|
On July 23 2023 16:06 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2023 12:25 AssyrianKing wrote:
One thing I always wondered was, the base units for Terran or Zerg have either similar strength or are a bit beefier, whereas for Protoss they have slightly less HP or Shields.
I am aware that both units now have special abilities or more micro potential. But Marines/Zerglings are better already due to better pathing in Starcraft 2.
I personally think the base units should be a bit beefier and then to balance Protoss around those changes. The goal of the race was always to make Protoss time and space manipulators. It turned out to be much harder to balance than expected, and a lot of abilities were too game breaking, like black hole/vortex, missile slow down field and even pylon warp-ins, which had to be heavily nerfed. I think the developers did necessarily give P less focus, but the whole concept of the race was much harder to get right when matched against the other two. Protoss still attracts players who enjoy a race with lots of trickery, the highest skillcap micro ability in the game, several devastating AOE options and massive air fleets.
I think the issue is that the other 2 races also have all those tools, and they're better than what toss has.
Imagine if nova did half of any units hp but it was instant, that's what ghosts feel like for example.
|
I think it's always been pretty clear that Protoss never really received the same attention or consideration as Terran or Zerg. Major problems with the race's design were addressed by a series of bandaids and specific counter units. Early game fragility and inability to win early fights was a big one.
First we had the Sentry, because Protoss couldn't win fights without being all in or having Colossi. Most of Wings of Liberty PvT involved the Protoss camping at the top of their main or natural ramp and using forcefields to prevent any sort of engagement until they had Colossi.
Then came the mothership core and photon overcharge, followed by the shield battery and battery overcharge. Because Protoss just does not have the tools to survive without over committing to defense outside of these clunky bandaids.
One nice example of a specific counter unit is the Tempest, which were originally designed as having massive air to air splash to address Mutalisks, but eventually arrived as long range siege units with bonus damage to massive units as a solution to Brood Lords. They eventually gained a little versatility, but were not conceived of as anything except a solution to a single problem faced by Protoss. Later, when Mutalisk regeneration was buffed because of Widow Mines and Protoss started dying to massive flocks of Mutalisks, Phoenix range was increased and Anion Pulse Crystals was added. Both times, instead of addressing the issues in Protoss design that led to these problems, Blizzard gave Protoss a specific unit to build in response.
Also, I'd like to give an honorable mention to Blizzard's handling of Chronoboost. It's hard to compare unit build times, but Protoss upgrade times are longer than the other races, and their research times are usually longer than comparable research from other races, too. For example, Extended Thermal Lance takes 100 seconds. Other siege unit ranges upgrades are Advanced Ballistics at 79 seconds and Seismic Spines at 57 seconds. It should really not surprise anybody that Protoss strategies are heavy on using chronoboost to rush out a single research for a timing attack or all in.
Finally, I'd like to remind everybody of the time Blizzard told the community that they'd prefer to see Protoss players frustrated over barely losing an observer to a scan over Terran player's frustrated over barely not killing an observer as a reason for nerfing observer speed.
We’d like to revert this change we made earlier in the year, as we feel the frustration caused by barely not catching Observers did not make up for the benefits of the speed increase. news.blizzard.com
In conclusion, while Protoss remains a (technically) functional race that can maintain representation in tournaments, I think it's pretty clear that the race never received the same attention, consideration, or polish that Terran and Zerg did.
