On September 26 2015 17:12 Iznogood wrote: Second, IMHO QXC fails to acknowledge , that Adepts are what allows Protoss to tage reasonable fast expos. No other unit from GW allows that. He says so himself. Stalkers DPS is atrocious. Zealots awfully slow and Sentries .... well.....
He doesn't need to acknowledge this. Terrible design is still terrible design, just because Protoss can't easily expand doesn't mean it should get a OP unit in the early game to compensate for it, or the ridiculous pylon overcharge. What Protoss needed was a redesign of the other core GW units, Zealots and Stalkers, so they'd be better at fighting and holding a expansion early, or so they'd be good in tandem with Adepts at holding a expansion early..
I really dont understand why blizzard keeps making up stupid units that just totaly skrew up the beautiful balance and playstyle made out from years of SCBW evolution.
Also the Adept model is ugly as hell, and totaly stolen from DOTA or WC3 Hero unit (which I proudly don't remember the name of, but im sure you all know what I am talking about)
I really dont understand why blizzard keeps making up stupid units that just totaly skrew up the beautiful balance and playstyle made out from years of SCBW evolution.
Also the Adept model is ugly as hell, and totaly stolen from DOTA or WC3 Hero unit (which I proudly don't remember the name of, but im sure you all know what I am talking about)
A 1to1 port of dragoon would be nothing but a nerfed stalker...
On September 26 2015 17:12 Iznogood wrote: Second, IMHO QXC fails to acknowledge , that Adepts are what allows Protoss to tage reasonable fast expos. No other unit from GW allows that. He says so himself. Stalkers DPS is atrocious. Zealots awfully slow and Sentries .... well.....
He doesn't need to acknowledge this. Terrible design is still terrible design, just because Protoss can't easily expand doesn't mean it should get a OP unit in the early game to compensate for it, or the ridiculous pylon overcharge. What Protoss needed was a redesign of the other core GW units, Zealots and Stalkers, so they'd be better at fighting and holding a expansion early, or so they'd be good in tandem with Adepts at holding a expansion early..
Well, since the design phase is now over, it doesn´t matter what disign flaws may or may not excist. The fact is, that Protoss doesn´t have anything else from GW that allows for the fast expos needed in LotV with the new econ system.
And since , as stated earlier, that tech for Toss takes the same time it always did, Adepts needs to be strong. Maybe they can be balanced more some way or another, we´ll have to see what Blizz comes up with. IMHO, Blizz has painted themselves into a corner as usual, regarding Adepts. It´s like the WM and the Hellbat. Nerf them a tad and they are too weak and useless, let them be or buff them, and they are OP as hell in some situations.
On September 26 2015 17:12 Iznogood wrote: Second, IMHO QXC fails to acknowledge , that Adepts are what allows Protoss to tage reasonable fast expos. No other unit from GW allows that. He says so himself. Stalkers DPS is atrocious. Zealots awfully slow and Sentries .... well.....
He doesn't need to acknowledge this. Terrible design is still terrible design, just because Protoss can't easily expand doesn't mean it should get a OP unit in the early game to compensate for it, or the ridiculous pylon overcharge. What Protoss needed was a redesign of the other core GW units, Zealots and Stalkers, so they'd be better at fighting and holding a expansion early, or so they'd be good in tandem with Adepts at holding a expansion early..
Well, since the design phase is now over, it doesn´t matter what disign flaws may or may not excist. The fact is, that Protoss doesn´t have anything else from GW that allows for the fast expos needed in LotV with the new econ system.
And since , as stated earlier, that tech for Toss takes the same time it always did, Adepts needs to be strong. Maybe they can be balanced more some way or another, we´ll have to see what Blizz comes up with. IMHO, Blizz has painted themselves into a corner as usual, regarding Adepts. It´s like the WM and the Hellbat. Nerf them a tad and they are too weak and useless, let them be or buff them, and they are OP as hell in some situations.
