|
On April 22 2011 18:09 Zaphid wrote: I don't think this is something that should be fixed
Do you really enjoy watching/playing 4 gate pvp that much? I mean I would love it too be fixed because then maybe pvp wouldn't be so lame to watch.
|
I honestly think the best solution to the 4-gate issue would be removing the ability to warp in units over the pylon's altitude. In other words, you would no longer be able to "cliff-warp" units, possibly making double gas openings much more feasible on maps with a narrow ramp.
Sentries would actually be able to hold off 4 gate aggression by allowing the defender to decide how he would like to split the aggressor's army, instead of being forced to face the 4 zealot warp over the force field, which is quite difficult to deal with in the early stages of a 4-gate battle.
Granted, as I've indirectly stated, this obviously will not work on maps such as Tal'Darim or Scrap Station, but I don't want to see the 4-gate removed entirely. I, personally, consider 4-gate to be quite entertaining when it's more of an exception rather than the rule.
|
On April 22 2011 17:46 Mailing wrote: Suggested this weeks ago and people said it was a stupid idea =/
Gateways already SHOULD make units faster than warpgates.
Warpgates should make units SLOWER because it has instant reinforcements. This would allow protoss to even play a macro gateway style where they never even get warpgates because they build units faster off gateways and can defend easier, but cannot be super aggressive.
Forgive my old, withered brood war heart, but I too like this idea a lot. Given that you still can turn gateways into warpgates and back again, gives you the option of changing around. It adds a choice of style and a tactical dimension of when to use gateways and when to convert them into warpgates for forward/offensive reinforcement.
|
I'm surprised Warp Gates aren't lategame tech in the first place, considering it nullifies rush distances completely. That's a pretty serious effect that they gotta balance totally around.
Also i don't think anything is going to straight up fix PvP. It'll just change to another 1 main strategy, i think it's the nature of this matchup. It's not like theres heavily positional based play like TvT... there's almost no defenders advantage, so it's going to equal a mirror matchup thats very edgy and players only sticking to one thing lest they fall behind slightly in units by teching and get run over. You need some element like a shield battery or something? Really doubt they will add anything in the game now though, but it's desperately needing something for the defender.
|
I think the best fix ive heard was by -orb- who said units should warp in slower depending on the distance from a friendly nexus... just a half second every 50 range or so could be a huge buff to defenders advantage in equal footing battles. I dont see this affecting anything other than a 4 gate rush in a PvP if anyone has a feasible scenario to argue against that statement plaease respond cause i think the fix -orb- suggested is perfect. Now lets get blizzard to hear it?
|
So with this change you could basically sit on gateways when macroing up at home, get units faster than before, and then once you push out you just morph them into warpgates. I don't like the sound of that.
|
I would love to see something like a second nexus is required for warp gate, or the build time increased by like 150 seconds, to make 4 warpgate no longer ridiculous in all matchups. And of course, compensate by making gateways better!
|
Units warping in should take 50% or so more damage while warping in. I think this will considerable reduce, pylon in your base warp-in strats that make 4 gate so much stronger than gateways.
|
It's cool that Blizz is looking into PvP.
I'm not really going to think about specifics until it's on PTR, though. I'm sure Blizz is trying all sorts of wacky things, and that was just the wacky thing they were working on at the time the blue poster said it.
Blizz also said they were looking at the Colo, but that they don't like completely messing with a race all at once.
My patch 1.4 prediction: Warp Gate Nerf, Gateway Buff, Corrupter buff to indirectly nerf Colossi.
I'll say that Stalkers/Sentries will build notably faster in a gateway, but maybe not Zealots (because Proxy zealots would be two strong).
|
On April 22 2011 18:11 Inori wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2011 18:04 Treadmill wrote:On April 22 2011 18:01 Mastermind wrote: I dont even mind pvp anymore. I learned to deal with the 4gate and move the game into the mid game. Really... then.... wow. You need to get in touch with MC, KiWiKaKi, and every pro out there... 'Cause if you know how to do this, that's something nobody else knows. They lose because they take risks. Reliable ways of stopping 4wg are around for 3-4 months now, you just need to know where to look. You actually believe that? Gah. 4 gate is in almost every pro PvP because there is no easy answer. If there was somebody like White-Ra (who's on the record disliking the 4gate) would do it every game and win all his PvPs. There are no reliable ways to stop a 4 gate PvP, at all. Not and survive if your opponent does anything else.
|
The only thing that would fix PvP is something that would make it possible for early expand builds to survive against any non-cheese one base play.
