|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On June 12 2012 06:31 Scufo wrote:
I'm sad for Tanks. Looks like they're gonna be pushed even further out of standard play in HoTS. Let's run it down...
Vipers abduct Tanks.
Locusts are light, making them great at absorbing tank fire.
Ultra charge kills tanks.
Fast hydras are better vs. tanks
Warhounds eat tanks alive
22 range Tempests laugh at Tanks and their silly seige up.
But, if hydras become more important in TvZ Tanks could retain their usefulness against them. Against P they still probably won't be useful since immortals and charge zealots still laugh at them.
But as a balance to that, all the supporting units to tanks have been buffed. Stronger Hellions, Mines that trade well with every air unit in the game and wreck shit in general, even the terribly designed Warhound should be good vs Toss, and these are all factory units that will benefit from Factory upgrades like the tank. It's not looking all bad for the tank, I think they'll actually see even more use in HotS due to mech's general improvement.
|
On June 12 2012 06:52 Decendos wrote:
you wouldnt have to get rid of WG tech. WG e.g. at pushes or prism drops + reinforcement warp ins are fine.
the problem is the low warp-in time of 5 seconds. why not just increase the warp-in time to 15-20 seconds? that way P would still have the possibility to reinforce pushes faster than with gateways + still be able to harrass but it wouldnt be that broken in lategame where toss instantly remaxes on 20-25 gates.
Because if you remove FFs, you need to give Toss some sort of buff to Gateway units that allows them to engage Zerg in the early game (and defend all-ins) and allows Gateway units to be cost-effective against MMM 10 minute pushes. If you buff Gateway units, then warp-in necessarily becomes stronger, and so while the WG timing might be increased by however many seconds, the units would be significantly harder to kill, which would create the same situation.
For the record, I don't think lategame WG reinforcement is overpowered or broken; I think lategame WG reinforcement is exactly where WG in general belongs. Terran players who lose to a 20 Zealot warp-in have already botched the previous engagement so hard that it doesn't even matter. If you decisively win an engagement, you cannot win with a single warp-in because you have no Storms or Colossi. I'd prefer to have the Sentry removed altogether and the Stalker/Zealot rebalanced (perhaps a Baneling analogue added with some low-tier AoE to assist against Marines) and WG moved to like Twilight Council or something. Perhaps make an exception for the Warp Prism (maybe give it a very small radius Recall spell and the ability to drop all of its units at once).
|
Guys, was any new HOTS gameplay shown besides the battlereports?
|
Not to hijack this thread, but...Re: Ultra Charge, Too Many Massive Projectiles, Tanks Not as Necssary, the issue is the map construction and too many open areas. The unit balance not in unison with new map construction is a never ending pushing-around-of numbers, imo, to try and balance things.
|
On June 12 2012 06:51 SmileZerg wrote:
I don't think WG should be removed, not by a long shot. I do think that proxy pylons should be nerfed, however, to make the warp prism more of an integral part of that mechanic. For example, limit pylon placement to within 30-40 range of a Nexus. This also fixes all sorts of problems with maps like needing neutral depots to prevent pylon blocking ramps.
That's quite brilliant. You keep all the deffensive capabilities wg offer and give T and Z defenders advantage back while making the warp prism an integral part of aggressive play. Maybe allow for better gateway units in general. Makes to much sense though, not gona happen.
|
well you cant just buff zealots and stalkers since chargelots and blinkstalker would be OP. so yeah there would need to be another spell for the sentry that makes up for the FF OR just make FF have hp and therefore killable.
WG is broken lategame. reinforcing with 50 supply stalker, chrono all gates and reinforcing 20 sec later with another 50 supply of stalker is just retarded vs zerg, same for chargelots vs terra. T and Z just need longer time to reinforce with an army to fight 100 supply of stalker or chargelot + archons.
WG is also too strong midgame since it totally removes defenders advantage. just have warp-in time up and its fine.
|
Can all of you "WG is too strong midgame/lategame/blablabla" dudes find yourselves a different thread for your balance whine? Nobody cares that you lose to Blink Stalkers on the ladder. We're trying to figure out a way for Protoss to function without Sentries, and removing/nerfing WG is just a necessary consequence of that.
