|
On December 09 2017 03:05 Olli wrote:
Besides, stalkers being strong doesn't equate to them being too strong. If anything they were quite terrible before 4.0 and, imo, were buffed to a reasonable point. I'm fine with nerfing them a bit, but double nerfing them while also nerfing chronoboost and disruptors while double buffing terran is... questionable at best.
I wonder if I even care enough to wait for the eventual re-buff. When PvT win-rates dip far below the current TvP win-rates, I wonder what Terrans will think should be done.
If all of Protoss' units are going to need ridiculous micro to get any value at all, I don't really see the point of playing the race any more. No one thought "Omg, Stalkers are too good in main-army battles" pre design-change, but they're going to be worse in those situations if this change goes through.
I guess the only good thing about it is that we can build 1 or 2 fewer stalkers to snipe things in the late game ... I certainly won't want to be building any more of them than my opponent forces me to.
|
i think nerfing stalkers is overkill, protoss needs the stalker to be strong in order to hold roach ravager allins in pvz. Stronger stalkers also mean that protoss can deflect drops if they position well, Which I think is good its allot better than when ms core meant protoss always had at least one base that could not be droped. I think the vast majority of the problems with this patch are cause by the insanely strong chrono that when stacked on long researches or production time allows protoss to do insanely powerful allins. I think toning donw the strength of chrono is enough, plz dont touch the stalker until we see how things would shake out with weaker chrono but decent stalker. Im also concerned for pvz balance Im worried that nerfing protoss to help the admittedly imbalanced pvt matchup will make them to week in pvz.
|
On December 09 2017 03:05 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 01:29 DomeGetta wrote:On December 09 2017 01:12 Olli wrote:On December 09 2017 00:35 DomeGetta wrote:On December 09 2017 00:26 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
These changes are actually going to buff blink stalker builds and allins because they will be able to kite attack smoother. Changing the stalker at all was just a horrendous idea. They need to change it back. They clearly did not think thru that changes implications at all. For a unit that gets its value from kiting the delay on shots is irrelevant so this is just a huge unecessary buff for pre stim timings and drop / lib defense. Actually that's exactly what it was supposed to do, considering they removed overcharge and shield batteries don't do damage. It was a good change imo. Disagree - Stalker is a core gateway unit - you don't buff that to replace an ability like overcharge. Overcharge has absolutely no impact on stalkers fighting the first few marines that pop out in the Terran nat. The fact that 2 stalkers can now kill infinity non-stimmed marines does though. They're the exact units you buff when removing overcharge. Overcharge was used mostly to deal with early game shenanigans. Without it, what you have to deal with them, and drop play, is mostly gateway units and shield batteries. Removing overcharge without buffing gateway units was never going to be possible. That's something you have to realize. As for early marines, you still make one bunker to deal with the first few stalkers and that's it. It's always been this way. Stalkers being stronger doesn't change that. Besides, stalkers being strong doesn't equate to them being too strong. If anything they were quite terrible before 4.0 and, imo, were buffed to a reasonable point. I'm fine with nerfing them a bit, but double nerfing them while also nerfing chronoboost and disruptors while double buffing terran is... questionable at best.
Nah sorry man..this arguement isnt logical. Overcharge was in the game for defensive purposes. If the stalker buff only helped defense then I would agree but it obviously doesnt. Using stalkers early game with kiting was always strong..this just makes it even stronger and there is no point of that.. yah you can build a bunker obviously you can but that doesnt mean proxy gate builds cant get stalkers to the nat before they are up and bunkers work wonders on maps where you can blink into the main lol. Cheaper or more readily available static defense maybe.. but core gateway unit buff makes no sense relative to what got taken away. The fact that they also buffed disrupters..a unit that already synergized well with stalkers is just amplifying the issue later on.
|
On December 08 2017 21:25 Ej_ wrote:
This time in the weekly balance whine thread: Protoss players teaching Scarlett who beat DRG and Keen with P about the game.
No one is teaching anyone anything.
we already went over this a few community updates back, just because you're a pro player doesn't mean you can't be biased or wrong when it comes to balance. It also just so happens that scarlett balance whines about protoss even when protoss doesn't perform well and comments on PvT..
