|
On July 10 2012 02:38 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:30 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:21 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:14 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:07 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:03 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 01:58 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 01:55 Sakagami wrote:
Am i the only one that's significantly bothered by the fact that the battle hellion essentially has the same stats as the stalker. Also the fact that the war hound costs 25 more gas than the stalker and is essentially better in EVERY way except it can't hit air???? almost everything does more dps and is more cost-effective health wise than stalkers, doesn't prevent them from being very versatile and good in all matchups I definitely wouldn't say that they are very versatile and good in all match ups. Considering in most match ups you try to get away with making as few stalkers as possible unless you're blink all inning. If we had a a unit that was half decent and could hit air (not phoenix because they aren't really massable) i doubt anyone would use the stalker anymore. pretty sure PvZ is still getting a huge ball of stalkers with a few colossus and sentries added in, and PvT people still invest a heavy portion of their supplies in them, not even counting in the timing where mass nothing but stalkers is still very viable as long as you have a few zealots or immortals for bust Quite a ridiculous statement to make, people don't make stalkers to just hit air (well, they're still very good against air), stalkers is incredibly good in a protoss army as long as you can micro and have zealots/forcefields for tanking 1) Theres a reason why PvZ your base army is stalkers. Zealots can't hit air (brood lords) and they also get raped by fungals because they're melee. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. 2) PvT you get stalkers to kill vikings and medivacs essentially while your entire base is zealots. Furthermore you bust with basically all stalkers because you HAVE to forcefield bunkers which make zealots near useless depending on the scv placement. 3) Yeah stalkers are good against air, which is why they get raped by mutalisks a unit that's supposed to be bad in direct engagements. and yet Protoss as a race is still doing fairly well. stalkers must be a bad unit and should be buffed so protoss deathballs can become stronger than ever. There are even multiple timings where you make nothing but stalkers, you can't seriously think its a bad unit. the whole "im worried cause new units seem to be stronger or equal than stalkers" is total crap consider almost everything is already better than stalkers when looking at the stats. Yet protoss lives on with having 70% of the army in stalker values (early to mid) If stalkers are as bad as you suggested, then how are protoss early and mid game pushes so strong when their army is dominantly heavy in stalkers? or even late game? army synergy counts alot more than just the units themselves. A few zealots in a stalker ball or sentries in early game drastically improve their effectiveness and colossus/chargelot/templars for late In PvT main reason you make stalkers is not only for air, but also actually being able to hit marauder and marines while your zealot is getting kited. Unless you plan to sit at base with sentries, you won't be able to push out any mid game pressure without stalkers. Most early midgame protoss push have a huge stalker force with 2-3 sentries and 3 zealots at the front. p.s stalkers don't get raped by mutalisks. LOL i'm not even sure if there is a point in me addressing every single useless point you made since i can essentially answer all of them with the same response. It doesn't matter if it's a stalker or not, the unit is irrelevant the reason why protoss survives early-mid game is because of sentries and forcefields. Not because we have a million stalkers it's because the near bulk of our army is ranged and we can section it off so that our army is significantly stronger than the sectioned off army making fights very cost efficient. Again it's not the huge ball of stalkers doing the work trust me, any ranged unit will work in its place. And that's exactly why Stalkers are as weak as they are. The Protoss have other things that combo well with the relatively weak Stalker, this increasing its effectiveness to reasonable levels. That's why buffing the Stalker is a bad idea; you'll just make the existing synergy that much stronger.
