|
On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote:
Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy.  I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP.
Zerg got my mind control.
|
wait. with chrono and mules . .doesnt this make zerg really weak early game? With faster minerals comes faster responsibility . . . i mean aggressive possibility, where the zerg needs to drone as their starter units arent as strong . . or is it just 6 queen openers every game?
|
On December 23 2014 10:17 StatixEx wrote:
wait. with chrono and mules . .doesnt this make zerg really weak early game? With faster minerals comes faster responsibility . . . i mean aggressive possibility, where the zerg needs to drone as their starter units arent as strong . . or is it just 6 queen openers every game?
Zerg can still inject and make 4 of anything at once. Including workers.
|
On December 23 2014 00:08 TedCruz2016 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 23:23 Espers wrote:
I don't see why you'd ever use Swarm Hosts over Mutalisks in this "harass" role. 1. Higher DPS 2. Ground attack (turrets and spores would be useless) 3. Unpredictable (compared to mutas, your opponents will immediately know what you're up to when your spire is detected) 4. No resource cost.
Also, set and forget. Don't need to micro or worry about being kill efficient with them.
|
On December 23 2014 06:35 gmorf33 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2014 02:09 Freeborn wrote:On December 20 2014 03:49 TheDwf wrote:On December 19 2014 21:23 Grumbels wrote:
A question out of curiosity. I thought it would be obvious that the reaper's weakness past early game could be amended by giving them a mid-game upgrade. A prime candidate would be combat shields: it does not come so early as to affect various reaper rushes and it can be argued that the unit is too squishy later on anyhow. However, there is a potential stumbling block in implementing this because there is a precedent for combat shields to effect some graphical change in marines and this might require a similar adjustment to the reaper model. So while allowing reapers to benefit from combat shields might seem like a harmless option to experiment with, there are hidden costs. Even if Blizzard thought of this change they have to question whether they can make the reaper model work with shields, whether the gameplay benefits (more reaper use) will compensate for the resources expended in creating the model, and so on. Am I overthinking this? I don't think you can make Reapers useful by midgame without implementing some kind of odd concept from a costly upgrade, simply because they cost 50m 50g and take a long time to produce. I suggested this before the last patch: On July 02 2014 21:42 TheDwf wrote:Nitro Packs
Researched from: Tech Lab Barracks
Cost: 150m 150g 140s
Requirements: Factory.
Effects: increases the Reaper's movement speed to 4.25 and restores their WoL attack.[WoL attack: same as the current one except +5 bonus damage to Light; secondary attack against buildings: 30 (+3). Both range 5.] Target: lategame TvP, lategame TvZ. Fairly straighforward. As of now, the Reaper has absolutely no use past early game. With this upgrade, it could be used in lategame, particularly in TvP to defend Zealots/DTs harassement and pressure remote expands without committing Medivacs. Reapers would probably remain marginal, but well, at least the possibility would be there in some lategame scenarii. The reaper is one of the units that bothers me the most - not beause its incredibly bad or makes the gameplay worse like the MSC, sentry or colossus. It's because nobody ever fuckign builds them past the first scout(s). That's not enough reason to exist for a unit in SC2 IMO. My idea would be to give the reaper an upgrade that allows it to place one widow mine. I think the widowmine is a crappy "unit" and this way they become less weird due to their limited production and the inability to relocate them, that plus making the reaper useful again. it should probably also get a very slight damage increase (maybe together with the nitro packs). But I know terran players probably love their mine so whatever :p Actually, this would be kind of a cool idea for the reaper. Give each one like 1-2 mines they can plant and remove the widow mine from the factory. That makes it more like a Vulture from BW and gives it a use all game long: Scouting and map control via mines.
I have a simple suggestion. How about giving the anti-building grenade back to reaper as an upgrade? Also, make it HEAVELY benefit from weapon upgrade, so a few 2A or 3A reapers can quickly blow up a base and run away before the enemy force draws back - a task that 0A or 1A reapers are unable to accomplish in early game.
|
On December 23 2014 10:17 StatixEx wrote:
wait. with chrono and mules . .doesnt this make zerg really weak early game? With faster minerals comes faster responsibility . . . i mean aggressive possibility, where the zerg needs to drone as their starter units arent as strong . . or is it just 6 queen openers every game?
How do you surmise that at all? Assuming Zerg still starts with 3 larvae, it will have the fastest early game production based on that.
Protoss gets shafted the most as they hit 12 workers before the other races via chrono. Terran benefits the most, as it gets there the slowest. Also, they don't lose mining time either when building a depot.
|
I wonder how this 12-worker economic system will work. Seems like it'll be only one worker for each mineral field and two for each vespene gaser. If that's the case, losing workers will hurt the economy more than ever before, thus harassments and blitzes will target at workers instead of smashing the base. I think that's the main purpose of this change.
|
Therefore, we’re currently not in a good place on the HERC, and we’re working towards a better solution.
How about tank (rolling) speed upgrade or increase?
|
On December 22 2014 23:39 Alexalder wrote:
I want to suggest a possibile solution to warp-in nerf: have it so that Nexuses "power up" warp-ins in their proximity so that they are like the old ones. This solution makes sense in game mechanics and also in lore and in-game coherence.