On June 12 2012 07:06 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 06:51 SmileZerg wrote:
I don't think WG should be removed, not by a long shot. I do think that proxy pylons should be nerfed, however, to make the warp prism more of an integral part of that mechanic. For example, limit pylon placement to within 30-40 range of a Nexus. This also fixes all sorts of problems with maps like needing neutral depots to prevent pylon blocking ramps. That's quite brilliant. You keep all the deffensive capabilities wg offer and give T and Z defenders advantage back while making the warp prism an integral part of aggressive play. Maybe allow for better gateway units in general. Makes to much sense though, not gona happen.
My mind is literally blown, that someone would actually find that a good idea. Why don't we make it impossible for Queens to move more than 40 yards away from a hatchery while we're at it?
|
There's a TvZ and PvZ game - is there a PvT I missed?
|
On June 12 2012 07:07 Decendos wrote:
well you cant just buff zealots and stalkers since chargelots and blinkstalker would be OP. so yeah there would need to be another spell for the sentry that makes up for the FF OR just make FF have hp and therefore killable.
WG is broken lategame. reinforcing with 50 supply stalker, chrono all gates and reinforcing 20 sec later with another 50 supply of stalker is just retarded vs zerg, same for chargelots vs terra. T and Z just need longer time to reinforce with an army to fight 100 supply of stalker or chargelot + archons.
WG is also too strong midgame since it totally removes defenders advantage. just have warp-in time up and its fine.
The fact that they didnt change anything regarding WG is my biggest disappointment with HotS. The game would benefit so much from it. Sadly, we'll have to live with this more or less broken mechanic even in the addon ...
|
Yeah Blizzard would never redesign the whole game now but the game needs those stupid abilities like force fields, conc shell, and fungals radically changed or removed. Fungals might be fixable if you just made it a dot and removed the freeze or maybe a slight slow. Watching someone lay down perfect force fields for the hundreth time and bring down bunkers or block a ramp to win the game is boring and horrible design I cant believe they actually thought that was a good idea.
|
is it me or are these units the same we saw 1 year ago with not many changes?
what have they been doing all this time?
|
On June 12 2012 07:14 Toadvine wrote:Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 07:06 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 12 2012 06:51 SmileZerg wrote:
I don't think WG should be removed, not by a long shot. I do think that proxy pylons should be nerfed, however, to make the warp prism more of an integral part of that mechanic. For example, limit pylon placement to within 30-40 range of a Nexus. This also fixes all sorts of problems with maps like needing neutral depots to prevent pylon blocking ramps. That's quite brilliant. You keep all the deffensive capabilities wg offer and give T and Z defenders advantage back while making the warp prism an integral part of aggressive play. Maybe allow for better gateway units in general. Makes to much sense though, not gona happen. My mind is literally blown, that someone would actually find that a good idea. Why don't we make it impossible for Queens to move more than 40 yards away from a hatchery while we're at it?
That isn't even remotely the same situation. Please compare more apples to oranges.
It's just an extension of the already present radial base mechanics of Protoss and Zerg. You can't place buildings outside of pylon power, it's not a stretch to say you can't place pylons outside of Nexus range. Look up the definition of Nexus.
|
On June 12 2012 07:17 snakeeyez wrote:
Yeah Blizzard would never redesign the whole game now but the game needs those stupid abilities like force fields, conc shell, and fungals radically changed or removed. Fungals might be fixable if you just made it a dot and removed the freeze or maybe a slight slow. Watching someone lay down perfect force fields for the hundreth time and bring down bunkers or block a ramp to win the game is boring and horrible design I cant believe they actually thought that was a good idea.
OMG, the dreaded Offensive FF Block has to be the stupidest thing in the game. Especially against poor Zergs.
|
On June 12 2012 07:14 Toadvine wrote:Can all of you "WG is too strong midgame/lategame/blablabla" dudes find yourselves a different thread for your balance whine? Nobody cares that you lose to Blink Stalkers on the ladder. We're trying to figure out a way for Protoss to function without Sentries, and removing/nerfing WG is just a necessary consequence of that. Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 07:06 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 12 2012 06:51 SmileZerg wrote:
I don't think WG should be removed, not by a long shot. I do think that proxy pylons should be nerfed, however, to make the warp prism more of an integral part of that mechanic. For example, limit pylon placement to within 30-40 range of a Nexus. This also fixes all sorts of problems with maps like needing neutral depots to prevent pylon blocking ramps. That's quite brilliant. You keep all the deffensive capabilities wg offer and give T and Z defenders advantage back while making the warp prism an integral part of aggressive play. Maybe allow for better gateway units in general. Makes to much sense though, not gona happen. My mind is literally blown, that someone would actually find that a good idea. Why don't we make it impossible for Queens to move more than 40 yards away from a hatchery while we're at it?