|
On July 24 2023 07:08 Kyadytim wrote:I think it's always been pretty clear that Protoss never really received the same attention or consideration as Terran or Zerg. Major problems with the race's design were addressed by a series of bandaids and specific counter units. Early game fragility and inability to win early fights was a big one. First we had the Sentry, because Protoss couldn't win fights without being all in or having Colossi. Most of Wings of Liberty PvT involved the Protoss camping at the top of their main or natural ramp and using forcefields to prevent any sort of engagement until they had Colossi. Then came the mothership core and photon overcharge, followed by the shield battery and battery overcharge. Because Protoss just does not have the tools to survive without over committing to defense outside of these clunky bandaids. One nice example of a specific counter unit is the Tempest, which were originally designed as having massive air to air splash to address Mutalisks, but eventually arrived as long range siege units with bonus damage to massive units as a solution to Brood Lords. They eventually gained a little versatility, but were not conceived of as anything except a solution to a single problem faced by Protoss. Later, when Mutalisk regeneration was buffed because of Widow Mines and Protoss started dying to massive flocks of Mutalisks, Phoenix range was increased and Anion Pulse Crystals was added. Both times, instead of addressing the issues in Protoss design that led to these problems, Blizzard gave Protoss a specific unit to build in response. Also, I'd like to give an honorable mention to Blizzard's handling of Chronoboost. It's hard to compare unit build times, but Protoss upgrade times are longer than the other races, and their research times are usually longer than comparable research from other races, too. For example, Extended Thermal Lance takes 100 seconds. Other siege unit ranges upgrades are Advanced Ballistics at 79 seconds and Seismic Spines at 57 seconds. It should really not surprise anybody that Protoss strategies are heavy on using chronoboost to rush out a single research for a timing attack or all in. Finally, I'd like to remind everybody of the time Blizzard told the community that they'd prefer to see Protoss players frustrated over barely losing an observer to a scan over Terran player's frustrated over barely not killing an observer as a reason for nerfing observer speed. Show nested quote +We’d like to revert this change we made earlier in the year, as we feel the frustration caused by barely not catching Observers did not make up for the benefits of the speed increase. news.blizzard.comIn conclusion, while Protoss remains a (technically) functional race that can maintain representation in tournaments, I think it's pretty clear that the race never received the same attention, consideration, or polish that Terran and Zerg did.
This is a pretty good write up, I agree.
Hope we get a balance patch soon, a slightly stronger Protoss would just lead to better tournament diversity anyways. I still would love to, at the least, see the Sentry get a bit of a buff, because I feel like they were never properly compensated for FF being so severely gimped in ZvP with Corrosive Bile. On top of that, Protoss looks really fragile in the early game against Terran and seem to have very limited opportunity to create map control outside of committed timing attacks.
My proposal is simple, FF now requires 2 biles to destroy, forcing the Zerg to make a choice between eliminating the FF or attacking the army.
And, Guardian Shield.
-Increase bubble size from 4 to 5, allowing the Sentry to hang back a bit more and not be so exposed.
-Increase ranged damage reduction from 2 to 3 to primarily strengthen Protoss early game vs. Terran, as the reduction would feel pretty useless against Zerg for the most part. One less damage from a Roach is meaningless and Hydras already excel against Gateway units as a whole and I don't think even 1 less damage per shot would really change the dynamic between GW armies and Hydralisks.
-All units inside bubble gain 20% movement speed. An increase in damage would be too OP, this would allow GW armies to close the distance faster, and engage and retreat with a bit more agility in the early/mid game.
|
Northern Ireland24512 Posts
On July 24 2023 07:08 Kyadytim wrote:I think it's always been pretty clear that Protoss never really received the same attention or consideration as Terran or Zerg. Major problems with the race's design were addressed by a series of bandaids and specific counter units. Early game fragility and inability to win early fights was a big one. First we had the Sentry, because Protoss couldn't win fights without being all in or having Colossi. Most of Wings of Liberty PvT involved the Protoss camping at the top of their main or natural ramp and using forcefields to prevent any sort of engagement until they had Colossi. Then came the mothership core and photon overcharge, followed by the shield battery and battery overcharge. Because Protoss just does not have the tools to survive without over committing to defense outside of these clunky bandaids. One nice example of a specific counter unit is the Tempest, which were originally designed as having massive air to air splash to address Mutalisks, but eventually arrived as long range siege units with bonus damage to massive units as a solution to Brood Lords. They eventually gained a little versatility, but were not conceived of as anything except a solution to a single problem faced by Protoss. Later, when Mutalisk regeneration was buffed because of Widow Mines and Protoss started dying to massive flocks of Mutalisks, Phoenix range was increased and Anion Pulse Crystals was added. Both times, instead of addressing the issues in Protoss design that led to these problems, Blizzard gave Protoss a specific unit to build in response. Also, I'd like to give an honorable mention to Blizzard's handling of Chronoboost. It's hard to compare unit build times, but Protoss upgrade times are longer than the other races, and their research times are usually longer than comparable research from other races, too. For example, Extended Thermal Lance takes 100 seconds. Other siege unit ranges upgrades are Advanced Ballistics at 79 seconds and Seismic Spines at 57 seconds. It should really not surprise anybody that Protoss strategies are heavy on using chronoboost to rush out a single research for a timing attack or all in. Finally, I'd like to remind everybody of the time Blizzard told the community that they'd prefer to see Protoss players frustrated over barely losing an observer to a scan over Terran player's frustrated over barely not killing an observer as a reason for nerfing observer speed. Show nested quote +We’d like to revert this change we made earlier in the year, as we feel the frustration caused by barely not catching Observers did not make up for the benefits of the speed increase. news.blizzard.comIn conclusion, while Protoss remains a (technically) functional race that can maintain representation in tournaments, I think it's pretty clear that the race never received the same attention, consideration, or polish that Terran and Zerg did.
