|
The way it seems, mamacore is necessary for base defense, and with a long range that can cover key structures / mineral lines, because Protoss simply doesn't have units waiting at base to add to the army after each production cycle.
With Zerg and Terran, units that have just been produced are only a few steps away from the harass and can be redirected without taking too long to address the threat. Box them as they come out of the facility or grab them as they are running out of your natural and they can at least buy enough time to get your probes pulled, move army back, etc. Protoss warping directly to the front lines means that those units are a long sprint away from home when an oracle or liberator shows up, and there's no way to bring the forces back home. Warp-in is so quick that there's no possibility to cancel it and redirect it, either.
Consider if we only allowed warp-in mechanic to work near a Nexus/Warpgate at full speed, or under a warp prism (at a significantly reduced warp-in speed, maybe like regular pylons do today), instead of just warping in anywhere. Speed of warp-in set aside, this would mean a significant change in how Protoss deploys their forces. Units would start out near the Protoss bases at the start of each production cycle, with the added mobility of being warpable to any base. Additionally, with correct balancing of how slow warp-ins from warp prisms are and possibly modifications to its survivability, we could easily buff Protoss gateway units without fear that an immensely strong all-in would demolish the other two races simply because Protoss can front-load two production cycles and keep reinforcing quickly directly at the front line with low risk.
This increases Protoss survivability in general, at the cost of some hyper-aggressive capabilities. Additionally, it opens up the option to improve gateway units considerably, especially if warp-in at warp prism becomes a research tech on robo bay instead of simply coming for free outright - that locks it to mid to late game tech instead of being just another all-in.
From here, mothership core could go on to become an army support role instead of needing to be a doting mother of nexus and pylon, or even radically repurposed or removed (if desired) - it's no longer a linchpin of early Protoss gameplay.
Thoughts? Am I off-base with my thinking? I didn't want to give any numbers but just some examples of how I think the mothership core's role could be given elsewhere without creating yet another base defense unit.
|
|
|
nobody cares what a probe has to say
they care what a carrier has to say
good job getting korean GM tho
|
On October 12 2016 23:10 BisuDagger wrote:I think the addition of the campaign shield battery combined with photon cannons would be a better option for defenders advantage. No one ever discusses photon cannons 
The problem with Photon Cannons is that they require a Forge. Other races can utilize static defenses (Bunkers and Spine Crawlers) much easier to hold of timings because they don't require a Evolution Chamber or Engineering Bay.
Eliminating the Forge requirement is a Cannon Rushers dream.
However, a superb solution, as you said, is a Shield Battery that is available when the Cybercore finishes and begins with zero energy, but can be charged by a nearby Nexus. Remember the ability in the HOTS beta that allowed the Nexus to fully charge the energy on a unit? Bring that back with a cast range about as large as a normal base, so it can't be used for proxied pushes.
The shield battery is such a slick solution because it acts like the Bunker does. The Bunker is just a big repairable shield that both protects immobilizes 4 units. If you don't actually have units to go inside it and deal damage, it is useless and you still die. The Shield Battery is the same, useless if you don't have combat units nearby.
Voila, defenders advantage restored.
On October 12 2016 23:14 minnek wrote:
The way it seems, mamacore is necessary for base defense, and with a long range that can cover key structures / mineral lines, because Protoss simply doesn't have units waiting at base to add to the army after each production cycle. ...
Thoughts? Am I off-base with my thinking? I didn't want to give any numbers but just some examples of how I think the mothership core's role could be given elsewhere without creating yet another base defense unit.
You're thinking is off base because your justification for the what the MSC and Pylon Overcharge is incorrect.
