Revert observer nerf.
Keep current zealot speed and bring back charge damage at 4 damage and have it scale +1 per level of forge weapon upgrade.
Increase tempest damage to 55 per shot vs all targets and decrease the supply cost to 4.
Decrease carrier interceptor build time to 7 seconds or have carriers start with 6 interceptors with current 9 second build time.
Decrease void ray cost to 200/125 and give them +1 armor to start
Require 2 corrosive biles to break a forcefield.
I’m not a pro but these things seem obvious to me and I watch a ton of pro games. Implement them and you’ll see more sentry immortal play in PVZ, heavy gateway styles in PVT, and the use of tempests overall. Right now these playstyles and units are dead and need to be revived.
Do that and protoss will be fixed in this current patch.
So you want to make the most annoying unit in the game to deal with (Carriers) overpowered, AND you want to bring back the most hated, abusive playstyle in the entire history of the game (Immortal+Sentry)? Thank god Blizzard don’t listen to diamond players for advice on how to balance the game.
You talk about abusive sentry immortal stuff i say about ravager all in it still a thing while zerg too lazy break forcefield so now sentry immortal never came
If you can’t tell the difference between an annoying strategy like a ravager all-in, or an outright broken and unfair attack like the Immortal/Sentry all-in from HoTS, then you’re just lying to yourself.
Ok so 7 Protoss buffs and one Zerg nerf, with no compensation… how about no thanks? If you need that much to be competitive, then it’s a learn to play issue.
Zealot is strong now.Stalker is the unit that requires some work.
Cost and supply could be an easy thing to test, but giving them good damage numbers could end with the unit being broken
Carrier is ok, and I don’t like the idea of massed overpowered lategame air units (I dislike mass bc too) because it leads to a bad gameplay.
Could be tested.
Sounds too much of a buff to the forcefield. It’s true that sentry needs some love, but it should be done differently.
No man, the most hated thing was broodlord-infestor, or broodlord infestor (two entire eras) or swarmhost golden age.Inmortal sentry was only hated by some z players, while the units I mentioned were hated by everyone and made people leave the game and they felt way more abusive than forcefields.
The weak zealot is a major part of why PVT is so heavily Terran favored. It also in part why Terrans feel they can go heavy early rushes before higher protoss tech can hit the ground and why the zest mass gateway style is dead. Terran bio now just trades ridiculously well vs gateway units currently with the current level of kiting and drops you see in diamond and masters. A little bit of charge damage back will settle things. Best case would be getting 4 damage with +1 scaling but just a flat 4 damage would also be good.
Carriers with faster interceptor build times would still be generally useless in PVT due to emps, vikings,Marines with armor upgrades, libs, etc . you cannot underestimate the Marines with uogrades issue. By the time carriers have +1 attack often the Terran will be on +3 armor. That is why you don’t see carriers in PVT generally speaking. My proposed change would make carriers a bit stronger in PVZ but you have to understand how carrier battles in PVZ work. All that matters in a carrier battle is the first 4 seconds. You never win a carrier battle in PVZ where you win with just one Carrier left. It’s either you get crushed or they crush you. I play skytoss vs Zerg exclusively based on a vibelol build and he made the exact same comments as he was teaching skytoss. When I win I lose like one or two Carriers. When I lose, I lose them all. When you fight carriers, in general its all about the initial instantaneous damage and interceptor build time won’t change that. What it does change is the initial utility of carriers as they are coming out generally for defensive purposes. Many times you will see 6 or so carriers lose to an inferior number of mildly reinforced hydras or marines or whatever because they can’t get the interceptors out. If the situation were broodlords or battlecruisers they would stop that inferior Hydra (or marine) count. This seems grossly unfair. Currently it takes a carrier 64 seconds + 40 seconds to get to full power. How does that make any sense? Each carrier takes almost as long as a mothership to get to the full power which the unit is balanced around? Let’s be real. That’s why I said you can also keep the build time the same but just increase the starting number of interceptors. It’s mostly a defensive buff for using carriers as you are being attacked and are making them.
The sentry forcefield buff seem like it’s a lot but it’s not. Ravagers often severely outnumber sentries and have a much much faster cool down for their ability. Often for every sentry on the field there are like 3 ravagers. It doesn’t seem like a massive issue to me at all when you commonly see rapid fire biles that drop 10 at a time.