The problem with this line of argument is that every race has things that combo just as well if not better than Stalker/X. MMM is hands down the best synergy in the game. Infestor/anything is definitely a better synergy than any Protoss pairing. It's not like Protoss is this magical synergy race with weak individual units that own together. Every race benefits from a well-rounded composition. Why do you think BL/Infestor/Corruptor/Spine is so feared? It's not because of any one part, per se, but because the combination is unstoppable.
|
|
|
On July 10 2012 02:38 NicolBolas wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:30 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:21 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:14 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:07 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:03 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 01:58 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 01:55 Sakagami wrote:
Am i the only one that's significantly bothered by the fact that the battle hellion essentially has the same stats as the stalker. Also the fact that the war hound costs 25 more gas than the stalker and is essentially better in EVERY way except it can't hit air???? almost everything does more dps and is more cost-effective health wise than stalkers, doesn't prevent them from being very versatile and good in all matchups I definitely wouldn't say that they are very versatile and good in all match ups. Considering in most match ups you try to get away with making as few stalkers as possible unless you're blink all inning. If we had a a unit that was half decent and could hit air (not phoenix because they aren't really massable) i doubt anyone would use the stalker anymore. pretty sure PvZ is still getting a huge ball of stalkers with a few colossus and sentries added in, and PvT people still invest a heavy portion of their supplies in them, not even counting in the timing where mass nothing but stalkers is still very viable as long as you have a few zealots or immortals for bust Quite a ridiculous statement to make, people don't make stalkers to just hit air (well, they're still very good against air), stalkers is incredibly good in a protoss army as long as you can micro and have zealots/forcefields for tanking 1) Theres a reason why PvZ your base army is stalkers. Zealots can't hit air (brood lords) and they also get raped by fungals because they're melee. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. 2) PvT you get stalkers to kill vikings and medivacs essentially while your entire base is zealots. Furthermore you bust with basically all stalkers because you HAVE to forcefield bunkers which make zealots near useless depending on the scv placement. 3) Yeah stalkers are good against air, which is why they get raped by mutalisks a unit that's supposed to be bad in direct engagements. and yet Protoss as a race is still doing fairly well. stalkers must be a bad unit and should be buffed so protoss deathballs can become stronger than ever. There are even multiple timings where you make nothing but stalkers, you can't seriously think its a bad unit. the whole "im worried cause new units seem to be stronger or equal than stalkers" is total crap consider almost everything is already better than stalkers when looking at the stats. Yet protoss lives on with having 70% of the army in stalker values (early to mid) If stalkers are as bad as you suggested, then how are protoss early and mid game pushes so strong when their army is dominantly heavy in stalkers? or even late game? army synergy counts alot more than just the units themselves. A few zealots in a stalker ball or sentries in early game drastically improve their effectiveness and colossus/chargelot/templars for late In PvT main reason you make stalkers is not only for air, but also actually being able to hit marauder and marines while your zealot is getting kited. Unless you plan to sit at base with sentries, you won't be able to push out any mid game pressure without stalkers. Most early midgame protoss push have a huge stalker force with 2-3 sentries and 3 zealots at the front. p.s stalkers don't get raped by mutalisks. LOL i'm not even sure if there is a point in me addressing every single useless point you made since i can essentially answer all of them with the same response. It doesn't matter if it's a stalker or not, the unit is irrelevant the reason why protoss survives early-mid game is because of sentries and forcefields. Not because we have a million stalkers it's because the near bulk of our army is ranged and we can section it off so that our army is significantly stronger than the sectioned off army making fights very cost efficient. Again it's not the huge ball of stalkers doing the work trust me, any ranged unit will work in its place. And that's exactly why Stalkers are as weak as they are. The Protoss have other things that combo well with the relatively weak Stalker, this increasing its effectiveness to reasonable levels. That's why buffing the Stalker is a bad idea; you'll just make the existing synergy that much stronger.
It's also what makes the entire protoss race so fragile. Losing sentries which are the only things keeping you alive early/mid game is stupid as hell if you play protoss. Losing a sentry is like the equivalent to you losing 10 probes in damage. Feel free to remove the sentry and give us REAL units.