I just don't see it happening anytime soon.
|
On April 22 2011 18:13 GinNtoniC wrote:Show nested quote +On April 22 2011 17:46 Mailing wrote: Suggested this weeks ago and people said it was a stupid idea =/
Gateways already SHOULD make units faster than warpgates.
Warpgates should make units SLOWER because it has instant reinforcements. This would allow protoss to even play a macro gateway style where they never even get warpgates because they build units faster off gateways and can defend easier, but cannot be super aggressive. Forgive my old, withered brood war heart, but I too like this idea a lot. Given that you still can turn gateways into warpgates and back again, gives you the option of changing around. It adds a choice of style and a tactical dimension of when to use gateways and when to convert them into warpgates for forward/offensive reinforcement. I agree with this greatly.
It's annoying to see the "Morph to Gateway" button on Warpgates when currently there is absolutely no advantage for this ability considering the strength of Warpgates. Adding a bit of choice to the style of your production cycle would add some interesting depth to the game.
|
If they break 4gate they better provide another way to pressure Zerg around the same timing.. otherwise Zerg is just going to be even more powerful than they already are. Without the fear of a 4gate you can say goodbye to 3gate expand and similar builds which rely on Zerg making some sort of minimal defence against the threat of a 4gate.
Also am I the only one who finds it mind boggling that they nerfed zealot rush (2 gating) so quickly (A build which was easy to stop if you just went pool first), yet 6 pool (a build which is currently almost unstoppable on 4 player maps if you arn't lucky with scouting (66% win rate..) and is still very hard to stop on short rush distances(look how successful actionjesus was against pros)) is still in the game?
|
instead of decreasing the build time on regular gateways I would rather have them increase the warp in time for all gateway units(like 8s instead of about 3s). While this doesnt necessarily fix PvP it still keeps balence in each matchup and makes things like zealot warp-ins on the high ground less effective, which is how people get broken most of the time
|
I'm sorry but i remember blizzard saying they want to make minor adjusments each patch and see how the community and game develops by itself. HOW Is it that adjusting game mechanics, removing CRUCIAL upgrades, rather than giving units say +1 range or some 'minor' change they said they would.
Btw, they already nerfed the zealot build time, so they're actually gonna go BACK on their change!? wtf?
|
Sounds like a nerf to protoss vs the other races or overpowered 2gate zealot rushes, both of which don't seem too appealing. I really hope it turns out well, but its hard to remain optimistic, I suppose I should be glad they aren't just removing the upgrade all together.
|
On April 22 2011 18:14 sicarii wrote: I think the best fix ive heard was by -orb- who said units should warp in slower depending on the distance from a friendly nexus... just a half second every 50 range or so could be a huge buff to defenders advantage in equal footing battles. I dont see this affecting anything other than a 4 gate rush in a PvP if anyone has a feasible scenario to argue against that statement plaease respond cause i think the fix -orb- suggested is perfect. Now lets get blizzard to hear it?
So if i make a proxy nexus, it will warp in faster :O The problem with that is that it would get very complicated to time attacks. A slight distance change would alter the warp in times, and i would many times be on the dark about how much time it will warp in in that location, unless i had to know by heart the map locations and warp in times. I think it would overcomplicate the matter.
I liked the idea of gateways actually making units faster than warpgates. Let's say you are attacking, you get warpgates. Defending? Change back to gateways (changing back to gateways is for sure one of the least used buttons in the game!). Of course not all defenses would be equal like drops, or any other that requires warp in in a specific place, but for early all ins, where the push comes from one direction it could be a good change.
|
I predict a sudden fall in the number of protosses from diamond and platinum. Farewell fourgaters!
Many zergs will unscrew champagne bottles the day this patch is implemented.
|
Can't they make a requirement for warpgate research being robotics facility or something. This way the crazy early rushes get denied a bit, but protosss still get the advantage of warp ins later on. Think this would be an easier to implement fix, without having to much impact on any matchups and reduce the 4gate madness
|
The idea of warpgates going slower definitely makes sense. Gives a defenders advantage without too significant changes.
|
|
|
|