Solid writeup sir!
|
On July 24 2023 06:18 Fubika24 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 23 2023 16:06 Slydie wrote:On July 23 2023 12:25 AssyrianKing wrote:
One thing I always wondered was, the base units for Terran or Zerg have either similar strength or are a bit beefier, whereas for Protoss they have slightly less HP or Shields.
I am aware that both units now have special abilities or more micro potential. But Marines/Zerglings are better already due to better pathing in Starcraft 2.
I personally think the base units should be a bit beefier and then to balance Protoss around those changes. The goal of the race was always to make Protoss time and space manipulators. It turned out to be much harder to balance than expected, and a lot of abilities were too game breaking, like black hole/vortex, missile slow down field and even pylon warp-ins, which had to be heavily nerfed. I think the developers did necessarily give P less focus, but the whole concept of the race was much harder to get right when matched against the other two. Protoss still attracts players who enjoy a race with lots of trickery, the highest skillcap micro ability in the game, several devastating AOE options and massive air fleets. I think the issue is that the other 2 races also have all those tools, and they're better than what toss has. Imagine if nova did half of any units hp but it was instant, that's what ghosts feel like for example.
You mean like being hit by a NOVA in the middle of a bio ball? Except they all die, not only lose half HP. Yes, I know how that feels! Even Cure lost a PvT recently that way.
|
Imo, the fundamental design issue with protoss is the warpgate. As it allows reinforcements to be delivered to the frontlines without travel time, negating the already perilous (e.g. high ground is not as powerful, compared to BW) defenders advantage. As this allowed protoss to conduct many powerful all-ins this meant that everything had to be designed around it, e.g. gateway units made weaker, etc.
A possible solution would've been to make the gateway/warpgate a toggle and rebalance the units:
- Units build quicker/cheaper if it's in gateway mode.
- Warpgate allows quick reinforcements but with the cost of increased build times or maybe increased unit cost?
Or maybe even get rid of the warpgate altogether and rebalance around that.
|
Australia2111 Posts
On July 24 2023 15:18 Azzur wrote:
Imo, the fundamental design issue with protoss is the warpgate. As it allows reinforcements to be delivered to the frontlines without travel time, negating the already perilous (e.g. high ground is not as powerful, compared to BW) defenders advantage. As this allowed protoss to conduct many powerful all-ins this meant that everything had to be designed around it, e.g. gateway units made weaker, etc.
A possible solution would've been to make the gateway/warpgate a toggle and rebalance the units:
- Units build quicker/cheaper if it's in gateway mode.
- Warpgate allows quick reinforcements but with the cost of increased build times or maybe increased unit cost?
Or maybe even get rid of the warpgate altogether and rebalance around that.
From games that I've watched, this isnt so much of an issue anymore because it takes so long for the units to warp in, and they can no longer warp in on high ground? Also, because the Protoss Army is designed to be so deathbally, having warp-in is kind of needed?