Just my thoughts. I don’t think any of these changes would make high level StarCraft OP but would fix glaring issues with the game and bring back playstyle options that have basically been nerfed to death for no good reason.
Let’s be honest here. The majority of Terrans rally and stim, the majority of Zergs surround and a-move, the majority of Protosses storm/colossus/a-move. Terran can be more difficult than Protoss, but at this point if you think it’s fair that Protoss has been receiving nerfs for the last 2 years, you are delusional.
I thought the most annoying units in the game were swarm hosts, yet they haven’t been touched since HOTS to my knowledge. I thought the most annoying strategy was GG lords and winfestors. A-move carriers were only ridiculous back when interceptors took like 5 seconds to build and the interceptors were super fast. Now? They’re slower, they take 9 seconds to build, and I think they cost more too? This goes the same for Terran too. Thors, battlecruisers, cyclones. The only thing broken Protoss has left is disruptors.
A ravager can bile every 7 seconds. Sentries need 50 energy to FF, and energy regens at 0.7875 per second. You do the math. You can bile much more than FF. If you can’t tell the difference between an annoying strategy like the current immortal/sentry all-in or an outright broken and unfair attack like the ravager all-in, then you’re just lying to yourself.
Are they buffs or are they reverting nerfs that have been imposed on Protoss over the last 2 years? Think about it.
No they aren’t. They are weaker than before. I wouldn’t say they are in a fine spot, but there are other things that need to be buffed around zealots.
No zealots aren’t, but yes to stalkers. It’s a difficult unit to balance though. On one hand, you have its importance in PVP. On the other hand, you don’t want to make them too broken because in most cases, their map presence in PVT can be insane.
Carriers aren’t okay. Going into skytoss in the late game vs. the other races is like digging your own grave unless you are significantly ahead of your opponent tech wise.
I get that I’m not a pro but in low master where I play, zealots are not at all “weak”. They perform fine as is.
Carriers are bad vs terran because marines have an easy time dealing with interceptors because of their high dps.
Carriers also don’t need a PvZ buff, if you are being attacked and making carriers then it is likely that the opponent scouted your tech choice and is abusing your early game weakness. No reason to make them have more interceptors as this will just encourage carrier rushes. Also, carriers are a late game unit and are balanced accordingly. You need to reach critical mass because carriers fly unlike hydralisk and can easily abuse terrain,
You mean revert the observer reversion that brought it back to the movement speed that it has been the entirety of sc2?
I could support buffing it again, though I feel like its already really quite fast with the move-speed research. Reverting it felt kinda out of place at the time.
Zealot charge with on hit damage was really strong before, and you want to bring it back, while also keeping the current move speed? You can’t have both. Pick one or the other. As it is, chargelots keep up with and out-run stimmed bio if I recall correctly. Adding the impact damage on top wpuld make it broken.
If you want the impact damage, you need to lose the speed buff because otherwise there is no form of counterplay whatsoever. No ability to kite or counter-micro.
No. This is a flat no.
While it doesnt do splash damage, the tempest is fairly quick for a capital ship, and has massive range, made even stronger by the fact that it is a flying unit. This is balanced by making it have lower burst damage and health.
I can support reducing the supply cost to 4, but I cannot support the increased damage without there being a direct trade off for something else. You cannot have both because quite frankly it would be absurdly broken.
Why? Carriers are niche units, sure, but they aren’t weak units. They require a critical mass to reach, but are quite strong with upgrades and support. Getting to that critical mass doesn’t need to be made easier. Furthermore, this buff directly goes against the concept that blizzard wanted to push; that being that the interceptors are both the strength and the weakness of the carrier.
While void rays are memey, frankly I don’t think making them even stronger in a cheese is going to help them, which is all this really does.
I would much rather see them have reduced cost and supply cost, but as a direct result, have less HP than they currently do.
However, void rays as a unit feel pretty one-dimensional in general, and we can agree that they do need something. I just don’t agree that your suggestions are it.
Personally I have no real issue with this, but I could see it causing issues with the Immortal Sentry All-In that used to be around in HotS.