Are PvZ expansion builds really hard to hold without adepts or something? Because holy shit, do I not remember the last time I saw a Protoss struggle to fast expand in PvT. Terran, on the other hand, is kind of shit right now TvP. Adepts do not need to be that strong if Protoss just wants to be able to defend an expo.
Surely you'll acknowledge that in the present build, Protoss is absurdly powerful early game, and gets pretty weak after that. Is that really what you want?
On September 25 2015 19:48 parkufarku wrote: You're a respected player and a good writer, but you are also a Terran player and tend to write things from the T perspective. Even if this article is well-written, I have a hard time not believing QXC's views are distorted and biased from the race he plays. High level players can't be biased? Look at Avilo.
Look, Liberators are WAY more of a balance problem than anything, and the article complains about Adept. That alone make me disregard this post as a 'polished balance whine' on SC2 general page.
Why? Of course QXC is biased (and he does not deny it) but that doesn't mean you shouldn't read the article. Can't you think for yourself? I do agree about the Liberator though, Blizzard should NOT add another air unit OBVIOUSLY (I was facepalming so hard when the unit was introduced).
Anyway QXC: Why do you opt for a second shade ability instead of just having an upgrade to increase the duration of the first one?
On September 26 2015 17:12 Iznogood wrote: Second, IMHO QXC fails to acknowledge , that Adepts are what allows Protoss to tage reasonable fast expos. No other unit from GW allows that. He says so himself. Stalkers DPS is atrocious. Zealots awfully slow and Sentries .... well.....
He doesn't need to acknowledge this. Terrible design is still terrible design, just because Protoss can't easily expand doesn't mean it should get a OP unit in the early game to compensate for it, or the ridiculous pylon overcharge. What Protoss needed was a redesign of the other core GW units, Zealots and Stalkers, so they'd be better at fighting and holding a expansion early, or so they'd be good in tandem with Adepts at holding a expansion early..
Well, since the design phase is now over, it doesn´t matter what disign flaws may or may not excist. The fact is, that Protoss doesn´t have anything else from GW that allows for the fast expos needed in LotV with the new econ system.
And since , as stated earlier, that tech for Toss takes the same time it always did, Adepts needs to be strong. Maybe they can be balanced more some way or another, we´ll have to see what Blizz comes up with. IMHO, Blizz has painted themselves into a corner as usual, regarding Adepts. It´s like the WM and the Hellbat. Nerf them a tad and they are too weak and useless, let them be or buff them, and they are OP as hell in some situations.
Are PvZ expansion builds really hard to hold without adepts or something? Because holy shit, do I not remember the last time I saw a Protoss struggle to fast expand in PvT. Terran, on the other hand, is kind of shit right now TvP. Adepts do not need to be that strong if Protoss just wants to be able to defend an expo.
Surely you'll acknowledge that in the present build, Protoss is absurdly powerful early game, and gets pretty weak after that. Is that really what you want?
Nobody said, that balancing wasn´t needed. I just said it is a difficult one TO balance. Just like the WM and the Hellbat. Add Tempests for measure. Adepts are kinda specialized units, like the above.
What about moving the Adept to other branch of the tech tree? what if the adept was redesigned to be a midgame harassing unit? Or at least put the transfer ability as a research on the twilight council
In this case, Stalker would be the bad substitute, poor modeldesigned, nerfed unit. Which actually has alot shorter range and less damange than the original and already fully functional Dragoon from SCBW, (which they really had no point in totaly removing in the first place)
I would suggest keep the stalker if you really have too, now make the stalker with blink the midd-game harrasment unit. and reinstate the Dragoon to its rightful place and glory with its longer range and perhaps some other stat adjustment to its advantage.
Also why not give back the Reavers, and their harrasment factor to Protoss. (but thats another forum)
On September 26 2015 17:12 Iznogood wrote: Second, IMHO QXC fails to acknowledge , that Adepts are what allows Protoss to tage reasonable fast expos. No other unit from GW allows that. He says so himself. Stalkers DPS is atrocious. Zealots awfully slow and Sentries .... well.....