Seeing how in recent games all it takes is Queens to get map control from T, it might not be such a bad ideea, hmmm
Just messing around, don't take it to seriously lol. Obviously WGs are an integral part of Protoss and they are not going anywhere.
|
Haven't see anyone anwser the question, even after a few people asking :
Why no amateur gameplay video from MLG ?
|
I wish they would have showed warhounds in the battle report just a little, but I guess it doesn't really make sense to use an anti mech unit against zerg. Hopefully they have a TvP battle report next. I'm totally digging widow mines though, mines are just such a terran-ish thing.
|
how are u supposed to trade vs +2 blink stalker without fungal? i am honestly interested, cause its not always possible to get a good surround with lings in front and roaches behind them.
|
On June 12 2012 07:14 Toadvine wrote:Can all of you "WG is too strong midgame/lategame/blablabla" dudes find yourselves a different thread for your balance whine? Nobody cares that you lose to Blink Stalkers on the ladder. We're trying to figure out a way for Protoss to function without Sentries, and removing/nerfing WG is just a necessary consequence of that. Show nested quote +On June 12 2012 07:06 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 12 2012 06:51 SmileZerg wrote:
I don't think WG should be removed, not by a long shot. I do think that proxy pylons should be nerfed, however, to make the warp prism more of an integral part of that mechanic. For example, limit pylon placement to within 30-40 range of a Nexus. This also fixes all sorts of problems with maps like needing neutral depots to prevent pylon blocking ramps. That's quite brilliant. You keep all the deffensive capabilities wg offer and give T and Z defenders advantage back while making the warp prism an integral part of aggressive play. Maybe allow for better gateway units in general. Makes to much sense though, not gona happen. My mind is literally blown, that someone would actually find that a good idea. Why don't we make it impossible for Queens to move more than 40 yards away from a hatchery while we're at it?
Well what about if you can place pylons wherever you want (for spotting and whatnot), but if it's too far away from a nexus it loses the warp-in ability. You can color code it to make it easy to tell whether it's in range or not. The non-warp-in pylons could be dull like an unpowered building.
|
I'm fine with removing/nerfing WG, but making it impossible to build pylons away from a Nexus would have a lot of implications for various aspects of Protoss play (literally no more Protoss cheese, impossible to use pylons for map vision and spotting, impossible to fortify an expansion before building a Nexus, no more proxy tech, and so forth). If it works for Nexi which are building, then it's easy to circumvent; if it doesn't, then it forces the Protoss to camp his army on top of a building Nexus in PvZ, or risk it being cancelled by 10 lings. And there's no reason to do this, there are much easier ways of accomplishing the same thing - for example only being able to warp stuff in close to a Nexus (or a Warp Prism). No need to screw with the basic Protoss mechanics, the depot before barracks thing was stupid enough.
Not that Blizzard will alter Warpgate in any major way, it's their valuable contribution to Protoss design. Same reason why they won't bring back BW units, they can't take the hit to their precious pride.
|
So after I suggested that Blizz should redesign Force Fields to another defensive ability (remember, the Mothership Core adds a new strong early defense for  in HOTS), many people are saying that WG would also need to be removed and Gateway units buffed for it to work.
I don't see why Warp gate needs to be removed. There are other ways around it. One is to move it up the tech tree (Twilight Council, Fleet Beacon). The other is to nerf it: units warped in start with no shield and energy, and/or make the upgrade cost more so that there is a significant strategical tradeoff rather than an auto upgrade after core. That way, you get strong units out of Gateways or weaker units out of Warp gate.
The Forcefield replacement spell can also fill in for early defense, as long as it's not as annoying.
I'm very pessimistic that Blizz be so bold to try to "fix" these pain-points of .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