Protoss does not need the MSC or Photon Overcharge due to production cycles. Protoss needs it to respond to certain early pushes and harassment units. Protoss players did just fine in WOL without it, and removing it would allow for some of the other destructive choices that necessitated its creation to be fixed too, specifically certain harass styles that Blizzard said they might consider changing...
|
On October 13 2016 00:46 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2016 23:10 BisuDagger wrote:I think the addition of the campaign shield battery combined with photon cannons would be a better option for defenders advantage. No one ever discusses photon cannons The problem with Photon Cannons is that they require a Forge. Other races can utilize static defenses (Bunkers and Spine Crawlers) much easier to hold of timings because they don't require a Evolution Chamber or Engineering Bay. Eliminating the Forge requirement is a Cannon Rushers dream. However, a superb solution, as you said, is a Shield Battery that is available when the Cybercore finishes and begins with zero energy, but can be charged by a nearby Nexus. Remember the ability in the HOTS beta that allowed the Nexus to fully charge the energy on a unit? Bring that back with a cast range about as large as a normal base, so it can't be used for proxied pushes. The shield battery is such a slick solution because it acts like the Bunker does. The Bunker is just a big repairable shield that both protects immobilizes 4 units. If you don't actually have units to go inside it and deal damage, it is useless and you still die. The Shield Battery is the same, useless if you don't have combat units nearby. Voila, defenders advantage restored. Show nested quote +On October 12 2016 23:14 minnek wrote:
The way it seems, mamacore is necessary for base defense, and with a long range that can cover key structures / mineral lines, because Protoss simply doesn't have units waiting at base to add to the army after each production cycle. ...
Thoughts? Am I off-base with my thinking? I didn't want to give any numbers but just some examples of how I think the mothership core's role could be given elsewhere without creating yet another base defense unit. You're thinking is off base because your justification for the what the MSC and Pylon Overcharge is incorrect. Protoss does not need the MSC or Photon Overcharge due to production cycles. Protoss needs it to respond to certain early pushes and harassment units. Protoss players did just fine in WOL without it, and removing would allow for some of the other destructive choices that necessitated its creation to be fixed too, specifically certain harass styles that Blizzard said they might consider changing...
I never understood why blizzard didn't look at the shield battery. The problem was that protoss was vulnerable on defense.
Why in the world was a building that already exists, whose sole purpose is to increase defenders advantage while not affecting offense not considered.
Blows my mind, man
|
On October 12 2016 21:32 Gwavajuice wrote:NIce post, but isn't #2, just coming back to HotS, but in a worst state, because pylons have much less durabiltiy than a nexus and 30 sec is damn long. I mean : PvT, you overcharge, I snipe the pylon, you cry. PvP, I one base rush you, you cast OC, I wait 11 sec, I attack, you cry. PvZ I runby glings ion your natural, you over charge, I go in the main, you cry. Last, about the energy, I'm not sure it's the energy that prevents the Moma core to get out on the map, it's more the time it takes to actually teleport back and the speed of the MSC that is even slower than your average protoss army, and that means something  Anyway, the ability to make multiple mothership cores you are suggesting is already giving you the ability to get one core on the map and one (2? 3? more?)in your base, so this point is kinda redundant. I think that before looking at solutions, we need to think more about the "problem" here : people saying OC allows the mothership core to defend everything by itself. 1- is it really true? haven't we managed to learn how to avoid overcharged pylons when dropping or rushing the protoss?Take PvT for instance, the most trendy build is 1-1-1 (see Maru against classic in KeSPA cup). It shows 2 things : - first if 1-1-1 are working so well, it must mean MSC is not that strong. - then, if you look at the answer from Protoss, it is actually by delaying the MSC that protosses manage to stay alive, because an extra stalker is way better than a overcharge in this scenario I recommend PiG's daily about the matter. So to me, saying MSC's defence is too powerful is 80% whine. I don't think anybody would say that it's stronger that the mass queens defence or a bunker being repaired behind a full wall. 2- now, let's get back to the need that MSC is the answer to.The need : - What is it for? inbase defence to allows protoss to tech more freely and to take extra bases safely.
- Who is it for ? for protoss that want to tech up more agressively or get a better economy
- When is it needed? early game, against heavy rush : cyclones/tanks, 1 base gateway push, big zerglings all ins. Late game, to defend against runbyes and doom drops.
- What does it impact : the builds and economy of the protoss
- Why is there this need ? because if you macro well, you won't have a warp in available when a drop hits your base and canons are expensive and are slowing you economy by a great deal.