|
On July 10 2012 02:41 Sakagami wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:38 NicolBolas wrote:On July 10 2012 02:30 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:21 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:14 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:07 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:03 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 01:58 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 01:55 Sakagami wrote:
Am i the only one that's significantly bothered by the fact that the battle hellion essentially has the same stats as the stalker. Also the fact that the war hound costs 25 more gas than the stalker and is essentially better in EVERY way except it can't hit air???? almost everything does more dps and is more cost-effective health wise than stalkers, doesn't prevent them from being very versatile and good in all matchups I definitely wouldn't say that they are very versatile and good in all match ups. Considering in most match ups you try to get away with making as few stalkers as possible unless you're blink all inning. If we had a a unit that was half decent and could hit air (not phoenix because they aren't really massable) i doubt anyone would use the stalker anymore. pretty sure PvZ is still getting a huge ball of stalkers with a few colossus and sentries added in, and PvT people still invest a heavy portion of their supplies in them, not even counting in the timing where mass nothing but stalkers is still very viable as long as you have a few zealots or immortals for bust Quite a ridiculous statement to make, people don't make stalkers to just hit air (well, they're still very good against air), stalkers is incredibly good in a protoss army as long as you can micro and have zealots/forcefields for tanking 1) Theres a reason why PvZ your base army is stalkers. Zealots can't hit air (brood lords) and they also get raped by fungals because they're melee. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. 2) PvT you get stalkers to kill vikings and medivacs essentially while your entire base is zealots. Furthermore you bust with basically all stalkers because you HAVE to forcefield bunkers which make zealots near useless depending on the scv placement. 3) Yeah stalkers are good against air, which is why they get raped by mutalisks a unit that's supposed to be bad in direct engagements. and yet Protoss as a race is still doing fairly well. stalkers must be a bad unit and should be buffed so protoss deathballs can become stronger than ever. There are even multiple timings where you make nothing but stalkers, you can't seriously think its a bad unit. the whole "im worried cause new units seem to be stronger or equal than stalkers" is total crap consider almost everything is already better than stalkers when looking at the stats. Yet protoss lives on with having 70% of the army in stalker values (early to mid) If stalkers are as bad as you suggested, then how are protoss early and mid game pushes so strong when their army is dominantly heavy in stalkers? or even late game? army synergy counts alot more than just the units themselves. A few zealots in a stalker ball or sentries in early game drastically improve their effectiveness and colossus/chargelot/templars for late In PvT main reason you make stalkers is not only for air, but also actually being able to hit marauder and marines while your zealot is getting kited. Unless you plan to sit at base with sentries, you won't be able to push out any mid game pressure without stalkers. Most early midgame protoss push have a huge stalker force with 2-3 sentries and 3 zealots at the front. p.s stalkers don't get raped by mutalisks. LOL i'm not even sure if there is a point in me addressing every single useless point you made since i can essentially answer all of them with the same response. It doesn't matter if it's a stalker or not, the unit is irrelevant the reason why protoss survives early-mid game is because of sentries and forcefields. Not because we have a million stalkers it's because the near bulk of our army is ranged and we can section it off so that our army is significantly stronger than the sectioned off army making fights very cost efficient. Again it's not the huge ball of stalkers doing the work trust me, any ranged unit will work in its place. And that's exactly why Stalkers are as weak as they are. The Protoss have other things that combo well with the relatively weak Stalker, this increasing its effectiveness to reasonable levels. That's why buffing the Stalker is a bad idea; you'll just make the existing synergy that much stronger. It's also what makes the entire protoss race so fragile. Losing sentries which are the only things keeping you alive early/mid game is stupid as hell if you play protoss. Losing a sentry is like the equivalent to you losing 10 probes in damage. Feel free to remove the sentry and give us REAL units.
No, we protoss would like to keep our sentries, they win us games. Same with stalkers and zealots. You should play a different race if you want "better units". Other people seem to have no problem keeping their key units alive.
|
66 dmg vs massive and 22 range, how can that be bad? strongest new unit for toss, we can now kill broodlords in lategame pvz, also it will be able to stop colossus wars in pvp 
|
On July 10 2012 02:47 aiseiplo. wrote:
66 dmg vs massive and 22 range, how can that be bad? strongest new unit for toss, we can now kill broodlords in lategame pvz
They cost 300/300, take a year to fire and come out of a stargate. Late game they could be awesome and I like that Blizzard is adding in some crazy units. We will have to see them in action, but everyone seems to be getting a little of what they need.
|
On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE.