Go find the discussion if you are interested more in the topic.
|
With the chrono and the Stalker nerf I don't think protoss will ever be able to hold early ravagers all in, i don't see a way.
|
On December 09 2017 03:42 Edowyth wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 03:05 Olli wrote:
Besides, stalkers being strong doesn't equate to them being too strong. If anything they were quite terrible before 4.0 and, imo, were buffed to a reasonable point. I'm fine with nerfing them a bit, but double nerfing them while also nerfing chronoboost and disruptors while double buffing terran is... questionable at best. I wonder if I even care enough to wait for the eventual re-buff. When PvT win-rates dip far below the current TvP win-rates, I wonder what Terrans will think should be done. If all of Protoss' units are going to need ridiculous micro to get any value at all, I don't really see the point of playing the race any more. No one thought "Omg, Stalkers are too good in main-army battles" pre design-change, but they're going to be worse in those situations if this change goes through. I guess the only good thing about it is that we can build 1 or 2 fewer stalkers to snipe things in the late game ... I certainly won't want to be building any more of them than my opponent forces me to.
If all of Protoss' units are going to need ridiculous micro to get any value at all!
thats how terrans have had it for years bruh
|
On December 09 2017 04:59 Lokxpr wrote:
With the chrono and the Stalker nerf I don't think protoss will ever be able to hold early ravagers all in, i don't see a way.
yeah I think you can hold but it will require protoss to play very saftley, and than they will just get rolled by zerg who decide to not allin. I dont think adept scout comes out early enough for you to reactivly make additional gateways to hold on vs roach ravager. I think you have to make these gateways to hold it, so protoss might be forced into more gateway heavy early games which will make it difficult to scout, pressure and expand because curently protoss relies on tech builds for these functions and protoss might not saftley be able to tech if theses nerfs all go through. Honestly I think they should buff terran bio instead of nerfing protoss, nerfing toss after msc removal is rough.
|
On December 09 2017 00:29 Lokxpr wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2017 23:32 xTJx wrote:On December 08 2017 20:54 egrimm wrote:On December 08 2017 20:31 xTJx wrote:On December 08 2017 17:56 egrimm wrote:On December 08 2017 17:15 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 08 2017 17:09 youngjiddle wrote:On December 08 2017 17:03 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 08 2017 16:51 youngjiddle wrote:On December 08 2017 16:35 -Kyo- wrote:
ROFL, these protoss changes are absolutely hilarious
[quote]
u should know how much of an investment that is... -_- he thought he could defend without pulling workers, he didnt -_-
sure it's awful gameplay, but to basically nerf everything that was even patched to toss in the first place is like almost nonsensical Actually, I think with the new disrupter, building a single turret in the mineral line is even better than before because it means toss has to drop outside of the mineral line, meaning you can just move one scv in front of the shot. However I haven't played it yet because disrupter drop builds are already a large investment and are a rare build. I also don't see how it is any different from say a widowmine drop except being a larger investment lol. Think of an expensive widow mine that fires instantly deals 145 damage and can get picked up from six range. You avoided my question. I'm going to sleepers now. I assumed you were being intentionally obtuse and thus it wasn't worth answering. But if you were being serious... On December 08 2017 16:31 youngjiddle wrote:On December 08 2017 16:23 ZigguratOfUr wrote:On December 08 2017 16:21 youngjiddle wrote:
Toss does something awesome
Awful gameplay xD xD xD The way the opponent has absolutely no chance whatsoever to react is definitely awesome too I take it. Are you implying that the warp prism that barely slipped past the marines could not have been stopped in anyway? The problem is obviously that you can't react to the shot once the disruptor has landed. For basically any other form of harassment there's at least some leisure to react if you failed to prevent the drop from happening. Not so for the disruptor which can just drop on top of the units instagib them and leave immediately. The widow mine has an attack delay precisely for that reason. Baneling drops are the most similar thing to it I guess, but there's a huge rift in the mobility and versatility of disruptor drops (before this change) and bane drops. However the bane drops are capable of erasing whole mineral line wheras disruptor drop will kill 3-6 workers not more. I agree that there is little to do for defenders once the disruptor lands in the mineral line - however it is hardly inbalanced imho. The investment costs + actual dmg you can do with it - is fine. Except that warp prisms are twice as fast as droper lords and banelings die when they attack, while with disruptors drop you kill workers for free and leave unharmed. Yeah sure that's why it is not so easy to compare them. Also we should take into consideration the cost, shall we? Warp Prism + Speed + 1 disruptor cost: 200 + 100/100 + 150/150 = 450/250 1 dropolord + 4 banes cost: 100 + 25/25 + 200/100 (4x 50/25) = 325/125 <- where usually you must have overlord anyway as a "supply depot" and if we assume that 1 dropped disruptor shot kills 5 workers then we need like 3-4 shots to kill similar worker count as with successful bane drop which surely can kill whole mineral line. So I am not saying that bane drops are imba just saying that disruptor drops doesn't feel imba either in comparison. Maybe it is bad design because it is hard to prevent the drop ? idk to little data to say so as the patch is life several weeks only and almost nobody plays that opener. Neither i am saying it's a matter of balance, but take a look at that clip. Terran has literaly 2 seconds to see the warp prism on the minimap and react, does that look like good design? Imo it doesn't, so the proposed nerf sounds good to me. Ah yes, because Protoss had so much time to react when a boosted medivac dropped a mine inside the mineral line.