- What are the constraints ?
-it must be cheap and obtainable quickly enough to survive early game
-it must be limited in its use to not break balance (for instance making it srong offensively may break balance)
-it must be strong enough in case of doom drops or nyduses
- What would end that need :
- Make more warp ins available so you can get enough units to defend a doom drop or an early push : this would make no sense for balance reasons
- allow the protoss to make more canons : getting more static D is not that good plus it would break the canon rush balance
- or just make every protoss play ultra agressive early game (you don't need MSC with proxy adepts or canon rushes) but is it the meta we want to have?
What I did here is to quickly list the basic functions and requirements (main function, constraints function, ...) a system must have to answer the need. The mothership core we know fulfils this functions. Now if for whatever reason, it was sure that MSC had other impact on the game than just answering the need and if this impact was 100% bad, we would need something else, but this something else would still have to have this functions covered. And it is not the case of what you're proposing : you forget main functions (cheap defence both early game and late game) and add another one (offensive use, which is cute but not needed) You're a good player and you're smart, this is why your post are a good read, but you're missing your target because you forget the requirements and think about new solutions before analysing the problem deeply enough. For your next article take the time to ask : what is it for? who is it for? When? what/who does it impact? what are the constraints? what would end the need? before proposing a solution you'll improve greatly the quality of your work (which is already good, but still)
Real quality post. This should be done for all analytical articles, like ... all, ever, for ever ever!
|
On October 13 2016 01:49 InfCereal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2016 00:46 BronzeKnee wrote:On October 12 2016 23:10 BisuDagger wrote:I think the addition of the campaign shield battery combined with photon cannons would be a better option for defenders advantage. No one ever discusses photon cannons The problem with Photon Cannons is that they require a Forge. Other races can utilize static defenses (Bunkers and Spine Crawlers) much easier to hold of timings because they don't require a Evolution Chamber or Engineering Bay. Eliminating the Forge requirement is a Cannon Rushers dream. However, a superb solution, as you said, is a Shield Battery that is available when the Cybercore finishes and begins with zero energy, but can be charged by a nearby Nexus. Remember the ability in the HOTS beta that allowed the Nexus to fully charge the energy on a unit? Bring that back with a cast range about as large as a normal base, so it can't be used for proxied pushes. The shield battery is such a slick solution because it acts like the Bunker does. The Bunker is just a big repairable shield that both protects immobilizes 4 units. If you don't actually have units to go inside it and deal damage, it is useless and you still die. The Shield Battery is the same, useless if you don't have combat units nearby. Voila, defenders advantage restored. On October 12 2016 23:14 minnek wrote:
The way it seems, mamacore is necessary for base defense, and with a long range that can cover key structures / mineral lines, because Protoss simply doesn't have units waiting at base to add to the army after each production cycle. ...
Thoughts? Am I off-base with my thinking? I didn't want to give any numbers but just some examples of how I think the mothership core's role could be given elsewhere without creating yet another base defense unit. You're thinking is off base because your justification for the what the MSC and Pylon Overcharge is incorrect. Protoss does not need the MSC or Photon Overcharge due to production cycles. Protoss needs it to respond to certain early pushes and harassment units. Protoss players did just fine in WOL without it, and removing would allow for some of the other destructive choices that necessitated its creation to be fixed too, specifically certain harass styles that Blizzard said they might consider changing... I never understood why blizzard didn't look at the shield battery. The problem was that protoss was vulnerable on defense. Why in the world was a building that already exists, whose sole purpose is to increase defenders advantage while not affecting offense not considered. Blows my mind, man
My guess is with Warpgates, Blizzard might have correctly foreseen that it could be used offensively. Actually, I strongly doubt they considered that because their lines of thinking are ridiculously simple.