Just my thoughts. Wish I knew how to edit maps so I can implement my own ideas haha
|
On July 24 2023 07:49 Beelzebub1 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2023 07:08 Kyadytim wrote:I think it's always been pretty clear that Protoss never really received the same attention or consideration as Terran or Zerg. Major problems with the race's design were addressed by a series of bandaids and specific counter units. Early game fragility and inability to win early fights was a big one. First we had the Sentry, because Protoss couldn't win fights without being all in or having Colossi. Most of Wings of Liberty PvT involved the Protoss camping at the top of their main or natural ramp and using forcefields to prevent any sort of engagement until they had Colossi. Then came the mothership core and photon overcharge, followed by the shield battery and battery overcharge. Because Protoss just does not have the tools to survive without over committing to defense outside of these clunky bandaids. One nice example of a specific counter unit is the Tempest, which were originally designed as having massive air to air splash to address Mutalisks, but eventually arrived as long range siege units with bonus damage to massive units as a solution to Brood Lords. They eventually gained a little versatility, but were not conceived of as anything except a solution to a single problem faced by Protoss. Later, when Mutalisk regeneration was buffed because of Widow Mines and Protoss started dying to massive flocks of Mutalisks, Phoenix range was increased and Anion Pulse Crystals was added. Both times, instead of addressing the issues in Protoss design that led to these problems, Blizzard gave Protoss a specific unit to build in response. Also, I'd like to give an honorable mention to Blizzard's handling of Chronoboost. It's hard to compare unit build times, but Protoss upgrade times are longer than the other races, and their research times are usually longer than comparable research from other races, too. For example, Extended Thermal Lance takes 100 seconds. Other siege unit ranges upgrades are Advanced Ballistics at 79 seconds and Seismic Spines at 57 seconds. It should really not surprise anybody that Protoss strategies are heavy on using chronoboost to rush out a single research for a timing attack or all in. Finally, I'd like to remind everybody of the time Blizzard told the community that they'd prefer to see Protoss players frustrated over barely losing an observer to a scan over Terran player's frustrated over barely not killing an observer as a reason for nerfing observer speed. We’d like to revert this change we made earlier in the year, as we feel the frustration caused by barely not catching Observers did not make up for the benefits of the speed increase. news.blizzard.comIn conclusion, while Protoss remains a (technically) functional race that can maintain representation in tournaments, I think it's pretty clear that the race never received the same attention, consideration, or polish that Terran and Zerg did. This is a pretty good write up, I agree. Hope we get a balance patch soon, a slightly stronger Protoss would just lead to better tournament diversity anyways. I still would love to, at the least, see the Sentry get a bit of a buff, because I feel like they were never properly compensated for FF being so severely gimped in ZvP with Corrosive Bile. On top of that, Protoss looks really fragile in the early game against Terran and seem to have very limited opportunity to create map control outside of committed timing attacks. My proposal is simple, FF now requires 2 biles to destroy, forcing the Zerg to make a choice between eliminating the FF or attacking the army. And, Guardian Shield. -Increase bubble size from 4 to 5, allowing the Sentry to hang back a bit more and not be so exposed. -Increase ranged damage reduction from 2 to 3 to primarily strengthen Protoss early game vs. Terran, as the reduction would feel pretty useless against Zerg for the most part. One less damage from a Roach is meaningless and Hydras already excel against Gateway units as a whole and I don't think even 1 less damage per shot would really change the dynamic between GW armies and Hydralisks. -All units inside bubble gain 20% movement speed. An increase in damage would be too OP, this would allow GW armies to close the distance faster, and engage and retreat with a bit more agility in the early/mid game.
I agree with the Guardian Shield buff from 2 dmg reduction to 3. As you said it'd primarily target Terran. It'd help Protoss not fold to Hydralisks as easily in case the Protoss is a bit behind. It'd make Sentries stronger and more supply efficient, and require Protoss less Sentries to be effective, thus saving them gas.
As for FF buff, I would suggest to allow the bile to only be able to clear 1 FF at a time, AND allow the FF to protect a building from bile. Imagine using FF to protect your shield batteries and battery overcharge from being sniped immediately. Also, you could use FF to potentially open with Forge Fast Expands again.
I also propose Stalker damage be changed from 13 (+5 armored) to 14 (+4 armored). This would help Gateway armies vs MMM and help defend earlier pushes. This would also help Stalkers slightly more vs Mutalisks. To keep the Stalker vs Hellion dynamic, and to also give Mech a slight buff in versatility and mobility and compensate for the AA missile nerf, also change Hellion damage from 8 (+6 Light) to 9 (+5 Light).
Good points from Kyadytim too, I don't like how Protoss is kind of forced into very specific responses like getting Phoenix + Range just to fend off Mutalisks, or getting Tempsts vs BLs/Liberators. And if they're a little behind or don't have the proper "counters" in place, their base units aren't good enough and they can easily die. It's very punishing, especially because even with Phoenix Range or the Tempests, it's not like you're rewarded with the investment+anticipation by being able to shut them down or hard counter them and get an opportunity to punish, it feels more like you need to do it just to fend it off and stay in the game on an even footing.