How dare they give zerg a similar rush to protoss. How dare they patch immediately before it even comes out!! Zerg should always be on defensive until after 12 minutes or else we.. wouldn't be able to complain about infestor/bl!
Come on, make any units at all and you can kill a spine rush. It's a cute cheesy strat for unprepared players that, if defended, leaves Zerg behind. Just like cannon rushing.
To the stupid stalker discussion: Please stop theorycrafting so damn hard. "1 Stalkers dps is less than a medivacs healz! underpowered!" Well obviously if you're attacking into a theorycrafting bubble, anything can sound bad.
Chances are you'll have more than a single stalker so chances are your example sucks. Leave this discussino for the dedicated balance discussion thread if you must discuss it. This is for theorycrafting (lol) unreleased features.
|
On July 10 2012 02:47 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:41 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:38 NicolBolas wrote:On July 10 2012 02:30 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:21 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:14 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:07 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:03 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 01:58 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 01:55 Sakagami wrote:
Am i the only one that's significantly bothered by the fact that the battle hellion essentially has the same stats as the stalker. Also the fact that the war hound costs 25 more gas than the stalker and is essentially better in EVERY way except it can't hit air???? almost everything does more dps and is more cost-effective health wise than stalkers, doesn't prevent them from being very versatile and good in all matchups I definitely wouldn't say that they are very versatile and good in all match ups. Considering in most match ups you try to get away with making as few stalkers as possible unless you're blink all inning. If we had a a unit that was half decent and could hit air (not phoenix because they aren't really massable) i doubt anyone would use the stalker anymore. pretty sure PvZ is still getting a huge ball of stalkers with a few colossus and sentries added in, and PvT people still invest a heavy portion of their supplies in them, not even counting in the timing where mass nothing but stalkers is still very viable as long as you have a few zealots or immortals for bust Quite a ridiculous statement to make, people don't make stalkers to just hit air (well, they're still very good against air), stalkers is incredibly good in a protoss army as long as you can micro and have zealots/forcefields for tanking 1) Theres a reason why PvZ your base army is stalkers. Zealots can't hit air (brood lords) and they also get raped by fungals because they're melee. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. 2) PvT you get stalkers to kill vikings and medivacs essentially while your entire base is zealots. Furthermore you bust with basically all stalkers because you HAVE to forcefield bunkers which make zealots near useless depending on the scv placement. 3) Yeah stalkers are good against air, which is why they get raped by mutalisks a unit that's supposed to be bad in direct engagements. and yet Protoss as a race is still doing fairly well. stalkers must be a bad unit and should be buffed so protoss deathballs can become stronger than ever. There are even multiple timings where you make nothing but stalkers, you can't seriously think its a bad unit. the whole "im worried cause new units seem to be stronger or equal than stalkers" is total crap consider almost everything is already better than stalkers when looking at the stats. Yet protoss lives on with having 70% of the army in stalker values (early to mid) If stalkers are as bad as you suggested, then how are protoss early and mid game pushes so strong when their army is dominantly heavy in stalkers? or even late game? army synergy counts alot more than just the units themselves. A few zealots in a stalker ball or sentries in early game drastically improve their effectiveness and colossus/chargelot/templars for late In PvT main reason you make stalkers is not only for air, but also actually being able to hit marauder and marines while your zealot is getting kited. Unless you plan to sit at base with sentries, you won't be able to push out any mid game pressure without stalkers. Most early midgame protoss push have a huge stalker force with 2-3 sentries and 3 zealots at the front. p.s stalkers don't get raped by mutalisks. LOL i'm not even sure if there is a point in me addressing every single useless point you made since i can essentially answer all of them with the same response. It doesn't matter if it's a stalker or not, the unit is irrelevant the reason why protoss survives early-mid game is because of sentries and forcefields. Not because we have a million stalkers it's because the near bulk of our army is ranged and we can section it off so that our army is significantly stronger than the sectioned off army making fights very cost efficient. Again it's not the huge ball of stalkers doing the work trust me, any ranged unit will work in its place. And that's exactly why Stalkers are as weak as they are. The Protoss have other things that combo well with the relatively weak Stalker, this increasing its effectiveness to reasonable levels. That's why buffing the Stalker is a bad idea; you'll just make the existing synergy that much stronger. It's also what makes the entire protoss race so fragile. Losing sentries which are the only things keeping you alive early/mid game is stupid as hell if you play protoss. Losing a sentry is like the equivalent to you losing 10 probes in damage. Feel free to remove the sentry and give us REAL units. No, we protoss would like to keep our sentries, they win us games. Same with stalkers and zealots. You should play a different race if you want "better units". Other people seem to have no problem keeping their key units alive.
