|
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential.
|
On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential.
if you give gateway unit even more damage and dps at the start of the game will always break PvT early game.
In previous version, there is a (brief) patch that the stalker have 15 damage per shot (up from 10), but the same theoretical DPS, and it instantaneously break PvT early game, there is a youtube video PiG done with progamers on that. The same can be said about adept as well, if adept have higher dps against scv or marine , it will make pushing them away in the first 2-3 minute for safe mining at the natural pretty much impossible. If T can only mine at natural 1 minute later than P, the match up is not going to be good.
|
Dominican Republic624 Posts
On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential.
Protoss doesnt need a buff in dps, zerg needs more nerf Queen needs to be look at, is way to good for his cost and what it does for zerg.
|
On August 18 2020 08:39 mounteast0 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential. if you give gateway unit even more damage and dps at the start of the game will always break PvT early game. In previous version, there is a (brief) patch that the stalker have 15 damage per shot (up from 10), but the same theoretical DPS, and it instantaneously break PvT early game, there is a youtube video PiG done with progamers on that. The same can be said about adept as well, if adept have higher dps against scv or marine , it will make pushing them away in the first 2-3 minute for safe mining at the natural pretty much impossible. If T can only mine at natural 1 minute later than P, the match up is not going to be good.
Glaives for free seems a bit over the top.
Build a bunker if you scout aggression. As a P if you scout early T aggression you generally build a battery
|
On August 18 2020 10:12 Sprog wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 08:39 mounteast0 wrote:On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential. if you give gateway unit even more damage and dps at the start of the game will always break PvT early game. In previous version, there is a (brief) patch that the stalker have 15 damage per shot (up from 10), but the same theoretical DPS, and it instantaneously break PvT early game, there is a youtube video PiG done with progamers on that. The same can be said about adept as well, if adept have higher dps against scv or marine , it will make pushing them away in the first 2-3 minute for safe mining at the natural pretty much impossible. If T can only mine at natural 1 minute later than P, the match up is not going to be good. Glaives for free seems a bit over the top. Build a bunker if you scout aggression. As a P if you scout early T aggression you generally build a battery
Do you know maxpax build? the agression comes before you can build a bunker, if you try to low ground cc. Now imagine if adept already comes with glaves upgrade, no way in hell you can try to low ground expand... not to mention super buffed stalkers later.
So you are forced to build cc later or in base, meaning you are already behind toss from early game economically.
So now blizz buffs bunker build time and they become broken versus zerg, so blizz buffs queens, which become broken versus toss and the cycle of buff and nerfs begins..
|
I mentioned this in another thread, but
Due to the 12 worker start seemingly benefiting Zerg the most of any race, might it be worth considering a universal slight nerf to Zerg macro? Something like making Queen build time a few seconds longer, making Inject give 1 less larva, or making Inject take a few more seconds to spawn the larva. Anything that might encourage you to make 1-2 more Hatcheries to compensate for the slight nerf, which would ever so slightly help compensate for Zerg disproportionately benefiting from LotV's 12 worker start. These changes wouldn't particularly change any Zerg BOs either. And when I say a few seconds I really mean a few seconds; just any tweak to help out even in the slightest bit, without changing any unit interactions/balance.
I think Zerg's economy benefitting from the increased worker start resulted in them getting faster access or easier tech switches to powerful tech like Vipers and SHs, which are units that are able to help further snowball any existing lead into something much greater.
Aside from previously mentioned ideas to reworking Abduct, such as making Abduct simply drag units slowly instead of instantly pulling units (and stunning them in the process), or having Massive units be pulled half the distance, or having some sort of channeling (could be like Steady Targetting or a channeling spell that can be interrupted mid-drag), Consume could also be taken a look at. I know Blizzard doesn't want to have the same abilities as BW, but consuming HP from buildings doesn't seem to really be much of a cost. Perhaps they can make Consume drain much more HP for each energy gained, to help compensate for Zerg's economy booming so quickly due to the 12 worker start? This would mean Zergs may need to create more Evos to drain HP from. Or they could nerf the energy cost of Abduct to 100 for example. Abduct has further been buffed in LotV because of you can now combo them into Lurkers.
