|
I have been around on TL for a while, but I don't really post much. To introduce myself, I'm a 29 yo masters protoss player that plays and watches a lot of sc2. I am in the HotS beta and I am not satisfied with the state of protoss. I created a long post on changes that I am confident would fix all of the things that protoss players are complaining about. I wanted to get the opinion of the TL community. Keep in mind that the balance numbers can of course be adjusted. I just wanted to give some suggestions to start out trying.
I know blizz wants to work on the new units first, but when they begin to focus on the older units, this is the direction than they should take. I am limiting this discussion to old units. I am not currently satisfied with the state of the new units, but I don't want to talk about that here. This thread is about fixing the problems with WoL units. HotS doesn't have a huge effect on early game protoss and zerg, so I think these changes can be made regardless of how the new units balance out.
Changes to Protoss:
Make Warp Gate upgrade require a twilight council. Add cost to 100/100.
Increase stalker damage from 10 (+4 armored) to 15.
Make forcefield an upgrade from the twilight council for 150/150.
Reduce Colossus damage from 15(x2) to 13(x2).
Make all gateway units build times equal between warp gate and gateway:
37 for stalker (from 42/32)
33 for zealot (from 38/28)
35 for sentry (from 37/32)
Changes to Zerg:
Make Roach 1 food.
Reduce Roach hit points from 145 to 100.
Increase hydralisk hitpoints from 80 to 120.
Explanation:
The primary reason that the warp gate units are less effective than other races is the abysmal damage output of the ranged staple unit, the stalker. Increasing stalker damage to light from 10 (+4 light) to 15 to everything will help buff the gateway army throughout the game. The stalker upgrade will compensate for and be counteracted by the later upgrade requirement on forcefield, and the much later and more costly warp gate tech. Thus, I think early game matchups will remain balanced. The additional damage vs light will also give stalkers a little better damage output for worker harass, and for muta defense.
With the better stalkers, protoss players will be less reliant on forcefields in the early game. Forcefields would require an upgrade in the twilight council for the sentry now that the hallucination upgrade has been removed from the cyber core. Forcefields could still be used, they would just come a little later and require a little more gas investment as a tech path. Requiring this as an upgrade in the twilight really fits into the protoss theme of having powerful upgrades in the twilight council (one for each staple gateway unit) that significantly alter a unit's role and effectiveness. It would also make the protoss player have to choose between 3 awesome upgrades.
In order to counteract the buff to stalkers, the colossus damage is slightly reduced in order for the overall damage output of the protoss army to remain consistent in the late game.
The warp gate research requiring a twilight council and increase cost will help to delay warp gates and all the awful balance issues that go along with giving a race a counter to the defender's advantage in the early game. In response, build times between warp gates and gateways would be equalized to give protoss players better production in the gateway.
Forcing a much later warp gate upgrade at a higher cost will actually force protoss players to CHOOSE whether they want the upgrade, rather than having the upgrade be a no brainer necessity. I never understood why they would make an upgrade such a no brainer in a strategy game. Strategy games are fun because they make us think and make decisions, forgoing one thing for another. Warp gate research is the only upgrade in the game that no one has to think about. Its automatic and necessary the second the cyber finishes.
The roach and hydralisk changes are meant to reduce zerg's ability to exploit the protoss later warp gates by getting on 3 base max production too easily. On the one hand, protoss will be able to put pressure on zerg more easily because of the reduced hit points of roach and the increased damage of the stalker. On the other, protoss will not have warp gates until much later and at a higher cost. Protoss timing pushes with warp gate would automatically come at a time where the buffed hydra would be in play. The roach would still be effective for certain all-ins, early, as it would still be powerful in the open field in combination with lings early (just a little less than completely IMBA in the open field as they are right now). With the much later (or even nonexistent forcefields), I believe the reduced health version of roaches (reduced food count to 1, so hopefully no QQ from zerg!) will still be very strong in many situations. Right now, hydras still suck and roaches are imba. Why not balance this out?