You... missed... the point.
I do think the worst part about stalkers is that you cant kite marines like you did in BW. Combined with the pathetic dps they really are the units you build when you have to.
Side ntoe: did anyone test if you can drop the mines from a medivac?
|
On July 10 2012 02:53 Probe1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. How dare they give zerg a similar rush to protoss. How dare they patch immediately before it even comes out!! Zerg should always be on defensive until after 12 minutes or else we.. wouldn't be able to complain about infestor/bl! Come on, make any units at all and you can kill a spine rush. It's a cute cheesy strat for unprepared players that, if defended, leaves Zerg behind. Just like cannon rushing.
To the stupid stalker discussion: Please stop theorycrafting so damn hard. "1 Stalkers dps is less than a medivacs healz! underpowered!" Well obviously if you're attacking into a theorycrafting bubble, anything can sound bad. Chances are you'll have more than a single stalker so chances are your example sucks. Leave this discussino for the dedicated balance discussion thread if you must discuss it. This is for theorycrafting (lol) unreleased features.
You can (and do) defend a Cannon Rush off of standard play. Protoss won't have a Stalker for AGES off an FFE because we don't even have a Gateway, let alone a Cyber or Gas. Until I can pull Probes to defend against Overlords spitting Creep on my 17 food Nexus, it'd be overpowered. By a lot.
|
On July 10 2012 02:53 Sabu113 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:47 Plansix wrote:On July 10 2012 02:41 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:38 NicolBolas wrote:On July 10 2012 02:30 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:21 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:14 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 02:07 iky43210 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:03 Sakagami wrote:On July 10 2012 01:58 iky43210 wrote:
[quote]
almost everything does more dps and is more cost-effective health wise than stalkers, doesn't prevent them from being very versatile and good in all matchups I definitely wouldn't say that they are very versatile and good in all match ups. Considering in most match ups you try to get away with making as few stalkers as possible unless you're blink all inning. If we had a a unit that was half decent and could hit air (not phoenix because they aren't really massable) i doubt anyone would use the stalker anymore. pretty sure PvZ is still getting a huge ball of stalkers with a few colossus and sentries added in, and PvT people still invest a heavy portion of their supplies in them, not even counting in the timing where mass nothing but stalkers is still very viable as long as you have a few zealots or immortals for bust Quite a ridiculous statement to make, people don't make stalkers to just hit air (well, they're still very good against air), stalkers is incredibly good in a protoss army as long as you can micro and have zealots/forcefields for tanking 1) Theres a reason why PvZ your base army is stalkers. Zealots can't hit air (brood lords) and they also get raped by fungals because they're melee. WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE. 2) PvT you get stalkers to kill vikings and medivacs essentially while your entire base is zealots. Furthermore you bust with basically all stalkers because you HAVE to forcefield bunkers which make zealots near useless depending on the scv placement. 3) Yeah stalkers are good against air, which is why they get raped by mutalisks a unit that's supposed to be bad in direct engagements. and yet Protoss as a race is still doing fairly well. stalkers must be a bad unit and should be buffed so protoss deathballs can become stronger than ever. There are even multiple timings where you make nothing but stalkers, you can't seriously think its a bad unit. the whole "im worried cause new units seem to be stronger or equal than stalkers" is total crap consider almost everything is already better than stalkers when looking at the stats. Yet protoss lives on with having 70% of the army in stalker values (early to mid) If stalkers are as bad as you suggested, then how are protoss early and mid game pushes so strong when their army is dominantly heavy in stalkers? or even late game? army synergy counts alot more than just the units themselves. A few zealots in a stalker ball or sentries in early game drastically improve their