EPTJYP`s After GSL; what is the solution for Adepts? - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Deleted User 3420
24492 Posts
| ||
|
gh0st
United States98 Posts
On January 08 2016 04:00 b_unnies wrote: Past the early game warp prism adepts harass stage, TvP is stupidly broken. IF you get past that stage, which most of us terrans don't without being irretrievably crippled. | ||
|
Edowyth
United States183 Posts
In the early game, it's only used to kill workers (and marines, because Terran doesn't have many great early-game options and adepts can snowball with near-instant reinforcement). In the mid-game, it's used partially for its damage versus light, but mostly to tank for other units. In the late-game, it's only used versus very heavy light-army compositions or to tank for the (almost exclusively) armored Protoss forces. Rather than having 50%+ of its damage tied up in +light, the unit should be generalized by flattening the damage (something like 15 damage versus all armor types ... or possibly very slightly more) so that it doesn't rule the roost early game versus Terran while seeing continually decreasing usage throughout the game (except when it precludes light-armor based armies). As for the warp-prism itself ... a nerf to the warp-in speed could well preclude further balance problems. Blizzard already heavily nerfed proxy-pylons, why not move the 5-HotS-second warp-in behind an upgrade (WPs would then take the 16-HotS seconds to warp-in) or possibly remove it entirely so that players have a bigger window to respond to warp prisms. If compensation was felt necessary ... they could increase the cargo capacity of the warp-prism so that more units could actually be dropped into a base instead of warped in. Such a change would remove a lot of the gimmicky feeling of warp-prisms while still allowing Protoss drops to feel threatening (and allowing skillful players to save more units from late drop & warp-in combos). Doing a combination of changes seems most needed here because the race isn't dominating PvT, even with the early lead, nor is it doing spectacularly amazing in PvZ ... and improving the design of both these early units (which are causing the trouble in PvT) will certainly help to remove later possible problems. | ||
|
Weltall
Italy83 Posts
On January 09 2016 12:31 Edowyth wrote: Really, the adept is just kind of badly designed. In the early game, it's only used to kill workers (and marines, because Terran doesn't have many great early-game options and adepts can snowball with near-instant reinforcement). In the mid-game, it's used partially for its damage versus light, but mostly to tank for other units. In the late-game, it's only used versus very heavy light-army compositions or to tank for the (almost exclusively) armored Protoss forces. Rather than having 50%+ of its damage tied up in +light, the unit should be generalized by flattening the damage (something like 15 damage versus all armor types ... or possibly very slightly more) so that it doesn't rule the roost early game versus Terran while seeing continually decreasing usage throughout the game (except when it precludes light-armor based armies). As for the warp-prism itself ... a nerf to the warp-in speed could well preclude further balance problems. Blizzard already heavily nerfed proxy-pylons, why not move the 5-HotS-second warp-in behind an upgrade (WPs would then take the 16-HotS seconds to warp-in) or possibly remove it entirely so that players have a bigger window to respond to warp prisms. If compensation was felt necessary ... they could increase the cargo capacity of the warp-prism so that more units could actually be dropped into a base instead of warped in. Such a change would remove a lot of the gimmicky feeling of warp-prisms while still allowing Protoss drops to feel threatening (and allowing skillful players to save more units from late drop & warp-in combos). Doing a combination of changes seems most needed here because the race isn't dominating PvT, even with the early lead, nor is it doing spectacularly amazing in PvZ ... and improving the design of both these early units (which are causing the trouble in PvT) will certainly help to remove later possible problems. If u nerf WP to adress TvP, you kill the only harass tool protoss has in PvZ. While I agree Adepts all-in are a powerful strategy, I also noticed that this is because most of terrans are anchored to old hots meta. They can't be aggressive off 2 bases anymore, true, but this is only because they want to place a fast expansion. Look how bad some hots proes are doing in lotv, like innovation and look how "new" proes are doing well when adapting the strategy to new units like cyclone and libs. In hots, Protoss opened every game with robo because of widow mines: opening stargate was just a bet. Now it's the same for terrans: want to take fast exp? than it's ur bet. While some terrans manage to counter properly the all in just by doing fast stim off 3 rax, placing correclt libs and cyclones off 2 bases, others are just exploring new tactis. Terran could start off 1 base with cyclone or lib harass, hit before 4 min mark and do HUGE damage to protoss, expecially with 1-2 cyclones. It will cripple protoss economy or just delay tech path (and eventually the drop). Terrans take a delayed 2nd, but protoss will be behind anyway because cyclones and libs are not countered easly in early game. Anyway, I think giving adepts flat damage is still good, because they become really weak in late game. I should be something more than 15 anyway, like 20, to make them well rounded unit (it should be core) but not so strong to 2shot marines in early. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 07 2016 20:34 Musicus wrote: The Adept harassment in combination with the Warp Prism is what JYP and many others consider OP. I don't think nerfing the Adept straight up is good, nerfing the WP is way better. It should either cost gas or be nerfed. What the War Prism provides for it's cost right now is just not fair, if you look at the cost and usefulness of any other unit in the game (except maybe the MSC). I personally think it's completely retarded that all 3 races are capable of having strong drop ships so damn early... Drop ships should be something that takes time and investment to get. They come out far far too early. Damn the economic curve of this game is so shitty. I completely understand why they want to skip the boring parts of the beginning of the game and get to action. But action can start with t1 units slowly working towards t3. Not instant t2-t2.5 units being teched to already at the start of the game.., | ||
|
ejozl
Denmark3489 Posts