These changes will add depth and choice to the game, and correct most of the things that people are currently complaining about with protoss.
|
Is this even serious? you want to locate kinda all crucial p tech in one building and make hydra and roach into the same unit, no?
|
well, it seems the blizzard is making some adjustments to protoss or at least considering them but roach to 1 supply? that is a bad idea even with the hp nerf. Zerg have tons of resources banked already late game and being able to add that many more roaches to hit expansions and speed around is too much
|
I'm having a hard time seeing how you defend any early game pressure without forcefield. Do you plan on making 3 cannons per forge FE just in case of a baneling bust?
Then, how does Zerg deal with the Stalker in the late game? We can agree that Ultralisk are never a unit you want against protoss, so Broodlord tech is the way to go. Unfortunately BLs are slow and can be effectively countered by going around them. This is a scenario you might very well be familiar with: Zerg v Protoss mid to late game is usually a struggle for Zerg to get broodlord tech to counter the 3 base deathball, and Zerg is usually somewhat low on bases (4-5). When Broodlords are out, so much food is into BL and Corruptors that there is no 'quick' army to take care of Stalkers just running around and sniping your bases while broodlord slowwly push across the map. After doing that Protoss need only kill your army once to force the GG. A Stalker buff would make this even worse in my mind.
Don't get me wrong, I think the protoss design is terrible and I hate it, but I'm not entirely sure about your changes. In general I don't think it's very fair that protoss can almost never be out of position due to warp in. Warp in also negates the defensive advantage of non-protoss players, which is crucial for balance. Finally, force field ensures protoss still has a good defensive advantage. As for unit composition, a large amount of stalkers with a good collosi count effectively counters everything in the zerg arsenal with the exception of the large Broodlord/Infestor army. This is sooooo boring for both races.
|
On October 15 2012 02:01 CYFAWS wrote:
Is this even serious? you want to locate kinda all crucial p tech in one building and make hydra and roach into the same unit, no?
I'm not sure how making roach 1 supply and reducing the HP to compensate makes them the same unit? Hydra would be a little beefier in HP, have still have higher DPS than roach, would still be able to shoot air, and cost two supply. Hydras would also be light armor. Roach would be only 1 supply, less beefy, and armored. Their roles wouldn't be too much different than they currently are now. Roach would still be strong early without FF, and the 1 supply cost would retain their strength on late game split army raids. Hydras would simply be beefier so they would actually be useful.
Also, regarding locating all crucial tech on one tech path, I disagree. First of all, warp gate would be less crucial on defense since the build times would be equivalent. Forcefield COULD be moved as a cyber core upgrade, but I like the idea of having the twilight council have one upgrade for each core gateway unit and also delaying the forcefield even more than it is currently. Saying that all crucial tech paths would be located in the twilight is a huge over reaction. However, the twilight council would increase in importance. Robo and twilight would each be critical. Blizzard would then have to figure out how to make stargate equally critical in importance so that protoss players would continue to have real choices.
|
On October 15 2012 02:13 SuperYo1000 wrote:
well, it seems the blizzard is making some adjustments to protoss or at least considering them but roach to 1 supply? that is a bad idea even with the hp nerf. Zerg have tons of resources banked already late game and being able to add that many more roaches to hit expansions and speed around is too much
Giving stalkers more power early and reducing roach power I believe is going to balance the matchup so that zerg isn't going to be able to max drone on 3 bases before building many units. Protoss will be able to have some strong early pushes to harass zerg and prevent them from developing that huge bank.
That being said, late game roaches will get a buff if the zerg is running on infinite resources. Zerg will be able to use roach as a late game harass unit in the way that you have described, and I don't think that that is necessarily a bad thing. I'm all for increasing harass potential. However, early game the roach is actually nerfed by roughly 1/3 reduction in hit points for the same resource cost.
Keep in mind, that the roach nerf in HP is not going to be a problem for early game zerg because things like the 4 gate would no longer exist until much later.
|
On October 15 2012 02:15 Steel wrote:
I'm having a hard time seeing how you defend any early game pressure without forcefield. Do you plan on making 3 cannons per forge FE just in case of a baneling bust?