I think buffing Stalkers would be a great way to help buff PvT early game and Gateway vs MMM, and make Protoss more resilient overall and rely slightly less on specific tech counters. It would also help Protoss Gateway armies vs Queens/Ravagers, and give more potential push power, making Zerg have to respect threats more and not blow their economy up as fast. It would work well as a slight buff to Protoss overall without leading to any degenerate strategies.
|
I promote a sentry buff, allowing them to see tumors on activation of the guardian shield.
I also think P race lack a bit of design but it s mostly because creep issue, you can complete the pretty good answer of
Kyadytim by the fact that 12 workers helped zerg to expand faster, so overall balance have been changed in adding 6
workers instead of 3.
Then adepts units are slightly overlapping Stalkers role (with teleport or shade ability) that s why i m thinking adepts need a
redesign to work out with sentry and detection of tumors.
Actually adepts looks expensive for their price and they are mainly used for all-in or strategy varies, the goal of blizzard
was to add a light unit mainly because of the unbalance number between light and heavy units but it doesn t work
simply because any place for this kind of unit has been found.
What make me say that Stalkers could eventually shift from heavy armored unit to light unit with some tweaks.
Simple idea is oftenly the better
PS : tweak also nova to a less idiot spell : insane damage => good damage + stun
Stalker tweak
Remenber Patch 4.0.0 and 4.1.4
Damage 10 + 4 armored to 15 + 6 armored then 13 + 5 (actually)
Reverse to 15 + 6 and decrease hp from 80/80 to 70/70 (adept health pool)
+ Light armor
A kind of new tournament could be created with trial tweak inside the tournament each month (race shift, terran, then
zerg then protoss...)
|
On July 24 2023 16:21 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On July 24 2023 07:49 Beelzebub1 wrote:On July 24 2023 07:08 Kyadytim wrote:I think it's always been pretty clear that Protoss never really received the same attention or consideration as Terran or Zerg. Major problems with the race's design were addressed by a series of bandaids and specific counter units. Early game fragility and inability to win early fights was a big one. First we had the Sentry, because Protoss couldn't win fights without being all in or having Colossi. Most of Wings of Liberty PvT involved the Protoss camping at the top of their main or natural ramp and using forcefields to prevent any sort of engagement until they had Colossi. Then came the mothership core and photon overcharge, followed by the shield battery and battery overcharge. Because Protoss just does not have the tools to survive without over committing to defense outside of these clunky bandaids. One nice example of a specific counter unit is the Tempest, which were originally designed as having massive air to air splash to address Mutalisks, but eventually arrived as long range siege units with bonus damage to massive units as a solution to Brood Lords. They eventually gained a little versatility, but were not conceived of as anything except a solution to a single problem faced by Protoss. Later, when Mutalisk regeneration was buffed because of Widow Mines and Protoss started dying to massive flocks of Mutalisks, Phoenix range was increased and Anion Pulse Crystals was added. Both times, instead of addressing the issues in Protoss design that led to these problems, Blizzard gave Protoss a specific unit to build in response. Also, I'd like to give an honorable mention to Blizzard's handling of Chronoboost. It's hard to compare unit build times, but Protoss upgrade times are longer than the other races, and their research times are usually longer than comparable research from other races, too. For example, Extended Thermal Lance takes 100 seconds. Other siege unit ranges upgrades are Advanced Ballistics at 79 seconds and Seismic Spines at 57 seconds. It should really not surprise anybody that Protoss strategies are heavy on using chronoboost to rush out a single research for a timing attack or all in. Finally, I'd like to remind everybody of the time Blizzard told the community that they'd prefer to see Protoss players frustrated over barely losing an observer to a scan over Terran player's frustrated over barely not killing an observer as a reason for nerfing observer speed. We’d like to revert this change we made earlier in the year, as we feel the frustration caused by barely not catching Observers did not make up for the benefits of the speed increase. news.blizzard.comIn conclusion, while Protoss remains a (technically) functional race that can maintain representation in tournaments, I think it's pretty clear that the race never received the same attention, consideration, or polish that Terran and Zerg did. This is a pretty good write up, I agree. Hope we get a balance patch soon, a slightly stronger Protoss would just lead to better tournament diversity anyways. I still would love to, at the least, see the Sentry get a bit of a buff, because