effectiveness and colossus/chargelot/templars for late In PvT main reason you make stalkers is not only for air, but also actually being able to hit marauder and marines while your zealot is getting kited. Unless you plan to sit at base with sentries, you won't be able to push out any mid game pressure without stalkers. Most early midgame protoss push have a huge stalker force with 2-3 sentries and 3 zealots at the front. p.s stalkers don't get raped by mutalisks. LOL i'm not even sure if there is a point in me addressing every single useless point you made since i can essentially answer all of them with the same response. It doesn't matter if it's a stalker or not, the unit is irrelevant the reason why protoss survives early-mid game is because of sentries and forcefields. Not because we have a million stalkers it's because the near bulk of our army is ranged and we can section it off so that our army is significantly stronger than the sectioned off army making fights very cost efficient. Again it's not the huge ball of stalkers doing the work trust me, any ranged unit will work in its place. And that's exactly why Stalkers are as weak as they are. The Protoss have other things that combo well with the relatively weak Stalker, this increasing its effectiveness to reasonable levels. That's why buffing the Stalker is a bad idea; you'll just make the existing synergy that much stronger. It's also what makes the entire protoss race so fragile. Losing sentries which are the only things keeping you alive early/mid game is stupid as hell if you play protoss. Losing a sentry is like the equivalent to you losing 10 probes in damage. Feel free to remove the sentry and give us REAL units. No, we protoss would like to keep our sentries, they win us games. Same with stalkers and zealots. You should play a different race if you want "better units". Other people seem to have no problem keeping their key units alive. You... missed... the point. I do think the worst part about stalkers is that you cant kite marines like you did in BW. Combined with the pathetic dps they really are the units you build when you have to. Side ntoe: did anyone test if you can drop the mines from a medivac?
No I totally got the point, I just did not feel it was very good. The entire protoss army has always been better than the sum of its parts and stalkers are great at what they do. People should not over build them, but they are great when used correctly. And I have no problem kiting marines before they have stim. There is nothing more awesome than cutting down a group of pre-stim marines who were out on the map when they should not have been.
|
On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE.
Removing the viability of an outdated opener is not imbalanced by any means, and if this change goes through, it would very specifically mean the death of FFE.
That is no different from the death of BBS, 4 gate, or 5 rax reaper, all of which have had a positive impact on the viewability and viability of SC2 as an eSport.
The question is not whether denying the nexus is imba, Protoss still has other openers.
The question is whether FFE is good for the game. Judging from the current state of PvZ, I'd argue that is likely a no.
|
On July 10 2012 02:57 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:53 Probe1 wrote:On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. How dare they give zerg a similar rush to protoss. How dare they patch immediately before it even comes out!! Zerg should always be on defensive until after 12 minutes or else we.. wouldn't be able to complain about infestor/bl! Come on, make any units at all and you can kill a spine rush. It's a cute cheesy strat for unprepared players that, if defended, leaves Zerg behind. Just like cannon rushing.
To the stupid stalker discussion: Please stop theorycrafting so damn hard. "1 Stalkers dps is less than a medivacs healz! underpowered!" Well obviously if you're attacking into a theorycrafting bubble, anything can sound bad. Chances are you'll have more than a single stalker so chances are your example sucks. Leave this discussino for the dedicated balance discussion thread if you must discuss it. This is for theorycrafting (lol) unreleased features. You can (and do) defend a Cannon Rush off of standard play. Protoss won't have a Stalker for AGES off an FFE because we don't even have a Gateway, let alone a Cyber or Gas. Until I can pull Probes to defend against Overlords spitting Creep on my 17 food Nexus, it'd be overpowered. By a lot.