What do you think?
I have another idea: pylon upgrade, unlocked by Cyber Core. Only can gateway units be warped in the power field generated by an UPGRADED pylon - or a prism, of course. This upgraded pylon could be a shield battery that automatically heals nearby toss units' shield (already existed in the SC1 Campaigns' SC2 Remake) or a cannon that attacks enemies (that could replace Photon Charge). Meanwhile, both gateway and warp-in tech in the Cyber Core be removed, which means you can directly build warp gates but you can't warp in anything without an upgraded pylon.
|
On December 23 2014 17:58 TedCruz2016 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2014 23:39 Alexalder wrote:
I want to suggest a possibile solution to warp-in nerf: have it so that Nexuses "power up" warp-ins in their proximity so that they are like the old ones. This solution makes sense in game mechanics and also in lore and in-game coherence.
What do you think? I have another idea: pylon upgrade, unlocked by Cyber Core. Only can gateway units be warped in the power field generated by an UPGRADED pylon - or a prism, of course. This upgraded pylon could be a shield battery that automatically heals nearby toss units' shield (already existed in the SC1 Campaigns' SC2 Remake) or a cannon that attacks enemies (that could replace Photon Charge). Meanwhile, both gateway and warp-in tech in the Cyber Core be removed, which means you can directly build warp gates but you can't warp in anything without an upgraded pylon.
![[image loading]](http://www.teamliquid.net/images/usericons/happybirthday.gif)
|
On December 23 2014 02:47 DarkLordOlli wrote:
What if they just introduced a strong core gateway unit that could only be built from actual gateways, not warpgates? You can leave warpgate in just fine, as long as that strong unit can't be built from them. That would give protoss tons of strategic options. How many WGs, how many regular gates?
Once that's established, phasing out sentries and perhaps even overcharge as the prime defensive tools becomes a hell of a lot easier.
I know I've brought this up before but I feel like it would solve pretty much everything - and happens to be the exact thing protoss seems to lack in Blizzard's current LotV package.
- Add dragoon
- move WG to mid-game (WG research needs TC or WG is moved to TC)
- keep Blizzard change of 8 sec warping
- replace FF with time warp (FF-radius)
- slightly modify Stalker stats from all-around unit to more harass oriented (slightly faster, lower HP/SH, flat & lower dmg)
then it could be possible to remove MsC/Mothership from the game.
- Scrap recall from MsC and add it to Nexus (maybe some upg) reduces radius drastically (FF like).
- Add new defensive building/ability to nexus like: Energize/Shield recharge etc
|
- Scrap recall from MsC and add it to Nexus (maybe some upg) reduces radius drastically (FF like).
- Add new defensive building/ability to nexus like: Energize/Shield recharge etc
I agree with you about removing MSC together with MS and giving their abilities to nexus, but I disagree with the decrease of mass recall's radius. I think this ability, if given to nexus, should be able to teleport an entire deathball back. With 3, 4 or more bases, P should be rewarded to SPAM it like CC's scan. It would be difficult for the enemy to kill a dt, an oracle, a prism drop or even a disruptor right after a supernova, because P could always immediately pull them back as long as there's a nexus with enough energy to cast a mass recall. The point is, since WoL, P has been bad at harassment because its units are too expensive to die. This would fundamentally solve that problem.
The said defensive ability could be mothership's cloaking field as an ability that cloaks all nearby toss units (buildings not included) for a short period. It would be very effective against early push or harassment due to both sides' lack of detecting abilities in the early game, and compared to photon charge, it would require a small army to defend the base.
|
On December 23 2014 10:09 robopork wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote:On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote:
Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy. I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. Zerg got my mind control.
Yes and no. The Infestor, a feeble and inferior creature, was unable to match the spiritual power of the Dark Archon to control other targets permanently.
|
On December 24 2014 00:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 10:09 robopork wrote:On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote:On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote:
Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy. I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. Zerg got my mind control. Yes and no. The Infestor, a feeble and inferior creature, was unable to match the spiritual power of the Dark Archon to control other targets permanently.
Naturally.
+ Show Spoiler +I still miss it though 
|
Thinking about Protoss things...
-Zealot legs. Base Speed 2.25 -> 2.4. Zealot Charge removed and replaced with 2.75 -> 3.5 Speed with 25% snare resist.
-Removal of MsC.
-Sentry acquires Time Warp instead of FF. Hallucination 50 energy. Revert WoL Beta nerf of 6 -> 8 damage attack. 2.25 -> 2.5 base speed.
-Stalker +2 instead of +1 per weapon attack upg. Lower damage point.
-Push Warpgate upgrade to Twilight unlock.
-Casting Chronoboost on regular Gateways is free.
-Two Sentry fuse into a unit, the Sentinel. High armor, dual energy cannon bionic. Low attack rate single target that can attack air, +light. Active AoE knockback ion bomb ~6-7 range cast 2-3 radius AoE effect. High shield/hp ratio. 2.25 move speed.