Yeah dude, we should justify bad design with other bad designs.
|
On December 09 2017 05:26 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 04:59 Lokxpr wrote:
With the chrono and the Stalker nerf I don't think protoss will ever be able to hold early ravagers all in, i don't see a way. yeah I think you can hold but it will require protoss to play very saftley, and than they will just get rolled by zerg who decide to not allin. I dont think adept scout comes out early enough for you to reactivly make additional gateways to hold on vs roach ravager. I think you have to make these gateways to hold it, so protoss might be forced into more gateway heavy early games which will make it difficult to scout, pressure and expand because curently protoss relies on tech builds for these functions and protoss might not saftley be able to tech if theses nerfs all go through. Honestly I think they should buff terran bio instead of nerfing protoss, nerfing toss after msc removal is rough.
I don't know a lot about PvZ. Can you explain why it will be a lot harder to hold an ravager all in?
the Stalker dps is still the same and you can get an Adept scout way faster in 4.0 thanks to the new CB.
If this becomes a problem, the better solution would be to reduce the Shield battery build time.
|
Finally Stalkers nerfed. Dont get why all Protosses are whining, TvP has been ridiculously broken lately.
All in all some very reasonable changes, curious to see how it will pan out at pro-level. GG Blizzard for reacting so fast, keep up the good work.
|
One minor tweak that would discourage dropping and firing of Disruptors directly on top of units is if they received their own splash damage.
|
As a Protoss player I'm fine w/ the changes except for the Stalker nerf. Stalkers finally felt they had a solid, well-defined role and in particular the buff to their weapon scaling was very much needed since I think pretty much everybody can agree their scaling into the late game was terrible.
IMO the early game dynamic of the Stalker nerf is going to have a much smaller effect on win ratios compared to their reduced ability to deter drops, which is a core role for the Stalker in the Protoss army. I've always felt that due to the Stalker's high cost and low DPS it was too cost prohibitive to defend drops as Protoss, and they are probably worse off now defending drops than pre-4.0 w/ the removal of the MSC.
If the Stalker nerf goes through and Protoss starts to struggle in early game defense I think Zealot base move speed needs to seriously be looked at (leaving Chargelot speed unchanged). It always made no sense to me how Zealots, the first unit Protoss has available, are almost never built early game.
|
On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
As a Protoss player I'm fine w/ the changes except for the Stalker nerf. Stalkers finally felt they had a solid, well-defined role and in particular the buff to their weapon scaling was very much needed since I think pretty much everybody can agree their scaling into the late game was terrible.
But they scaling as good into Lategame as before, they still get +2 attack vs armored units. How many non armored Lategame units are in the game? the only one i can think of is the Ghost.
On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
IMO the early game dynamic of the Stalker nerf is going to have a much smaller effect on win ratios compared to their reduced ability to deter drops, which is a core role for the Stalker in the Protoss army. I've always felt that due to the Stalker's high cost and low DPS it was too cost prohibitive to defend drops as Protoss, and they are probably worse off now defending drops than pre-4.0 w/ the removal of the MSC.
the Stalker dps wasn't changed at all with 4.0, the Stalker buff only changed how many shots a Stalker needs to kill a medivac and how many Stalker you need to 1shot a medivac. With this patch the stalker still needs 3 shots less to kill a Medivac than before 4.0.
|
On December 09 2017 06:49 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
As a Protoss player I'm fine w/ the changes except for the Stalker nerf. Stalkers finally felt they had a solid, well-defined role and in particular the buff to their weapon scaling was very much needed since I think pretty much everybody can agree their scaling into the late game was terrible.