I remember an "Inside the Game" where somone asked Idra if moving creep droping to pre-lair would be a good idea. Idra thought it would be overpowered because the zerg would be able to block buildings and mess up builds to easily. I feel safe in saying that any change to zerg that Idra feels would be overpowered is not a good idea in any way.
|
On July 10 2012 03:00 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. Removing the viability of an outdated opener is not imbalanced by any means, and if this change goes through, it would very specifically mean the death of FFE. That is no different from the death of BBS, 4 gate, or 5 rax reaper, all of which have had a positive impact on the viewability and viability of SC2 as an eSport. The question is not whether denying the nexus is imba, Protoss still has other openers. The question is whether FFE is good for the game. Judging from the current state of PvZ, I'd argue that is likely a no.
The current state of PvZ is 2base all-inning. Removing FFE would just make our 2base all-ins worse, if anything. It still wouldn't give us an answer to lategame Zerg, which is the fundamental problem with the matchup.
This is like suggesting we remove 3base Roach from the game because it's boring. That's not the way this game works.
Protoss has no other consistently viable openers than FFE, which is why virtually no professional Protoss players do anything but FFE. Trust me, if there were a way to play macro PvZ that was better than FFE, top Koreans (other than Seed) would be using it, because nobody likes having to Immortal/Sentry all-in every single game.
|
On July 10 2012 03:00 Jermstuddog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. Removing the viability of an outdated opener is not imbalanced by any means, and if this change goes through, it would very specifically mean the death of FFE. That is no different from the death of BBS, 4 gate, or 5 rax reaper, all of which have had a positive impact on the viewability and viability of SC2 as an eSport. The question is not whether denying the nexus is imba, Protoss still has other openers. The question is whether FFE is good for the game. Judging from the current state of PvZ, I'd argue that is likely a no.
I think the only thing bad about FFE is that it is really the only build we see PvZ because it is the fastest, safest way to get to 2 base and go into the mid game strong vs zerg.
As for the stalker, the fact that it has the ability to learn blink, a big boost in the unit's strength, mobility and harass potential (provided proper micro ofc) makes it so it has to be balanced like a mutalisk, weak in direct conflict due to mobility and harass potential, but then the problem with the stalker is that they have to research blink before being a strong unit.
I had thoughts of making the stalker higher DPS/more robust to fit into the army better and have another unit with blink designed for map control/harassment.
|
On July 10 2012 03:11 Phoobie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 03:00 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. Removing the viability of an outdated opener is not imbalanced by any means, and if this change goes through, it would very specifically mean the death of FFE. That is no different from the death of BBS, 4 gate, or 5 rax reaper, all of which have had a positive impact on the viewability and viability of SC2 as an eSport. The question is not whether denying the nexus is imba, Protoss still has other openers. The question is whether FFE is good for the game. Judging from the current state of PvZ, I'd argue that is likely a no. I think the only thing bad about FFE is that it is really the only build we see PvZ because it is the fastest, safest way to get to 2 base and go into the mid game strong vs zerg. As for the stalker, the fact that it has the ability to learn blink, a big boost in the unit's strength, mobility and harass potential (provided proper micro ofc) makes it so it has to be balanced like a mutalisk, weak in direct conflict due to mobility and harass potential, but then the problem with the stalker is that they have to research blink before being a strong unit. I had thoughts of making the stalker higher DPS/more robust to fit into the army better and have another unit with blink designed for map control/harassment.
I say you can easily open with 1 gate expand, especially in HotS you get mothershipcore which would solve all the problems with all ins zerg can throw at your 1 gate expand.
|
On July 10 2012 03:16 Adonminus wrote:Show nested quote +On July 10 2012 03:11 Phoobie wrote:On July 10 2012 03:00 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:38 Shiori wrote:On July 10 2012 02:36 Jermstuddog wrote:On July 10 2012 02:13 Probe1 wrote:On June 20 2012 12:39 Dingobloo wrote:Interesting tidbit from david kim's interview with RTSGuru: RTS Guru: Where do you see the game changing the most? Late game, mid game...etc. It seems to me a lot more late game with all the new units having to tech up to get to.