Then, how does Zerg deal with the Stalker in the late game? We can agree that Ultralisk are never a unit you want against protoss, so Broodlord tech is the way to go. Unfortunately BLs are slow and can be effectively countered by going around them. This is a scenario you might very well be familiar with: Zerg v Protoss mid to late game is usually a struggle for Zerg to get broodlord tech to counter the 3 base deathball, and Zerg is usually somewhat low on bases (4-5). When Broodlords are out, so much food is into BL and Corruptors that there is no 'quick' army to take care of Stalkers just running around and sniping your bases while broodlord slowwly push across the map. After doing that Protoss need only kill your army once to force the GG. A Stalker buff would make this even worse in my mind.
Don't get me wrong, I think the protoss design is terrible and I hate it, but I'm not entirely sure about your changes. In general I don't think it's very fair that protoss can almost never be out of position due to warp in. Warp in also negates the defensive advantage of non-protoss players, which is crucial for balance. Finally, force field ensures protoss still has a good defensive advantage. As for unit composition, a large amount of stalkers with a good collosi count effectively counters everything in the zerg arsenal with the exception of the large Broodlord/Infestor army. This is sooooo boring for both races.
I don't think early pressure is going to be a problem with my changes. I think that the stalker buff, the build time buff early out of gateways, and the roach nerf combined will allow protoss to deal with early pressure against zerg.
Same with terran. Forcefields are by no means necessary against terran early pressure, especially with the new MScore. Stalker damage buff will also help out against early terran pressure.
I don't think that my 15 damage change to stalker is going to have a huge effect in late game zerg compositions. This is literally a 1 point damage upgrade to stalkers against armored (they were already 14 damage before). Stalkers would get a 5 point damage buff vs hyrda, but hydras would be getting a 40 hit point buff keep in mind.
One problem that COULD happen I would imagine is baneling bust allins. Stalkers would be a little stronger vs lings. I'm not sure the timing on this but it would have to be looked at if something like this was every implemented. I think that good building placement, a few extra cannons, and the hallucination spell coming with the sentry (so you can scout it) will be enough to allow protoss players to respond to baneling allins.
|
Not gateway units have to be fixed - but warpgate mechanics should be fixed.
|
On October 15 2012 07:40 thetaoptimus wrote:
Not gateway units have to be fixed - but warpgate mechanics should be fixed.
I'm not really suggesting changing much to gateway units except a slight buff +1 attack for stalkers vs everything, and +4 more to stalkers vs light. Check out the thread by kcdc to see why stalkers need this damage buff.
Warp gate is the biggest problem in the early game where the defender's advantage matters most. Mid to late game, the warp gate is less of a problem. Making warp gates come later will fix most of the problems that warp gates cause, and still allow cool mid or late game warp in harass strategies, etc.
|
I have been testing this sort of thing making balance changes in map editor I made stalkers have noted bonus to light and removed their armor bonus. This is amazing and I love it stalkers just feel better to use while roaches and marauders become much more effective against them.
I also buffed zealot shields to 60 and gave them a very minor speed buff. This makes zealots tougher early and lets them catch stalkers/roaches/marauders if not microed well.
I then raised roach a lair upgrade to increase armor by one, give them a minor increase in life regen, and slightly faster burrow speed (note: this becomes available after burrow movement upgrade). Hydra movement speed buffed (very minor) buffed range by one so with the range upgrade they have 7 range(and minor life regen rate and buffed health to 90 thinking of raising that to 100 but probably not higher. Hydra range is at Hive and added speed at lair.
These changes make early 4 gates not as effective if they get a spine, extra queen or roaches.
Lings are not quite as effective (not yet been an issue) but I am considering buffs/lair upgrades.
To terran I buffed siege tanks damage in siege mode but extended siege deployment time makes them better positionaly but much worse if caught unsieged. Marauders being much more effective against stalkers causes marauders to shine but zealots with the shields buff counter this nicely. I also made the energy upgrade to Bcs increase movement speed and slightly raised their ground attack making battlecruisers more viable(but i also made them a bit more expensive but now it is worth it)
To address the issue of gateway warpgate problem rather then delay warpgate I made two gateway only units. That are unlocked in the twilight council, and to make the stargate a bigger contender I made voids faster but reduced their life and shields by 50 respectively, while scaling damage slightly (stronger initial charge but less over all increase but still more damage over all) this has been better then I had ever expected making voidray phoenix very effective but not a 1a group and they are not persistent alone.