I feel like they were never properly compensated for FF being so severely gimped in ZvP with Corrosive Bile. On top of that, Protoss looks really fragile in the early game against Terran and seem to have very limited opportunity to create map control outside of committed timing attacks. My proposal is simple, FF now requires 2 biles to destroy, forcing the Zerg to make a choice between eliminating the FF or attacking the army. And, Guardian Shield. -Increase bubble size from 4 to 5, allowing the Sentry to hang back a bit more and not be so exposed. -Increase ranged damage reduction from 2 to 3 to primarily strengthen Protoss early game vs. Terran, as the reduction would feel pretty useless against Zerg for the most part. One less damage from a Roach is meaningless and Hydras already excel against Gateway units as a whole and I don't think even 1 less damage per shot would really change the dynamic between GW armies and Hydralisks. -All units inside bubble gain 20% movement speed. An increase in damage would be too OP, this would allow GW armies to close the distance faster, and engage and retreat with a bit more agility in the early/mid game. I agree with the Guardian Shield buff from 2 dmg reduction to 3. As you said it'd primarily target Terran. It'd help Protoss not fold to Hydralisks as easily in case the Protoss is a bit behind. It'd make Sentries stronger and more supply efficient, and require Protoss less Sentries to be effective, thus saving them gas. As for FF buff, I would suggest to allow the bile to only be able to clear 1 FF at a time, AND allow the FF to protect a building from bile. Imagine using FF to protect your shield batteries and battery overcharge from being sniped immediately. Also, you could use FF to potentially open with Forge Fast Expands again. I also propose Stalker damage be changed from 13 (+5 armored) to 14 (+4 armored). This would help Gateway armies vs MMM and help defend earlier pushes. This would also help Stalkers slightly more vs Mutalisks. To keep the Stalker vs Hellion dynamic, and to also give Mech a slight buff in versatility and mobility and compensate for the AA missile nerf, also change Hellion damage from 8 (+6 Light) to 9 (+5 Light). Good points from Kyadytim too, I don't like how Protoss is kind of forced into very specific responses like getting Phoenix + Range just to fend off Mutalisks, or getting Tempsts vs BLs/Liberators. And if they're a little behind or don't have the proper "counters" in place, their base units aren't good enough and they can easily die. It's very punishing, especially because even with Phoenix Range or the Tempests, it's not like you're rewarded with the investment+anticipation by being able to shut them down or hard counter them and get an opportunity to punish, it feels more like you need to do it just to fend it off and stay in the game on an even footing. I think buffing Stalkers would be a great way to help buff PvT early game and Gateway vs MMM, and make Protoss more resilient overall and rely slightly less on specific tech counters. It would also help Protoss Gateway armies vs Queens/Ravagers, and give more potential push power, making Zerg have to respect threats more and not blow their economy up as fast. It would work well as a slight buff to Protoss overall without leading to any degenerate strategies.
I would prefer a Sentry buff only because I feel like Stalkers already have a great place in the meta and the Sentry suffered alot from the transition between HoTS into LotV with things like Corrosive Bile severely gimping their primary ability and Terrans just, plain getting better over the years, devising all sorts of quick knife stab early game pressures that seem disproportionally difficult to hold for Protoss compared to Terrans required effort to execute the builds.
That being said, I wouldn't frown over a Stalker buff (especially a very smart one like that) because Stalkers to me are kind of like the Marine for Protoss, kind of the general work horse unit and I've always hated how vulnerable Protoss feels to Mutalisk overall.
If they gave a buff to either unit and it strengthened the race competitively, I'm all for it.
Funnily enough, in Brood War it's the same thing, Protoss always opens (or used to for many years) Corsair/DT because the threat of Mutalisks was so severe.
|
On July 24 2023 15:18 Azzur wrote:
Imo, the fundamental design issue with protoss is the warpgate. As it allows reinforcements to be delivered to the frontlines without travel time, negating the already perilous (e.g. high ground is not as powerful, compared to BW) defenders advantage. As this allowed protoss to conduct many powerful all-ins this meant that everything had to be designed around it, e.g. gateway units made weaker, etc.
A possible solution would've been to make the gateway/warpgate a toggle and rebalance the units:
- Units build quicker/cheaper if it's in gateway mode.
- Warpgate allows quick reinforcements but with the cost of increased build times or maybe increased unit cost?
Or maybe even get rid of the warpgate altogether and rebalance around that.
