If you really have to go in and change in armour types, I would like them to just remove it similar to the Ghost, in conjunction with a small hp/shields nerf. Just to differentiate Adepts from Stalkers and Zealots and create more opportunities for experienced players to really capitalize on making the right unit composition calls.

NEEDZMOAR

Sweden1277 Posts

January 07 2016 15:37 GMT

#22

Perhaps the adept shouldnt be tweaked but the warp prism?

It seems like after all these years, the warp gate mechanic is still broken and needs to be dealt with.

(aggressive) Warpgate-mechanic or strong gateway units, theres only room for one of them in this game (imho). Blizzard is prob aware of this issue and will eventually nerf the adept but doing so will once again force protoss to rely on high tech deathballs and leave them unable to spread out their army and defend multiple locations etc. Only if aggro WG mechanic is removed can floating boob / pylon deathray be addressed.

TimeSpiral

United States1010 Posts

January 07 2016 15:40 GMT

#23

This issue has been clear to the LotV Beta community for some time, and it's two-pronged: (1) Adept is too strong versus Terran, and (2) the Warp Prism is too good altogether. I believe some of us predicted, GSL is going to show us how broken these units really are.

I suppose the third prong of the problem is that Protoss might be slightly weak versus Zerg.

Dino's minuscule -1 DMG nerf is interesting, but probably not enough. The unit is fast, starts with an awesome ability that doesn't require an upgrade, and completely throws off the ground-army fights in TvP. This issue is seriously compounded by Resonating Glaives and Disruptors.

Adding gas to the cost of the Warp Prism is probably necessary, but I think we also need to change the "passive Blink" area granted by the Warp Prism in both modes. Nerf the range, and/or restrict it to one mode.

Thouhastmail

Korea (North)876 Posts

January 07 2016 15:44 GMT

#24

my suggestion is simple: drop turret`s cost to 75.

Tenks

United States3104 Posts

January 07 2016 15:56 GMT

#25

On January 08 2016 00:44 Thouhastmail wrote:
my suggestion is simple: drop turret`s cost to 75.

Didn't they toy around with that in the beta? Or maybe I'm thinking of engi bay-less turrets. Either way I'd love for a turret buff in some fashion because TvT is somewhat a doom drop mess and tech is so powerful in the TvT early game I feel turrets would go a long way to make it so there could be more openers.

Elentos

55550 Posts

January 07 2016 16:04 GMT

#26

On January 08 2016 00:56 Tenks wrote:

Show nested quote +

It were indeed turrets without engi bays they tested.

Deleted User 3420

24492 Posts

January 07 2016 16:13 GMT

#27

So people are calling for nerfs of the race performing the worst in all matchups? Specifically, absymally bad in pvz.

Tenks

United States3104 Posts

January 07 2016 16:14 GMT

#28

I think people are calling for design in TvP

ejozl

Denmark3390 Posts

January 07 2016 16:21 GMT

#29

Adept -> Armoured Just doesn't work, PvP will be exclusive Stalker/Immortal with no competition. They will perform worse against Spines+Lurkers+Ultralisks and finally we're back to square one in PvT where a gateway army has to flea to the best of their ability for any kind of confrontability vs the Terran army.

Furthermore there's no chance for the awesomeness that is Banelings vs Adepts and Ghosts as a counter to Adepts. Not something we see a lot, but would be incredible to see.

Deleted User 3420

24492 Posts

January 07 2016 16:22 GMT

#30

Ah. But I can't really take "feelings" or "theory" on how games play out as evidence of a problem, I don't think the game should be balanced around that at all once it's been released. Actual statistics are the only way to go, and currently T is ahead in the TvP matchup.

Unless the complaints are that it is a guessing game, which can be a legitimate complaint. But the original post wasn't framed that way, it's complaining of imbalance.

Hider

Denmark9389 Posts

January 07 2016 16:28 GMT

#31

So PvZ with Broodlord Infestor in late WOL was fine because the toss win/rate was increased due to the Immortal allin?

Madars

Latvia166 Posts

January 07 2016 16:33 GMT

#32

On January 07 2016 19:09 deth wrote:

Show nested quote +

Seems like a bit of a contradiction :S

How about you translate korean to english and let me talk about contradictions in your translation.

stuchiu

Fiddler's Green42661 Posts

January 07 2016 16:34 GMT

#33

JYP basically said adepts are creating a similar situation to the blink era in HotS.