Nonetheless, it requires a solution like I mentioned to be implemented properly.
|
Bisutopia19231 Posts
On October 13 2016 00:46 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On October 12 2016 23:10 BisuDagger wrote:I think the addition of the campaign shield battery combined with photon cannons would be a better option for defenders advantage. No one ever discusses photon cannons The problem with Photon Cannons is that they require a Forge. Other races can utilize static defenses (Bunkers and Spine Crawlers) much easier to hold of timings because they don't require a Evolution Chamber or Engineering Bay. Eliminating the Forge requirement is a Cannon Rushers dream. However, a superb solution, as you said, is a Shield Battery that is available when the Cybercore finishes and begins with zero energy, but can be charged by a nearby Nexus. Remember the ability in the HOTS beta that allowed the Nexus to fully charge the energy on a unit? Bring that back with a cast range about as large as a normal base, so it can't be used for proxied pushes. The shield battery is such a slick solution because it acts like the Bunker does. The Bunker is just a big repairable shield that both protects immobilizes 4 units. If you don't actually have units to go inside it and deal damage, it is useless and you still die. The Shield Battery is the same, useless if you don't have combat units nearby. Voila, defenders advantage restored. Show nested quote +On October 12 2016 23:14 minnek wrote:
The way it seems, mamacore is necessary for base defense, and with a long range that can cover key structures / mineral lines, because Protoss simply doesn't have units waiting at base to add to the army after each production cycle. ...
Thoughts? Am I off-base with my thinking? I didn't want to give any numbers but just some examples of how I think the mothership core's role could be given elsewhere without creating yet another base defense unit. You're thinking is off base because your justification for the what the MSC and Pylon Overcharge is incorrect. Protoss does not need the MSC or Photon Overcharge due to production cycles. Protoss needs it to respond to certain early pushes and harassment units. Protoss players did just fine in WOL without it, and removing it would allow for some of the other destructive choices that necessitated its creation to be fixed too, specifically certain harass styles that Blizzard said they might consider changing...
Forge-Expand has been a standard for PvZ in Brood War for the past decade. There is nothing wrong with opening forge and it led to really strong +1 atk timings. I would be completely okay if SC2 Protoss required a faster forge in matchups. The strength of the shieldbattery from the LoTV campaign and its auto shield recharge is quite strong. It's weakness comes from poking type damage (mutas) that would wear down its energy and then mutas can go after cannons. I think defenders advantage would be quite a sight if cannon/battery replaced MSC.
|
I don't really see a problem with the MSC. Photon overcharge is a very skillbased ability and relies on positioning (do I keep the MSC at the third? in the main? at the natural? do I only overcharge 2 pylons and save the rest of the energy or do I overcharge all 4 pylons?) pylon positioning is also very important now.
recall allows protoss to play aggressive because their units can't retreat as easily. timewarp is quite unnecessary but not a huge problem.
|
^ " Photon overcharge is a very skillbased ability and relies on positioning"
I heavily disagree with this...it's more like an instant, "Whoops got caught out need some defense on demand!".
To be fair though, the MSC is absolutely necessary for Protoss to remain strong, everyone knows how pathetic early game Protoss defense has always been since WoL pretty much (why FFE was the go to build for a long long time)
Changing this unit will necessitate several changes to the way early game Gateway mechanics/units themselves work and I don't know enough about Protoss to comment with an actual "suggestion" but I think removing it all together and buffing the Stalker/Sentry so that smaller groups of Gateway units can hold off aggression a bit better would be key.
|
On October 12 2016 18:04 NutriaKaiN wrote:
"Photon overcharge: While photon overcharging pylons has definitely been better than nexus overcharge (due to the ability to snipe the pylon/have less photon overcharge), it is still extremely strong. For the cost of a 100/100 flyer that you can build extremely early into the game, you can completely lock down definitely 1 base, and given enough notice, cover 2 or even 3 bases."
Not sure in what a world you live.
Haha he's not completely off tho to be honest
|
On October 13 2016 02:45 Charoisaur wrote:Photon overcharge is a very skillbased ability
Okay, that has to be the most hilarious thing i've ever read on a starcraft forum.
|
We've had some great discussion so far centered around either just removing the unit all together and multiple msc. I'll briefly just address my thoughts about the two.
Firstly, the general consensus is to just remove the entire unit! I could get behind that change as well. However, we have been calling for that for years and there has been no change, and not even much acknowledgement. I want to provide some suggestions that just tweak the existing spells. I believe they are easier to adjust.