As we saw in Rogue's game, it seemed he was able to safely have Ravagers, Lurkers, and Vipers out all at once, when Stats was only on Stalker/Colossus. It seems like Zerg was able to both power up economically as well as access 2 of its highest tech in the time Protoss was only able to access 1, and that seems to be a bit undesired. Add on top of that, Vipers with Abduct and Consume make Zerg battle efficient as well. Protoss used to be the race that wants to access powerful tech quickly, Zerg should be the race that wants to macro up their econ quickly, and Terran should be the race who wants to pump their efficient army out asap so they can start multitasking and micro'ing. Unless I'm missing some big reasons as to how Rogue outplayed Stats so hard in that game, doesn't it feel like something might be wrong if Zerg was able to macro up, tech up, and get efficient and strong army out all at once?
|
Too much entitlement in the game design. Entitled to get 2 - 3 bases (due to early game buffing mechanics) which mean players don't need to earn their way to 2 or 3 bases, the game design will entitle them to just 'have it" with little effort on the part of the player.
What happened to earning expansions ?
IMHO, they have catered too much to new players and their complaints, the result is a game that is very on the rails and kinda uninteresting.
SC2 should be all about earning your way through tech, not be given better units and buffs just because players are bad.
|
On August 20 2020 12:58 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
Due to the 12 worker start seemingly benefiting Zerg the most of any race, might it be worth considering a universal slight nerf to Zerg macro? Something like [...] making Inject give 1 less larva
The larvae amount is already reduced by 1 with the 12 worker economy. That change has already been implemented.
Source
|
Northern Ireland25585 Posts
On August 20 2020 12:58 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but
Due to the 12 worker start seemingly benefiting Zerg the most of any race, might it be worth considering a universal slight nerf to Zerg macro? Something like making Queen build time a few seconds longer, making Inject give 1 less larva, or making Inject take a few more seconds to spawn the larva. Anything that might encourage you to make 1-2 more Hatcheries to compensate for the slight nerf, which would ever so slightly help compensate for Zerg disproportionately benefiting from LotV's 12 worker start. These changes wouldn't particularly change any Zerg BOs either. And when I say a few seconds I really mean a few seconds; just any tweak to help out even in the slightest bit, without changing any unit interactions/balance.
I think Zerg's economy benefitting from the increased worker start resulted in them getting faster access or easier tech switches to powerful tech like Vipers and SHs, which are units that are able to help further snowball any existing lead into something much greater.
Aside from previously mentioned ideas to reworking Abduct, such as making Abduct simply drag units slowly instead of instantly pulling units (and stunning them in the process), or having Massive units be pulled half the distance, or having some sort of channeling (could be like Steady Targetting or a channeling spell that can be interrupted mid-drag), Consume could also be taken a look at. I know Blizzard doesn't want to have the same abilities as BW, but consuming HP from buildings doesn't seem to really be much of a cost. Perhaps they can make Consume drain much more HP for each energy gained, to help compensate for Zerg's economy booming so quickly due to the 12 worker start? This would mean Zergs may need to create more Evos to drain HP from. Or they could nerf the energy cost of Abduct to 100 for example. Abduct has further been buffed in LotV because of you can now combo them into Lurkers.
As we saw in Rogue's game, it seemed he was able to safely have Ravagers, Lurkers, and Vipers out all at once, when Stats was only on Stalker/Colossus. It seems like Zerg was able to both power up economically as well as access 2 of its highest tech in the time Protoss was only able to access 1, and that seems to be a bit undesired. Add on top of that, Vipers with Abduct and Consume make Zerg battle efficient as well. Protoss used to be the race that wants to access powerful tech quickly, Zerg should be the race that wants to macro up their econ quickly, and Terran should be the race who wants to pump their efficient army out asap so they can start multitasking and micro'ing. Unless I'm missing some big reasons as to how Rogue outplayed Stats so hard in that game, doesn't it feel like something might be wrong if Zerg was able to macro up, tech up, and get efficient and strong army out all at once?
I like the cut of your jib sir.
Zerg macro has both got the biggest boost via the 12 worker start, but also by the skill ceiling on its macro mechanic.
If you ever have the pleasure to watch Serral or Dark’s play in first person, their injects are crazy fast you can honestly barely see them. On top of great improvements in spreading creep over the years.
What about cutting the top number of larva that can be banked to a hatch by a little? This shouldn’t affect Zerg styles that spend larva and trade a lot as they’ll be spending larvae as they come in. Big remaxes and tech switches would be made slightly weaker in how the game is currently played, but more use of macro hatches could compensate for that while slightly slowing Zerg down a bit.