David Kim: For example on the Zerg side, the only change we have on the early game is the Overlord creep. That ability got moved from Lair to Evolution Chamber. Moving the overlords drop creep ability from the lair to the evo chamber seems interesting on paper, hopefully spine all-ins vs forge fast expands for example don't become a bit ridiculous. I'll see your cannon rush and raise you overlord rush! Wow... This is actually pretty huge... I can already theorycraft denying a natural nexus off a FFE until at least your first stalker comes out. I like this ^_^ I hope you realize that if this were possible, it would be hideously imbalanced and would need to be patched out. It's not like Protoss gets a super early Nexus off an FFE. Removing the viability of an outdated opener is not imbalanced by any means, and if this change goes through, it would very specifically mean the death of FFE. That is no different from the death of BBS, 4 gate, or 5 rax reaper, all of which have had a positive impact on the viewability and viability of SC2 as an eSport. The question is not whether denying the nexus is imba, Protoss still has other openers. The question is whether FFE is good for the game. Judging from the current state of PvZ, I'd argue that is likely a no. I think the only thing bad about FFE is that it is really the only build we see PvZ because it is the fastest, safest way to get to 2 base and go into the mid game strong vs zerg. As for the stalker, the fact that it has the ability to learn blink, a big boost in the unit's strength, mobility and harass potential (provided proper micro ofc) makes it so it has to be balanced like a mutalisk, weak in direct conflict due to mobility and harass potential, but then the problem with the stalker is that they have to research blink before being a strong unit. I had thoughts of making the stalker higher DPS/more robust to fit into the army better and have another unit with blink designed for map control/harassment. I say you can easily open with 1 gate expand, especially in HotS you get mothershipcore which would solve all the problems with all ins zerg can throw at your 1 gate expand.
For 20 seconds, until the power wears off and more zerglings rushing in and you have one more zealot. If anything, the MScore will allow protoss to skimp on cannons if they want to rely on the super cannon for defense. FFE is not going anywhere.
|
At what time does the overlord reach the base of the protoss now?
Denying the nexus would be overpowered enough in my opinion but that wouldn't even be necessary because with this you can just drop creep where the wall would be instead and prevent it for long enough to get lots of zerglings in.
|
On July 10 2012 03:20 Darneck wrote:
At what time does the overlord reach the base of the protoss now?
Denying the nexus would be overpowered enough in my opinion but that wouldn't even be necessary because this you can just drop creep where the wall would be instead and prevent it for long enough to get lots of zerglings in.
Depends on the map? I think we can accept that prelair creep drop is a terrible idea. As I stated above, even Idra thought it would be overpowered. What is it with people and their dislike for fast expand builds? Can I request a change that makes a super pylon that rebuilds itself and allows me to block hatchs for as long as I am willing to spend the money?
|
On July 10 2012 03:20 Darneck wrote:
At what time does the overlord reach the base of the protoss now?
Denying the nexus would be overpowered enough in my opinion but that wouldn't even be necessary because this you can just drop creep where the wall would be instead and prevent it for long enough to get lots of zerglings in.
Exactly the point.
If Ovie creep is moved to the evo chamber, 100 different holes get opened up in FFE. The build is effectively dead.
Personally, I have never been much of a FFE fan, it seems cheap and lazy, but its so damn powerful that nobody really found a way to truly make 1 gate expos work. I personally think gateway openers are much stronger due to their ability to defend, tech, and attack all at the same time, but that has no relevance to this argument.
I hope FFE dies, I am sure gateway expand openers are significantly more powerful, especially with the mscore being added.
|
On July 10 2012 03:20 Darneck wrote:
At what time does the overlord reach the base of the protoss now?
Denying the nexus would be overpowered enough in my opinion but that wouldn't even be necessary because this you can just drop creep where the wall would be instead and prevent it for long enough to get lots of zerglings in.
On 2 player maps or close air maps, overlords reach your base really early. Only expansion which could be done before your overlord reaches your base is probably nexus first and I'm still not sure of it, depends on the map. If that change applies and zerg start denying expansions with creep, you'll have to go 1 gate, then cyber and chrono out a stalker to expand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