On January 10 2016 09:16 Spyridon wrote: I personally think it's completely retarded that all 3 races are capable of having strong drop ships so damn early... Drop ships should be something that takes time and investment to get. They come out far far too early. Damn the economic curve of this game is so shitty. I completely understand why they want to skip the boring parts of the beginning of the game and get to action. But action can start with t1 units slowly working towards t3. Not instant t2-t2.5 units being techies to already at the start of the game.., Word. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
Since WoL, all balance issues` been adjusted; 4 gate was nerfed by increasing time requirement for Warp Gate. 111 was adjusted by increasing Immortal`s range to 6 Adept has already been nerfed a lot more than both of these. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On January 08 2016 04:53 travis wrote: As far as design goes, another idea that could be played with would be to make adepts unable to attack while a shade is present. Decent idea. It would make sending out shades a tactical decision while still preserving the ability to attack two mineral lines at once (with shade cancel). I'm playing the hell out of custom balance test mod, that includes the armored tag on Adepts, as well as overcharge revamp. Initial tests are heartening. | ||
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
On January 10 2016 09:16 Spyridon wrote: I personally think it's completely retarded that all 3 races are capable of having strong drop ships so damn early... Drop ships should be something that takes time and investment to get. They come out far far too early. Damn the economic curve of this game is so shitty. I completely understand why they want to skip the boring parts of the beginning of the game and get to action. But action can start with t1 units slowly working towards t3. Not instant t2-t2.5 units being techies to already at the start of the game.., Well, this is effectively the purpose of the economic changes. | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 10 2016 12:04 EatingBomber wrote: Well, this is effectively the purpose of the economic changes. I don't believe that from the intent of what they mentioned at the time the changes are made. After 12 worker start they even went through months of messing with macro mechanics to slow down the game. And the pacing felt great with no macro mechanics at all... but they slowly trickled them back in and reverted to nearly full mechanics. All evidence points to them simply not having enough time to balance the macro mechanics properly with the release date getting pushed up (before the release date announcement, the LotV store page said released March 2016, then they suddenly announce release date near Blizzcon and revert all changes). And now we're stuck with 12 worker start PLUS macro mechanics, which is just ridiculous. | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
On January 10 2016 11:52 Cyro wrote: Adept has already been nerfed a lot more than both of these. There have been 0 balance changes on live. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20326 Posts
On January 10 2016 13:17 TheWinks wrote: There have been 0 balance changes on live. Because we had a 9 month beta | ||
|
TheWinks
United States572 Posts
There was nothing special about lotv beta compared to the others. New units getting more changes also just makes sense. The widow mine was changed in 9/10 of the first hots updates. One of the two adept nerfs was also reverted in beta, not that that's important. | ||
|
DinosaurPoop
687 Posts
On January 08 2016 04:53 travis wrote: As far as design goes, another idea that could be played with would be to make adepts unable to attack while a shade is present. WHAT how how did you think of that that is such a simple nerf but it is so elegant | ||
|
printf
United States13 Posts
On January 08 2016 04:53 travis wrote: As far as design goes, another idea that could be played with would be to make adepts unable to attack while a shade is present. A while ago I suggested this on the battle.net forums and discovered that those people are useless. Well, technically my suggestion was being unable to move (and/or possibly attack?) while the shade was out. Regardless, I still think this is the best idea. | ||
|
CursOr
United States6335 Posts
| ||
|
EatingBomber
1017 Posts
On January 10 2016 12:23 Spyridon wrote: I don't believe that from the intent of what they mentioned at the time the changes are made. After 12 worker start they even went through months of messing with macro mechanics to slow down the game. And the pacing felt great with no macro mechanics at all... but they slowly trickled them back in and reverted to nearly full mechanics. All evidence points to them simply not having enough time to balance the macro mechanics properly with the release date getting pushed up (before the release date announcement, the LotV store page said released March 2016, then they suddenly announce release date near Blizzcon and revert all changes). And now we're stuck with 12 worker start PLUS macro mechanics, which is just ridiculous. Their intent was to remove the 'boring' and 'no-action' early game by violently increasing the speed of development, which is what a major proportion of the community wanted. Having faster technology, including faster dropships, are simply an intended effect of this change . | ||
|
Spyridon
United States997 Posts
On January 11 2016 03:00 EatingBomber wrote: Their intent was to remove the 'boring' and 'no-action' early game by violently increasing the speed of development, which is what a major proportion of the community wanted. Having faster technology, including faster dropships, are simply an intended effect of this change . If it were intended, they would not have spent the last few months of beta trying to figure out how they could slow the game. Several community updates were dedicated to that exact subject. Plans did not get scrapped until it became too close to launch, and in their posts explaining the reasoning for reverting the macro mechanics to the current state, they never stated it was to increase the speed of technology. That is one of the things they were attempting to slow down the game for. They simply didn't have time to do it before launch. They listed many reasons as to why they were putting macro mechanics in. To speed up the economy was never one of their reasons. It's a side affect they neglected to mention and apparently an aspect of the game they don't want to bring any attention to. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5219 Posts
And here we are. You better like it. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/legacy-of-the-void/482697-razzia-of-the-blizzsters | ||
|
halomonian
Brazil255 Posts
On January 08 2016 04:53 travis wrote: As far as design goes, another idea that could be played with would be to make adepts unable to attack while a shade is present. +1 for this, + increase cooldown + warp prism range reduce. | ||
| ||