I dunno, the balance feels on the cusp of being bang on, but slightly, slightly off. TvZ isn’t unwinnable by any means but generally I’m seeing Ts get completely swallowed whole if their big first pushes get cleared.
Ideally I guess you’d want it something like:
Push does appreciable damage - T favoured
Push cleared up, pretty even trades - Even game or slightly Z favoured
Push wiped out - Z favoured
As I said I don’t feel it’s too far off, it’s a rather delicate tightrope to walk, but it is a little off from having the constant back and forth trading styles we’ve seen before.
At the opposite end of the macro mechanics scale, chronoboost feels really weak by comparison, especially with the new economy coming in. Aside from being very potent in optimising builds and timings in the early game, it feels it doesn’t scale overly well as the base count increases.
If chrono got a slight boost for every nexus you had, perhaps Protoss would be more flexible against Z and their macro machine. Although I have misgivings that this would make them too strong against Terrans. Still I would enjoy having chrono as a more integral part of the macro cycle. Could introduce some interest tactical decisions, do you chrono your production like a madman or have harassment forces out and be banking for recalls.
|
It isn't that the other races macro is too strong, it's that Protoss macro is too weak, and units like the Ravager all but invalidates old macro strategies like the FFE.
Mule is powerful, Spawn is very powerful and in comparison (especially with how the new economy works) Chronoboost just seems meh, almost like an afterthought, it could probably use a raw numbers buff to allow Protoss greater flexibility in pumping out economy, upgrades, or units.
|
On August 20 2020 22:49 jpg06051992 wrote:
It isn't that the other races macro is too strong, it's that Protoss macro is too weak, and units like the Ravager all but invalidates old macro strategies like the FFE.
Mule is powerful, Spawn is very powerful and in comparison (especially with how the new economy works) Chronoboost just seems meh, almost like an afterthought, it could probably use a raw numbers buff to allow Protoss greater flexibility in pumping out economy, upgrades, or units.
Im pretty sure most terrans would be more than happy trading mules for a chronoboost ability on their cc's. Gets you a nice probe lead in PvT and it allows the toss to take upgrade leads after being down. Also gets your powerful units and researches out at a more favorable time. So I wouldnt say thats really the problem.
|
Lol @ chronoboost being weak 🤣
Seriously last months and now Gsl qualifier are pointing into pretty balanced game.
Blizz should focus on underused units and abilities / upgrades. So void Ray buff in some way is fine, also stuff like microbial shroud or infestor in general would be great for fun purposes and strategic variations.
|
United States1883 Posts
On August 20 2020 14:26 Parcelleus wrote:
Too much entitlement in the game design. Entitled to get 2 - 3 bases (due to early game buffing mechanics) which mean players don't need to earn their way to 2 or 3 bases, the game design will entitle them to just 'have it" with little effort on the part of the player.
What happened to earning expansions ?
IMHO, they have catered too much to new players and their complaints, the result is a game that is very on the rails and kinda uninteresting.
SC2 should be all about earning your way through tech, not be given better units and buffs just because players are bad.
When you start with 12 workers and a shit ton of money early on, you sorta end up on 2/3 bases pretty naturally...
|
Northern Ireland25585 Posts
On August 20 2020 23:34 Decendos wrote:
Lol @ chronoboost being weak 🤣
Seriously last months and now Gsl qualifier are pointing into pretty balanced game.
Blizz should focus on underused units and abilities / upgrades. So void Ray buff in some way is fine, also stuff like microbial shroud or infestor in general would be great for fun purposes and strategic variations.
It falls off in utility hugely the longer the game runs, although it’s certainly potent in crafting tight builds earlier on.
There’s all sorts of ways it could be tweaked to make it scale better. You could cut both its duration and its cost proportionally, so you can chrono more things while not outright buffing it. You’d be able to continuously chrono gateways for example, but it wouldn’t be a buff to chronoing out a single robo unit for example.
There’d be decisions to be made, but it could augment certain styles simply by letting you spread energy around, although with a higher attention to the cycles needed.
I’m really not interested in a singular unit like Voids getting more use when the issues in PvZ are much more rooted in core mechanics.
|
Northern Ireland25585 Posts
On August 20 2020 14:26 Parcelleus wrote:
Too much entitlement in the game design. Entitled to get 2 - 3 bases (due to early game buffing mechanics) which mean players don't need to earn their way to 2 or 3 bases, the game design will entitle them to just 'have it" with little effort on the part of the player.