He doesn't need to acknowledge this. Terrible design is still terrible design, just because Protoss can't easily expand doesn't mean it should get a OP unit in the early game to compensate for it, or the ridiculous pylon overcharge. What Protoss needed was a redesign of the other core GW units, Zealots and Stalkers, so they'd be better at fighting and holding a expansion early, or so they'd be good in tandem with Adepts at holding a expansion early..
Well, since the design phase is now over, it doesn´t matter what disign flaws may or may not excist. The fact is, that Protoss doesn´t have anything else from GW that allows for the fast expos needed in LotV with the new econ system.
And since , as stated earlier, that tech for Toss takes the same time it always did, Adepts needs to be strong. Maybe they can be balanced more some way or another, we´ll have to see what Blizz comes up with. IMHO, Blizz has painted themselves into a corner as usual, regarding Adepts. It´s like the WM and the Hellbat. Nerf them a tad and they are too weak and useless, let them be or buff them, and they are OP as hell in some situations.
Are PvZ expansion builds really hard to hold without adepts or something? Because holy shit, do I not remember the last time I saw a Protoss struggle to fast expand in PvT. Terran, on the other hand, is kind of shit right now TvP. Adepts do not need to be that strong if Protoss just wants to be able to defend an expo.
Surely you'll acknowledge that in the present build, Protoss is absurdly powerful early game, and gets pretty weak after that. Is that really what you want?
Nobody said, that balancing wasn´t needed. I just said it is a difficult one TO balance. Just like the WM and the Hellbat. Add Tempests for measure. Adepts are kinda specialized units, like the above.
I mean yeah, they are kinda specialized – and interestingly enough, not particularly defensively focused, contrary to your points. I haven't seen Protoss struggle to expand in my games, but when they do expand early it doesn't usually seem to be on the back of adepts. Maybe in PvZ that's more necessary? Is it not fast enough to expand with forge and cannons now? Or do ling drops kill you or something?
Because it sure sounded like your argument here was that qxc and others calling for adept nerfs are misunderstanding or willfully ignoring that the adept has to be so strong in order to allow Protoss to expand relatively quickly – otherwise, the new economy is just too punishing because they can't take a safe expo. I'd be a little surprised if that's true, and given how hard they make it for Terran to take an expo anyway I don't think the argument can hold much weight.
On September 27 2015 00:10 ToqZICTTD wrote: In this case, Stalker would be the bad substitute, poor modeldesigned, nerfed unit. Which actually has alot shorter range and less damange than the original and already fully functional Dragoon from SCBW, (which they really had no point in totaly removing in the first place)
I would suggest keep the stalker if you really have too, now make the stalker with blink the midd-game harrasment unit. and reinstate the Dragoon to its rightful place and glory with its longer range and perhaps some other stat adjustment to its advantage.
Also why not give back the Reavers, and their harrasment factor to Protoss. (but thats another forum)
Dude, the dragoon literally needs and upgrade to have the same range that the stalkerpacks by default. It has literally the same damage vs light/small and I think even a higher firerate (did the math a few years back). The speed is also comparable. the only upsides are 20extra health and a bit extra dps vs large/massive targets, for the cost of blink whichis a ridiculously powerful ability inand out of combat.
Is the adept really op? I think we can't say this for sure. There was a time when everyone said "omg nerf blink", "omg nerf oracle", then people just figured out a way to counter them.
Lotv meta changes very quickly and until all the sc2 pros leave hots for lotv and figure out new strategies, I think no units can be said to be op. People can write posts like these on 3-4 units for every race
I wont comment on balance, but every tvp was mass adapts + dropplay. Every single tvp the same shit over and over and over and over again. Im looking forward to the first tournaments to see how the results will be.
