colossi" is not because of balance or because they want Carrier buffs, but rather because the Colossus is blunt and boring and because all Protoss MUs kind of revolve around that unit. Sure, we see different builds than the usual Colossus-stuff, but the Protoss play is too dependant and centered around Colossi and to some degree HTs.
|
On September 29 2011 00:42 Thrasymachus725 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 28 2011 23:20 Sina92 wrote:On September 23 2011 10:54 ch33psh33p wrote:
In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership
WHAT THE FUCK. this goes to show that blizz needs to hire new balance designers No, this goes to show they think this through more than the whining screaming idiot people who have knee jerk reactions and lack the ability to think about what they are saying. You don't even understand WHY the carrier is UP. You just know it is, so you want a buff so it can be good. Go ahead. Name a buff that would make the carrier a viable option in the game. It's ok. I'll wait. (edit): A reasonable buff.
Shorter build times?
|
On September 29 2011 01:11 Let it Raine wrote:
the ultralisk is waaay more useful with the build time buff
it's still not all that good though. I look forward to seeing pros use them in games that aren't already won. As is, they are amazing as a "get out" unit, or something to punish someone who doesn't know how to counter them.
stalker collossi is a good situation for ultra ling infestor, zealot archon will destroy ultra ling infestor with absolutely insane cost efficiency though. (i've been maxed with better upgrades and ultra ling infestor, and I'll trade army for army vs a 120 food zealot archon toss.)
the buff has changed ZvZ. Ultras are quick and efficient against Infestor armies that were forced because of mutas.
|
Just make Carriers like in BW, 6 interceptor base dmg instead of 5 and with 4 armor.
Buff corruptors a bit too while they're at it 
|
On September 30 2011 07:42 RavenLoud wrote:Just make Carriers like in BW, 6 interceptor base dmg instead of 5 and with 4 armor. Buff corruptors a bit too while they're at it
Carriers actually do 10 damage per interceptor in SC2 (the interceptors have two shots). If anything, they are stronger than their SC1 counterparts. Might I add that they start with 4 interceptors (SC1 carriers started with none) and they can purchase up to 8 without having to buy an upgrade? The only thing that the SC1 carrier has over it is +2 armor and the auto-heal interceptors when they come back in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