It beats the normal bio comp, but if "countered" allows Protoss to aggressively expand with no recourse for Terran.

Deleted User 3420

24492 Posts

January 07 2016 16:46 GMT

#34

Hider, no - but no one would try to frame that entire problem as a one sided issue like this article does. Or, if they did, they would be wrong. You can't argue that a race is up against the wall when their overall winrate at pro level is > 50%. It just doesn't make sense.

So, if one has an issue with the design of the game when that is happening then one should frame it as such. Not as a balance issue.

If adepts and warp prisms are so overpoweringly strong then why is terran still > 50%? Why doesn't the article talking about that. Are terrans just doing miracle blind counters over 50% of the time? No way.

So yeah, maybe there are design issues. But if terran is > 50% what is going to happen when you weaken or take away protoss options? The article doesn't seem to consider this. It doesn't address the fact that statistically terran is doing fine.

weikor

Austria580 Posts

January 07 2016 16:53 GMT

#35

Protoss needs some adjustment to be viable.

In the mid and lategame, protoss lost a lot of relative power vs terran and especially zerg.

Just compare Hots to Wol in tvp.
Collosus is bad now, mules give terran a macro advantage, the adept is about 25 gas better than a zealot in 200 vs 200. Most importantly, the liberator has made direct engagements much easier.

Is adept overpowered?, Sure, but protoss as a race is underpowered. If its 50% win vs terran ATM, thats mostly the adept putting in a lot of work.

ejozl

Denmark3390 Posts

January 07 2016 17:05 GMT

#36

Yeah I always thought that there was too much Marine killing power, with Adepts+Pylon Rush+Oracle, couple that with a strong Prism, I can for sure understand the frustration. As it stands now though, if Protoss didn't have these tools and they also want to nerf Pylon Overcharge in defense and Adepts suck vs Bio in mid game, then something like removing the upgrade for Liberators might be needed and that would be a huge change.

DinoMight

United States3725 Posts

January 07 2016 17:06 GMT

#37

I've said this before but when you look at it it's quite clear why there are issues:

PvT: Adept + Warp Prism + third base = the whole game is played with a huge econ advantage to the Protoss. Despite that the win rate is 50% meaning if the Terran does well in the early game defending the game actually favors T.

PvZ: There is no such early game vulnerability... and the statistics show what happens next... economy changes favor the Zerg, the Lurker is overpowered, and tech switches hit harder than ever.

If they want to fix the game, they need to reduce how quickly adepts obliterate combat shield-less marines (my -1 damage nerf accomplishes this quite well, and maybe a Photon Overcharge tweak), then they need to re-buff the Colossus a little bit to compensate or increase the adept upgrade's effectiveness.

After that they can take a serious look at the Lurker and the Ultralisk because those units are extremely punishing in PvZ.

Sissors

1395 Posts

January 07 2016 17:07 GMT

#38

Quite frankly I really don't understand the colossus nerf. And I think reverting that will boost protoss winrate, and could be used to nerf some of their stupid things again. I think the main issue is only that contrary to zerg and terran, protoss lacks a good anti-colossus unit. But in for example TvP the colossus gives imo a more interesting relationship than the disruptor, with positioning being very important.

DinoMight

United States3725 Posts

January 07 2016 17:10 GMT

#39

On January 08 2016 02:07 Sissors wrote:
Quite frankly I really don't understand the colossus nerf. And I think reverting that will boost protoss winrate, and could be used to nerf some of their stupid things again. I think the main issue is only that contrary to zerg and terran, protoss lacks a good anti-colossus unit. But in for example TvP the colossus gives imo a more interesting relationship than the disruptor, with positioning being very important.

As much as people bitched about the Colossus "ignoring positioning" I really do miss the Colossus/Viking/Blink Stalker/MMM dance from HotS.

There was a lot more back and forth unit control than just "split against disruptor shot." It took a lot more micro than people thought, and interesting micro at that. Not just microbot level splitting.

Deleted User 137586

7859 Posts

January 07 2016 17:12 GMT

#40

Compulsory post regarding both GSL and Aligulac data being premature, because the game is fresh and the sample sizes (especially of premier tournaments) are too small.