What happened to earning expansions ?
IMHO, they have catered too much to new players and their complaints, the result is a game that is very on the rails and kinda uninteresting.
SC2 should be all about earning your way through tech, not be given better units and buffs just because players are bad.
Perhaps, I think it’s more a desire to force macro games than any catering to new players though.
At least to me the sheer speed of Legacy and the compliment of harassment units and the speed of bases mining out made it the hardest of the iterations for a scrub like me to play.
Perhaps that’s just a failure to deliver on intent but I wouldn’t find it caters to new players all that well at all. You have a lot more money more quickly to not be able to spend and it’s really furiously paced.
|
On August 20 2020 22:14 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2020 12:58 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but
Due to the 12 worker start seemingly benefiting Zerg the most of any race, might it be worth considering a universal slight nerf to Zerg macro? Something like making Queen build time a few seconds longer, making Inject give 1 less larva, or making Inject take a few more seconds to spawn the larva. Anything that might encourage you to make 1-2 more Hatcheries to compensate for the slight nerf, which would ever so slightly help compensate for Zerg disproportionately benefiting from LotV's 12 worker start. These changes wouldn't particularly change any Zerg BOs either. And when I say a few seconds I really mean a few seconds; just any tweak to help out even in the slightest bit, without changing any unit interactions/balance.
I think Zerg's economy benefitting from the increased worker start resulted in them getting faster access or easier tech (....) production like a madman or have harassment forces out and be banking for recalls.
Where Blizzard has done nothing for that, it s easy to prove Zerg won 11 or 12 seconds at start (see my post : https://tl.net/forum/starcraft-2/557533-the-beginning-of-an-answer). Everybody must agree LotV is suffering to please the pro scene while it s the fan base which is the most important. Of course, limit the larva per base could solve some problem but in theory it sn t a smart idea (Unless all maps have the same number of expansion which isn t the case).
Love your messages guys, Wombat and Yoshi, ...
|
On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential.
Any buff to the dps of stalkers or adepts Not gated by an upgrade can really tip the balance of TvP early game, remember when due to build times and The burst damage buff proxy gate could deny terans expo for a minute. The strength of proxy gate is a significant problem because it can put on extreme pressure while basically not impacting protoss’s own economic progress.
I think giving ravagers an armored or light tag would be an appropriate nerf. Their are very few tagless units and Zerg seems to have most of them.
For this matter maybe queens should have a tag, they would not be nearly as tanky vs every unit if they took bonus damage from some. I think making queens armored would make sense since it won’t break TVZ early game since Terran mainly has access to anti light or neutral damage types but would help Protoss mid game since now stalkers, immortals and vrs do extra damage to them. It also will maintain queens effectiveness vs Phoenix and adepts. My one concern is that this might make canon battery proxy’s vs Zerg to oppressive.
Honestly I would like to see something done to curb proxy battery strats while buffing the units used in them. Vrs and immortals can only be so good before the proxy battery strat becomes oppressive this is a concern of mine on the upcoming patch. I think defensive voidrays clearly needed a buff, but offensive vr battery may become to good with cheaper rays.
|
Northern Ireland25585 Posts
On August 21 2020 01:33 Vision_ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 20 2020 22:14 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 20 2020 12:58 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:
I mentioned this in another thread, but
Due to the 12 worker start seemingly benefiting Zerg the most of any race, might it be worth considering a universal slight nerf to Zerg macro? Something like making Queen build time a few seconds longer, making Inject give 1 less larva, or making Inject take a few more seconds to spawn the larva. Anything that might encourage you to make 1-2 more Hatcheries to compensate for the slight nerf, which would ever so slightly help compensate for Zerg disproportionately benefiting from LotV's 12 worker start. These changes wouldn't particularly change any Zerg BOs either. And when I say a few seconds I really mean a few seconds; just any tweak to help out even in the slightest bit, without changing any unit interactions/balance.
I think Zerg's economy benefitting from the increased worker start resulted in them getting faster access or easier tech (....) production like a madman or have harassment forces out and be banking for recalls. Where Blizzard has done nothing for that, it s easy to prove Zerg won 11 or 12 seconds at start (see my post : https://tl.net/forum/starcraft-2/557533-the-beginning-of-an-answer). Everybody must agree LotV is suffering to please the pro scene while it s the fan base which is the most important. Of course, limit the larva per base could solve some problem but in theory it sn t a smart idea (Unless all maps have the same number of expansion which isn t the case). Love your messages guys, Wombat and Yoshi, ...