-Dark Shrine removed. Templar archives now unlocks DTs. DT Blink now researchable for 150/150. HT move speed buffed from 1.875 -> 2.25.
-Reaver-esque unit instead of Disruptor at Robo.
|
On December 24 2014 00:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 10:09 robopork wrote:On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote:On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote:
Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy. I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. Zerg got my mind control. Yes and no. The Infestor, a feeble and inferior creature, was unable to match the spiritual power of the Dark Archon to control other targets permanently.
What doesn't make sense is that DT and HT teches are combined in SC1 (archive unlocks both) yet separated in SC2, while you could make an archon with either two HTs, two DTs or a HT and a DT!
|
On December 24 2014 00:59 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 23 2014 10:09 robopork wrote:On December 23 2014 02:43 TheDwf wrote:On December 23 2014 01:53 Grumbels wrote:
Would it be fun if sentries were given defensive matrix instead of guardian shield? I've been thinking recently that all "field" abilities like time warp and guardian shield need to be removed from the game for visibility reasons and defensive matrix seems to fit with protoss. Also, guardian shield is one of those "synergy" abilities on a gas-heavy unit that (maybe) promotes death balling. Out of principle I am opposed to SC2 Protoss pillaging the BW Vessel legacy. I don't think Defensive Matrix would be a good spell for the Sentry, as it once again reinforces the logic of individually powerful units like Immortals or Colossi (perhaps Voids too in PvZ) when that system should be erased to begin with. You're right that Guardian Shield contributes to the ball aspect though; even literally. Regardless of what happens to the Sentry, I think the priority is to rework Protoss in such a way the race can operate without the MSC and without Sentries, even in early game. Sentries are for instance marginalized in midgame TvP/PvP and it's a good thing. The same thing should happen in ZvP. Zerg got my mind control. Yes and no. The Infestor, a feeble and inferior creature, was unable to match the spiritual power of the Dark Archon to control other targets permanently.
Infestors seem based on brain bugs from starship troopers, which are highly intelligent.
|
If warpgate tech is really the main balance issue for P then I would suggest that they use energy for warp ins but also lower the time required for switching between warpgate and gateway significantly.
That way warpgate pressure would still be a strong tactic while it would run out of steam quicker. This would also increase the mechanical ceiling for playing P which is a good thing considering that it has the lowest so far.
I don't like the idea of restricting warpgates with ressources or by limiting it's unit options. The only other suggestion that I like is moving warpgate tech to the twilight council and or prolonging the upgrade time in conjunction with the higher warp in time (+4s). Because past 2-3 base play it is really not that much of an issue anymore but gives P the option to be more mobile. The talk about defenders advantage is bollocks. Literally only the first warpin round circumvents the defenders advantage and the following ones are on the timing of a normally rallied army. The mobility you get from warpgate during lategame is not more or less than what T gets through medivacs and Z through sheer unit speed, creep and nydus.
|
On December 24 2014 06:28 clickrush wrote:
If warpgate tech is really the main balance issue for P then I would suggest that they use energy for warp ins but also lower the time required for switching between warpgate and gateway significantly.
That way warpgate pressure would still be a strong tactic while it would run out of steam quicker. This would also increase the mechanical ceiling for playing P which is a good thing considering that it has the lowest so far.
I don't like the idea of restricting warpgates with ressources or by limiting it's unit options. The only other suggestion that I like is moving warpgate tech to the twilight council and or prolonging the upgrade time in conjunction with the higher warp in time (+4s). Because past 2-3 base play it is really not that much of an issue anymore but gives P the option to be more mobile. The talk about defenders advantage is bollocks. Literally only the first warpin round circumvents the defenders advantage and the following ones are on the timing of a normally rallied army. The mobility you get from warpgate during lategame is not more or less than what T gets through medivacs and Z through sheer unit speed, creep and nydus.
Finally some statement with brain. The question about warpgate is that is a top must upgrade for protoss, because without it production times are awful for the protoss (which is a huge disadvantage). Reducing gateway times and increasing warpgate times a bit (4-5 seconds) solves the problems. Also you could rebalance it with slightly longer building times for pylons (potentially solving the 2gate rush issue).
No need for bonus damage or slow warpin mechanic. It's unfair, specially considering the low mobility of the protoss options against other race's options. Protoss balance has remained quite well with it.
The real problem (and I tell this as a protoss player myself) is the Mothership Core and nexus cannon mechanic. Photon overcharge should be moved to a nexus ability, an Energyze should return to the core. So the activation combo is Energize (MSC) + Nexus Cannon (nexus). Or maybe some building protective mechanic (So you can use Protect Building + Nexus cannon).
As energy is not abusable on the MSC, Photon overcharge mechanic could be somewhat expensive (so chronoboost is not used when using nexus cannon): this way nexus ability provides only one advantage at a time (base defense or production buff). This would also sinergize with longer cooldowns on warpgates.
This way to rebalance things could be interesting.
|
Would anyone miss the Collosus if it was removed?
I would love to see the reavers in the game just for nostalgia's sake, seing how Lurkers are making a comeback.
They were such a potent unit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