I think they should kill the warpprism and replace with some sort of modified shuttle. The warp in mechanic can stay, but imo it should only be used near a nexus. this should be accompanied with a buff for gateway units.
|
I believe protoss is build around the warpgate, which prevents the race from having a solid foundation. Protoss has been at its strongest when it has air units or robo units. Warpgate allowing a race to build units anywhere really requires those units not to be as strong as protoss units should be. Even with nerfs to warpgate protoss gateway units never became the staple it should have been. Successful protoss have done so primarily with stargate and robo units. I know gateway units are very important, but with the exception of blink stalker all ins they are usually weak units, that compliment robo or gateway units.
Protoss didn't end up getting a powerful long range unit like the dragoon, instead it was split between two units the colossus and the stalker. Even prior to LotV the gateway unit required sentries to create force fields to protect it. The mighty protoss army was fragile
Thematically warpgate is awesome, and the LotV reveal trailer having warping in units was epic. I do think the mechanic kept a core part of protoss weaker than it should have been. Sure the units warping in your base is very difficult to deal with, but the army itself is weak.
|
Increase sentry shield's range from 4 to 5.
Make warping units a little faster (a little!).
there, solved.
|
Australia2111 Posts
Blizzard has said many times that it has spoken with Pro players and others from SC community. I wonder how much influence they actually had
|
Blizzard just never had the balls to remove warpgate tech, if they did they could buff stalkers and zealots , make main usage of sentry guardian shield. Followed by removing force field from the game and buffing Immortals.
If this happened we would see high tempo constant fighting in pvz and pvt because Protoss could go zealot stalker templar and you would see lots of trading all the time and the games would more naturally move to late game instead of like now where protoss either all inns or turtles to late game
|
On July 29 2023 00:07 Drahkn wrote:
Blizzard just never had the balls to remove warpgate tech, if they did they could buff stalkers and zealots , make main usage of sentry guardian shield. Followed by removing force field from the game and buffing Immortals.
If this happened we would see high tempo constant fighting in pvz and pvt because Protoss could go zealot stalker templar and you would see lots of trading all the time and the games would more naturally move to late game instead of like now where protoss either all inns or turtles to late game
I don't think they should remove warpgate, but it should be a later game tech. If units were rebalanced around that idea. Who knows, maybe they could even make Zealots not terrible then.
zealot/stalker/templar would get melted by banelings without forcefield.
I'd like to see them un-nerf the shield battery (massively reduced the range of early game builds... for a race that relies on catching opponents by surprise). My dream would be for them to remove the Mothership and add in Arbiters (which are already in the game, just not in competitive) as a support for lategame ground. But as with significant changes to warp-ins that's unlikely to happen.
|
Revelation of oracle could be used on itself allowing him to reveal invisibility (like i would like for sentry to help Protoss in fighting tumors and creep - which is the core/philosophy of zerg). but tweak sentry spell shield isn t great from a design persepective
|
I think the original question is impossible to answer for any of us outside of the team that worked with sc2. However, i acknowledge how the thread has progressed and turned into slightly something else.
And for me, i almost feel deflated by this point when it comes to toss. Rarely watch tourneys anymore. I know nothing will change. Not any meaningful changes. But it is interesting to see you guys who have the energy make suggestion, from a hypothetical standpoint. But apart from that, I just dont feel the same about the game anymore now, unfortunately. It is still the best game ever, but, alas, it has come to a point when it is extremely obvious that a toss win in a bigger tourney is a fun novelty.
|
On July 29 2023 00:51 QOGQOG wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2023 00:07 Drahkn wrote:
Blizzard just never had the balls to remove warpgate tech, if they did they could buff stalkers and zealots , make main usage of sentry guardian shield. Followed by removing force field from the game and buffing Immortals.
If this happened we would see high tempo constant fighting in pvz and pvt because Protoss could go zealot stalker templar and you would see lots of trading all the time and the games would more naturally move to late game instead of like now where protoss either all inns or turtles to late game I don't think they should remove warpgate, but it should be a later game tech. If units were rebalanced around that idea. Who knows, maybe they could even make Zealots not terrible then. zealot/stalker/templar would get melted by banelings without forcefield. I'd like to see them un-nerf the shield battery (massively reduced the range of early game builds... for a race that relies on catching opponents by surprise). My dream would be for them to remove the Mothership and add in Arbiters (which are already in the game, just not in competitive) as a support for lategame ground. But as with significant changes to warp-ins that's unlikely to happen.
Moving warpgate tech might be too much impact, probably adding a later game tech to buff gateway unit to the desired strength would be an alternate way.
|
And also mothership should not be pulled by viper, which makes this expensive unit totally useless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