I also did have an idea for removing photon overcharge and giving the Mothership Core a shield restoring ability (similiar to the sentry one in the campaign), but I just simplified to what I have here.
About multiple Mothership Cores, I do agree that it is a bit more out there, but without testing and suggesting things we get nowhere. I also think it wouldn't be as bad as people think. If you want the same amount of pylon overcharge as now you would need to commit a lot more resources. If you want to "abuse" recall, you NEED TO SPLIT UP YOUR UNITS! You could have 3 mothership Cores with your army but you can't actually use recall anymore than currently unless you split up the deathball. I think this is something to at least consider and test.
What are people's opinion about the Time warp change? I can't don't I read anything about what people thought of that. I think would be really good. Time warp is essentially never used anymore, but we don't want to change it back to the incredibly strong hots version.
How do you test these changes? I will hopefully have an extension mod finished in a few hours for people to test it out on.
Thanks to anyone who has given me feedback for the article as well. I am not the best writer, and struggle to write down exactly what I am thinking ^_^.
|
On October 13 2016 04:39 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On October 13 2016 02:45 Charoisaur wrote:Photon overcharge is a very skillbased ability Okay, that has to be the most hilarious thing i've ever read on a starcraft forum.
Forgot repair
|
The problem with multiple MSC can be easily "limited" by introducing 1 MSC per Nexus mechanics.
On gateway army strength: why don't give us a choice: going warp gate? -> weaker GW army, doing production with warpgate research done, but classically via queuing -> stronger / cheaper / [any better ideas] GW army
|
Ever since the warpgate debate started, I've always wondered why Blizzard never tried increasing production time for units made out of a warpgate (let's say, 5 to 10 seconds longer recharge time than simply building them out of a gateway). Protoss would then have to transform their gates once they knew they were pushing/dropping with prism/need warpins at distant expansions, and so forth.
|
Interesting point of view.
I guess your idea would have to be completed by a huge recall nerf (eg 200 energy cost) in order to disable excessive use of it.
|
thanks for taking the time to do this write up.. its a nice job.
i don't like the multiple mothership cores suggestion.
On October 12 2016 21:25 JackONeill wrote:
The warp mechanic in itself is in a decent position, but the warp prism is an issue. If the warp prism was nerfed too (way less HP/gaz cost/no range pickup), gateway units could be buffed. Or more precisely, the frontal strength of adepts could be buffed.
But overall in LOTV protosses rely much more on gateway armies, which help them secure more bases and have better defensive capabilites with warpins. Overcharge was allowed to be less overwhelming than the nexus version balance-wise because of this.
If protoss was able to warpin a strong fighting unit that's not very good at harassing, the overcharge could be transformed into something better designed. This role needs to be fitted by the adept, especially since adept harass is an issue in LOTV since the begining because it's so abusive.
i agree.
On October 24 2016 04:01 MF_Icy wrote:
Ever since the warpgate debate started, I've always wondered why Blizzard never tried increasing production time for units made out of a warpgate (let's say, 5 to 10 seconds longer recharge time than simply building them out of a gateway). Protoss would then have to transform their gates once they knew they were pushing/dropping with prism/need warpins at distant expansions, and so forth.
i think it does take longer if you're warping in from a lone pylon versus warping in a unit in close proximity to the Warpgate.
On October 13 2016 00:39 Bill Murray wrote:
nobody cares what a probe has to say
they care what a carrier has to say
good job getting korean GM tho
when is Meatballs 3 coming out?
|
I think adding a little channel on PO would make it less frustrating to play against for things like oracles, reapers or liberators. I liked the idea of transfering the PO ability to sentries but the you could end up with walls of pylons with tons of sentries and I'm not sure it's good. The thing that really push me toward the MSC suppression is the fact that the entire defence is centered around MSC making its loss very punishing and really discourages any kind of recall shenanigans.
This is a though probleme to solve.
|
I think it's fine that Protoss has one hero-like unit. It is just another thing that makes the race unique compared to the others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