Back to the two new units
The first is a high front end damage unit with passive(constant) shield regen and a large shield bank. It has bonus damage to structures and is rather durable over all. It forces players to keep units around for defense because these things eat up buildings rather quickly (I refer to them as raiders rather then harass) I am adding raiding units to every race to force this kind of response but in early game it acts as an anti marauder/roach/stalker unit having bonus to armor so it tends to support your army very well in skirmishes and on the defense but dose poorly in large or drawln out engagments.
The second is a heavy slow unit with 2 armor on shields and a large cone aoe (and counts as massive) It kills light units slowly and has a large-ish bonus to armor and a large bonus to massive. For early game defense if you have a ramp this thing can hold 3-1 but in the open field it tends to lag behind and losses most of its effectiveness.
These changes make warpgate not a must and give reasons to keep gateways around or switch back and forth (and if I forgot to mention this I made gateways production equal to warpgate(current) slowed warpgate production speed and added an upgrade at twilight for faster production with warpgate meaning early pushes with warpgate are weaker but not overly so just about 20-30 seconds later but this gives time for scouting and getting units up
I am still working on it V0.1.02 Right now but it is looking promising
Feedback is appreciated If you have concerns ideas ect please share :D (This isn't all the changes I have made just a few)
|
Azreal, it seems you put a lot of work into your map, but I just think its highly unlikely that blizzard is going to make so many changes (adding new units etc). My proposal offered a few simple changes that would have a huge impact on the feel of playing the race. I'm not removing units, I'm not adding new units, I'm not changing damage to much (other than the stalker buff). I'm really not making too many changes other than making later and more costly warp gate and forcefield in exchange for a stalker buff. For that reason, I think a change like I've suggested is a much more plausible approach.
|
The zerg ideas are too over the top. 1 supply roach is far too much for a tier 1 unit, even with reduced health. And the hydralisks issue has never been its hp or damage, but its speed. Making them significantly beefier doesn't solve the issue, it just makes the unit a higher hp snail.
What you suggest for Protoss would be akin to making all factory research require an armory, or all barracks research require a ghost academy, as well as doubling the cost of these upgrades. Or even better yet, making the repair ability of a bunker a researched ability on a factory tech lab. You're forcing toss down a tech path, which is what blizzard and most Protoss players are specifically trying to avoid in the HotS beta.
Stalker damage buff is too over the top in my ind. 50% extra damage is far too much. Considering the high mobility of stalkers once they have blink and the strength of blink all-in, I doubt a damage buff is even necessary. Blink stalkers do fine against roaches, but get annihilated by marauders. And most of that is simply related to the micro-reducing concussive shells. Once marauder has concussive shells, there is no turning back. You engage and you either win or die. You can't retreat and you can't micro units out of it. Marauder is fine otherwise; concussive shell needs a rework. Maybe reduces opposition's armor or reduces attack speed, but movement speed is too hard of a counter.
Your Forcefield idea is absolutely absurd. I would urge you to really try and hold a 2 rax or 3 rax or any terran aggression earlier than the 9 minute mark without forcefields. You also remove any chance of destroying any bunkers because protoss can't prevent repair. In addition, zerg will completely roll over toss before forcefields come out, with just a moderate amount of roaches and/or lings. 1 supply roaches means less minerals spent on overlords which leads to more roaches. You basically destroy any toss early aggression and any toss early defense with these two changes. People dislike the turtle style already, these changes makes protoss turtle even harder and be less successful at it.
Nerf Collosus damage? How TvP Biased are you being right now? I'm sorry, but each and every one of these protoss changes sounds exactly like Terran whine. The Collosus needs a mobility change more than a damage change. However, of all your proposals, this is at least semi-reasonable.
There are two concerns to Warpgate. The very initial warp-in after research finishes, leading to warpgate timings, and the reinforcement warp-in. Your change adresses neither concern. The warp-in timing will just be later according to when the gate finishes, and with units building at a faster rate out of gateways than before, the all-in timing will be deadlier. It also doesn't solve the late game advantage of having tons of gateways and a power source nearby, and being able to warp in whatever I'd like.
Simply put, these are way too over the top to be viable. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