Glad someone loves my messages anyway haha.
I’m fine balancing around the pro scene, my issue is they seem to cut out a lot of options in how they’ve approached things/not approached things.
Accelerated 3rd base eco where it kicks in so fast really cut off a lot of non-cheesy aggression and decision-making. Queens being so good as they currently are filled far far too many holes. Them not adopting my chrono changes is a huge mistake obviously :p
In fairness removing the mothership core was a good change in the right direction. It opens a dynamic between a Protoss cutting batteries to be greedy, windows for punishing that and greedy opponents being able to eke out an advantage over an overly cautious Toss.
That kind of risk/reward is good, and it impacts the variety of the game from the lowest scrub right up to the elite pro players if you have it.
|
Northern Ireland25585 Posts
On August 21 2020 01:37 washikie wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2020 08:07 Freeborn wrote:
Guys...
Gateway units need more DPS. Every person with half a brain who has played protoss and other races will know that.
What works for terran and zerg, massing low tier units just does not work for protoss, the damage is so low that you just lose without AoE. This limits protoss playstyles and makes them weak to early game attacks and harrass as there is not enough dps to clear harrass units efficiently.
We don't need a new gateway unit, we need an overall increase of dps for all gateway units, and then changes to make sure their offensive capabilities don't become too overwhelming.
Obvious solution: nerf offensive warp ins. Offensive warp ins negate a good part of the defenders advantage, change that and gateway units don't overwhelm as easily when buffed.
Additional options: remove or nerf force field. It still has the ability to create very lopside battles, while being 100% useless in others. Exchange these extremes for some solid sentry combat power.
Now all we need is to do buff stalkers and adepts as well (zealots seem okay) without making them too strong.
For adepts an easy option would be to have them start with glaives and increase their attack upgrades. If they become too powerful, their shading ability or some of it's power could be locked behind an upgrade.
Stalkers need a flat base damage buff, if they get too strong, we can reduce their range by 1 (Could be unlocked via upgrade) or reduce their hp.
My simple core ideas summarized:
- no more fast warp in unless near nexus (plus maybe lategame upgrade for warpprism)
- forcefield removed or made destructible by having hp.
- sentry +1 range, gas cost reduced to 75
- adepts start with glaives
- stalkers +3 base damage (+2 upgrade progression), -1 range
Additional fun ideas:
- make swarmhosts and ravagers light units -> bam! suddenly adepts, phoenix and oracle become much more useful vs zerg
- archon speed upgrade researched at templar archives -> another option to buff gateway compositions without affecting the archons direct battle strength too much, while increasing survivability and tactical potential. Any buff to the dps of stalkers or adepts Not gated by an upgrade can really tip the balance of TvP early game, remember when due to build times and The burst damage buff proxy gate could deny terans expo for a minute. The strength of proxy gate is a significant problem because it can put on extreme pressure while basically not impacting protoss’s own economic progress. I think giving ravagers an armored or light tag would be an appropriate nerf. Their are very few tagless units and Zerg seems to have most of them. For this matter maybe queens should have a tag, they would not be nearly as tanky vs every unit if they took bonus damage from some. I think making queens armored would make sense since it won’t break TVZ early game since Terran mainly has access to anti light or neutral damage types but would help Protoss mid game since now stalkers, immortals and vrs do extra damage to them. It also will maintain queens effectiveness vs Phoenix and adepts. My one concern is that this might make canon battery proxy’s vs Zerg to oppressive. Honestly I would like to see something done to curb proxy battery strats while buffing the units used in them. Vrs and immortals can only be so good before the proxy battery strat becomes oppressive this is a concern of mine on the upcoming patch. I think defensive voidrays clearly needed a buff, but offensive vr battery may become to good with cheaper rays.
I think it’s the concern of most people skimming the proposed changes. Most changes to Protoss always have the threat of a augmenting existing cheese.
I suppose we could nerf batteries recharge rate somewhat if they’re not within a certain distance of a Nexus? Perhaps not hugely harshly so you keep up the option of aggressive cheesy builds being doable, but enough so that you could buff units that you mightn’t otherwise for fear of them making cheese builds too strong?
|
+ Show Spoiler +GSL 9 P 10 T 5 Z advance from qualifiers...finally we can talk about useless Z things to buff like midgame infestor, burrow movement, SHs and hydras :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