But they scaling as good into Lategame as before, they still get +2 attack vs armored units. How many non armored Lategame units are in the game? the only one i can think of is the Ghost. Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
IMO the early game dynamic of the Stalker nerf is going to have a much smaller effect on win ratios compared to their reduced ability to deter drops, which is a core role for the Stalker in the Protoss army. I've always felt that due to the Stalker's high cost and low DPS it was too cost prohibitive to defend drops as Protoss, and they are probably worse off now defending drops than pre-4.0 w/ the removal of the MSC.
the Stalker dps wasn't changed at all with 4.0, the Stalker buff only changed how many shots a Stalker needs to kill a medivac and how many Stalker you need to 1shot a medivac. With this patch the stalker still needs 3 shots less to kill a Medivac than before 4.0.
These are good clarifications, Stalkers are still in a better place then they were, it seems like this balance team is committed to more regular and attentive balance patching anyways so if Protoss starts to look weak, they will get a buff, they may need one oriented around Zerg (or maybe Zerg just needs a slight nerf somewhere) but they definitely don't need one against Terran at the moment.
Personally I think Protoss will always suffer from design "flaws" because they are the only race that has Warp Gate which clearly negates reinforcement time and nullifies defenders advantage in some cases. The entire race is balanced around a gimmick, if Warp Gate were removed then it would pave the way for Gateway buffs across the board, you can't have super strong units coming out of something 8 at a time anywhere there is a Pylon/Prism, but obviously, that ship has sailed long long ago.
|
On December 09 2017 06:18 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 05:26 washikie wrote:On December 09 2017 04:59 Lokxpr wrote:
With the chrono and the Stalker nerf I don't think protoss will ever be able to hold early ravagers all in, i don't see a way. yeah I think you can hold but it will require protoss to play very saftley, and than they will just get rolled by zerg who decide to not allin. I dont think adept scout comes out early enough for you to reactivly make additional gateways to hold on vs roach ravager. I think you have to make these gateways to hold it, so protoss might be forced into more gateway heavy early games which will make it difficult to scout, pressure and expand because curently protoss relies on tech builds for these functions and protoss might not saftley be able to tech if theses nerfs all go through. Honestly I think they should buff terran bio instead of nerfing protoss, nerfing toss after msc removal is rough. I don't know a lot about PvZ. Can you explain why it will be a lot harder to hold an ravager all in? the Stalker dps is still the same and you can get an Adept scout way faster in 4.0 thanks to the new CB. If this becomes a problem, the better solution would be to reduce the Shield battery build time.
Because you need stalkers to dps down roaches, and now chrono boosting stalkers take longer and they are weaker.
I like the idea of the shield battery, reducing the building time so it becomes more of a reaction to attacks, and make it constructable only in a pylon within the range of a gate/nexus.
|
On December 09 2017 03:05 Olli wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 01:29 DomeGetta wrote:On December 09 2017 01:12 Olli wrote:On December 09 2017 00:35 DomeGetta wrote:On December 09 2017 00:26 YourFavoriteTerran wrote:
These changes are actually going to buff blink stalker builds and allins because they will be able to kite attack smoother. Changing the stalker at all was just a horrendous idea. They need to change it back. They clearly did not think thru that changes implications at all. For a unit that gets its value from kiting the delay on shots is irrelevant so this is just a huge unecessary buff for pre stim timings and drop / lib defense. Actually that's exactly what it was supposed to do, considering they removed overcharge and shield batteries don't do damage. It was a good change imo. Disagree - Stalker is a core gateway unit - you don't buff that to replace an ability like overcharge. Overcharge has absolutely no impact on stalkers fighting the first few marines that pop out in the Terran nat. The fact that 2 stalkers can now kill infinity non-stimmed marines does though. They're the exact units you buff when removing overcharge. Overcharge was used mostly to deal with early game shenanigans. Without it, what you have to deal with them, and drop play, is mostly gateway units and shield batteries. Removing overcharge without buffing gateway units was never going to be possible. That's something you have to realize. As for early marines, you still make one bunker to deal with the first few stalkers and that's it. It's always been this way. Stalkers being stronger doesn't change that. Besides, stalkers being strong doesn't equate to them being too strong. If anything they were quite terrible before 4.0 and, imo, were buffed to a reasonable point. I'm fine with nerfing them a bit, but double nerfing them while also nerfing chronoboost and disruptors while double buffing terran is... questionable at best.