On September 27 2015 01:29 Icekin wrote: Is the adept really op? I think we can't say this for sure. There was a time when everyone said "omg nerf blink", "omg nerf oracle", then people just figured out a way to counter them.
Lotv meta changes very quickly and until all the sc2 pros leave hots for lotv and figure out new strategies, I think no units can be said to be op. People can write posts like these on 3-4 units for every race
Uh, the blink/oracle era was largely solved by map changes – in other words, an indirect nerf to blink and oracle. I'm not saying there's no examples of something being called OP and then people figuring it out, but I don't think that blink (which did get a big nerf in HotS) and the oracle are good examples.
If you say "we can't say anything about balance until all the pros have switched over" then we just can't make balance changes until release. Is that really what you want?
On September 27 2015 01:29 Icekin wrote: Is the adept really op? I think we can't say this for sure. There was a time when everyone said "omg nerf blink", "omg nerf oracle", then people just figured out a way to counter them.
Lotv meta changes very quickly and until all the sc2 pros leave hots for lotv and figure out new strategies, I think no units can be said to be op. People can write posts like these on 3-4 units for every race
Uh, the blink/oracle era was largely solved by map changes – in other words, an indirect nerf to blink and oracle. I'm not saying there's no examples of something being called OP and then people figuring it out, but I don't think that blink (which did get a big nerf in HotS) and the oracle are good examples.
If you say "we can't say anything about balance until all the pros have switched over" then we just can't make balance changes until release. Is that really what you want?
Blink era was ended by the widow mine revert. It was introduced by the widow mine nerf. Yeonsu, Polar Night, and Frost were in S3 2013 and while blink was strong on those maps, it was not completely broken until the nerf.
On September 27 2015 01:29 Icekin wrote: Is the adept really op? I think we can't say this for sure. There was a time when everyone said "omg nerf blink", "omg nerf oracle", then people just figured out a way to counter them.
Lotv meta changes very quickly and until all the sc2 pros leave hots for lotv and figure out new strategies, I think no units can be said to be op. People can write posts like these on 3-4 units for every race
Uh, the blink/oracle era was largely solved by map changes – in other words, an indirect nerf to blink and oracle. I'm not saying there's no examples of something being called OP and then people figuring it out, but I don't think that blink (which did get a big nerf in HotS) and the oracle are good examples.
If you say "we can't say anything about balance until all the pros have switched over" then we just can't make balance changes until release. Is that really what you want?
Blink era was ended by the widow mine revert. It was introduced by the widow mine nerf. Yeonsu, Polar Night, and Frost were in S3 2013 and while blink was strong on those maps, it was not completely broken until the nerf.
exactly, even IEM and other tournaments were a toss fest.
On September 27 2015 01:29 Icekin wrote: Is the adept really op? I think we can't say this for sure. There was a time when everyone said "omg nerf blink", "omg nerf oracle", then people just figured out a way to counter them.
Lotv meta changes very quickly and until all the sc2 pros leave hots for lotv and figure out new strategies, I think no units can be said to be op. People can write posts like these on 3-4 units for every race
Uh, the blink/oracle era was largely solved by map changes – in other words, an indirect nerf to blink and oracle. I'm not saying there's no examples of something being called OP and then people figuring it out, but I don't think that blink (which did get a big nerf in HotS) and the oracle are good examples.
If you say "we can't say anything about balance until all the pros have switched over" then we just can't make balance changes until release. Is that really what you want?
Blink era was ended by the widow mine revert. It was introduced by the widow mine nerf. Yeonsu, Polar Night, and Frost were in S3 2013 and while blink was strong on those maps, it was not completely broken until the nerf.
Well, fair enough. For my point, it's inconsequential, since I'm merely refuting that the blink/oracle issues were solved without the game needing any adjustment.
Zergs are defending really well adept harass this week. I'm starting to think that any change to this unit should not impact PvZ otherwise adepts will be weak.
EPT