"double buffing" haha, WM's buildtime almost as cyclone's is dumb after last nerf, and everyone will agree that raven need some adjustments, chrono kills bio so it's a must have nerf.
|
On December 09 2017 05:17 MiCroLiFe wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 03:42 Edowyth wrote:On December 09 2017 03:05 Olli wrote:
Besides, stalkers being strong doesn't equate to them being too strong. If anything they were quite terrible before 4.0 and, imo, were buffed to a reasonable point. I'm fine with nerfing them a bit, but double nerfing them while also nerfing chronoboost and disruptors while double buffing terran is... questionable at best. I wonder if I even care enough to wait for the eventual re-buff. When PvT win-rates dip far below the current TvP win-rates, I wonder what Terrans will think should be done. If all of Protoss' units are going to need ridiculous micro to get any value at all, I don't really see the point of playing the race any more. No one thought "Omg, Stalkers are too good in main-army battles" pre design-change, but they're going to be worse in those situations if this change goes through. I guess the only good thing about it is that we can build 1 or 2 fewer stalkers to snipe things in the late game ... I certainly won't want to be building any more of them than my opponent forces me to. If all of Protoss' units are going to need ridiculous micro to get any value at all! thats how terrans have had it for years bruh
decades.. in Brood War i used to run in terror from 4 Zealots... rather than exhausting all 175 APM and sweating my ass off for 25 seconds laser focused on a small battle that'll only kill mineral-units..
|
On December 09 2017 06:49 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
As a Protoss player I'm fine w/ the changes except for the Stalker nerf. Stalkers finally felt they had a solid, well-defined role and in particular the buff to their weapon scaling was very much needed since I think pretty much everybody can agree their scaling into the late game was terrible.
But they scaling as good into Lategame as before, they still get +2 attack vs armored units. How many non armored Lategame units are in the game? the only one i can think of is the Ghost. Show nested quote +On December 09 2017 06:31 Skyro wrote:
IMO the early game dynamic of the Stalker nerf is going to have a much smaller effect on win ratios compared to their reduced ability to deter drops, which is a core role for the Stalker in the Protoss army. I've always felt that due to the Stalker's high cost and low DPS it was too cost prohibitive to defend drops as Protoss, and they are probably worse off now defending drops than pre-4.0 w/ the removal of the MSC.
the Stalker dps wasn't changed at all with 4.0, the Stalker buff only changed how many shots a Stalker needs to kill a medivac and how many Stalker you need to 1 shot a medivac. With this patch the stalker still needs 3 shots less to kill a Medivac than before 4.0.
There are plenty of light armor units used that are used in the late game. When I say late game I don't mean high tech units. Late game = bigger armies = DPS plays a bigger role (and in particular DPS/cost, which Stalkers has pretty much the worst ratio of in the game). Stalker DPS wasn't changed in terms of the base raw numbers, but in real world applications it has due to armor and the weapon upgrade scaling changes.
The proposed change makes it so Stalkers kill medivacs in 9 rather than 8 hits. That may not seem like a big deal but it does change the equation quite a bit, likely needing a 5th stalker to deter drops. That is just one example, but there are many unit matchups where I think Stalkers performance should be improved, such as vs. Phoenix, Oracles, Adepts, Mutas, etc. (unit matchups where Stalkers are supposed to be very effective against). We shall see. I just feel there was hardly any time at all for people to adjust to the new Stalker and that it was very rushed especially combined with the other nerfs.
|
On December 09 2017 08:40 Skyro wrote:
We shall see. I just feel there was hardly any time at all for people to adjust to the new Stalker and that it was very rushed especially combined with the other nerfs.
i'm a Terran player and i think the buffed Stalker was pretty cool. I think Blizzard should not nerf the Stalker in its next patch update. Include the other Protoss nerfs and see how things go.
As a last resort nerf the Stalker in another patch if things do not improve.
Basically, i want the Stalker to be a much more "core unit" to Protoss play than the fucking flying miracle machine called the Oracle.
Even more generally, i want more ground combat and less air combat.
|
On December 09 2017 06:20 Zygno wrote:
Finally Stalkers nerfed. Dont get why all Protosses are whining, TvP has been ridiculously broken lately.
All in all some very reasonable changes, curious to see how it will pan out at pro-level. GG Blizzard for reacting so fast, keep up the good work.
Yup, the stalker nerf was needed. TvsP is badly broken.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
