EPTwhy is psi storm weaker now? - Page 3
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
Probe.
United States877 Posts
| ||
|
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
Since this is starting to sound like the classic "HTs suck; just get Colossi" argument (from some people -- not everyone), I'll go ahead and post this link, as if you're getting any useful information out of this thread, then the HT/Colossi thread would be helpful to read: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128792 My opinion on storm is essentially that, just because 1 HT can't kill 10 Hydras doesn't mean they suck, because 1 Storm followed by 3-4 Zealots can, since if a storm lands for full damage, the Zealots can 1shot all the Hydras. Basically I think that storms, rather than being used for huge mass slaughter (basically like they were in BW), they should be used in SC2 as a support spell, used to weaken enemy units, thereby making your own significantly more cost-effective. | ||
|
chocoed
United States398 Posts
You never played since week one huh? Tanks were much underused and less cost-effective prior to the one patch (I forgot which #) that fixed tanks splash. Marauders cost-effectiveness led it to be highly preferred over tanks. | ||
Liquid`Jinro
Sweden33719 Posts
On June 09 2010 14:57 daewdasd wrote: I think storms in SCBw and Sc2 a pretty much equal. In SCBW they were dealing massive damage but really hard to cast. In SC2 there damage is ok but even silver players can cover the whole screen with a blanket of storms. Also Unita clump togehter much more, but units move in SC2 generally a bit faster then in SCBW. So in the end storms are as godd as they were before, but in SC2 has with the collosus a good alternative to storms, while reaver in SCBW were most of the time more a harrass unit then a good support for your army. With magic boxes, storms were never that hard to cast. Storms are kinda shitty now, I would really not mind them being better (and I play Terran) :/ | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
That also goes for Psionic Storm. What should be happening is a move away from high dps and an emphasis on high damage. Colossi attack speed has been raised for higher attack speed, Tanks fire faster than before, Psionic Storm has higher dps for less total damage, and there are very few high-risk high-reward units anymore. Units should be clearly divided into two types to make a good, Starcraft-like rts: High burst damage units and high damage-per-second units. High dps units should have the lowest durability, and high burst damage units should have more durability or be more micro-dependent. Units like these simply don't exist anymore. Zerglings have nerfed dps, Marines and Marauders have high dps AND durability for some reason, Tanks have higher dps and attack smarter with less burst damage, units like the Colossus and High Templar have higher dps attack when they SHOULD be burst damage units, and the list goes on. If you look at the way units have changed over time, Blizzard has favored higher dps over higher burst damage time and time again, which goes against Starcraft's style. *by easier I mean less reliant on micro. I don't think the game is balanced around micro, which is fatal design flaw for a game like Starcraft if you ask me. | ||
|
DooMDash
United States1015 Posts
Did you miss the days when this happened? Do you think that Blizzard gave them +10 hp for no reason what so ever? I remember all the time when people thought tanks sucked. I think it was just the fact that Marine Marauder was much easier to win with at that time... and more people didn't realize the counter to it yet. As for Storm, its pretty good, but I also wouldn't mind it being better. I almost think being able to click on the target would make it slightly better. | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On June 09 2010 17:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: With magic boxes, storms were never that hard to cast. Storms are kinda shitty now, I would really not mind them being better (and I play Terran) :/ They need to make it get closer to killing more units, i know hydras don't have speed and are pretty fucked and mis microed rines dine in bundles, but storm should be more useful then that. Only issue is how do you deal more damage do you make it last longer but have the same dps, give it more dps? give it a wider area? Making them stackable would be interesting imo. Mostly what i miss is the ability to take out tanks with storms. | ||
|
Radiomouse
Netherlands209 Posts
Every T thought tanks sucked pre patch 13. Mostly because they were to busy spamming marine marauder, but there were a lot of terrans saying that tanks were "just not worth it". In my opinion a good idea for the high templar storm would be to make it a bigger area, longer uptime and lower dps, this way you reward players for actually getting out of storm instead of just staying in because it is going to be over in 3 seconds anyway. Oh and they could remove the dark shrine again so that you can make dark templar and high templar after you've made your templar archives. | ||
|
KinosJourney2
Sweden1811 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:16 jacen wrote: make it range 8 (or even 9) so these slow ass mofos don't have to travel ages to cast the storm. really, that annoys me the most about storm. currently storm is at range 6 which is just as much as upgraded hydras. I've never thought about it until now, Storm DOES have a pretty bad range. They should make storm range 7 or 8 so they don't get picked off so fast in combat, people also gotta stop seeing storm as a unit killer like it was in SC1. Think of it as a way to soften up the enemy units. Feedback is also amazing vs Thors and Battlecruisers (and Motherships). On June 09 2010 17:44 FrozenArbiter wrote: With magic boxes, storms were never that hard to cast. Storms are kinda shitty now, I would really not mind them being better (and I play Terran) :/ I wouldn't want a stronger storm, with the current lag on battle.net your Marine/Marauder ball will take heavy damage before they get away from the storm. If they make the damage 80x3 or 3.5 seconds instead of 80x4 seconds it would also be OK. Either that or making the storm radius a bit bigger. | ||
|
Smu
Serbia164 Posts
Storm is just weaker in SC2. You can no longer rely on it to devastate the opponent's army alone with a few zealots and dragoons thrown in. There was simply no unit Zerg had until ultralisk that wasn't annihilated by a well thrown storm. Now it's just a counter for 2 or 3 units in the game. It can be decent enough versus mmm, but Ts don't really do pure barracks that often anymore. Also HTs look kinda gay now, like giant toys. And the storm graphic looks awful as well. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
On June 09 2010 17:54 semantics wrote: They need to make it get closer to killing more units, i know hydras don't have speed and are pretty fucked and mis microed rines dine in bundles, but storm should be more useful then that. Only issue is how do you deal more damage do you make it last longer but have the same dps, give it more dps? give it a wider area? Making them stackable would be interesting imo. Mostly what i miss is the ability to take out tanks with storms. Higher dps is not the answer. Lower dps in exchange for higher maximum damage would help the game by encouraging army control and micro because storms would be more dodge-able. Colossi also need higher burst damage at longer intervals, Sieged Tanks should have higher burst damage at longer intervals, and units overall need to be more split between burst damage and high damage per second. Right now, this is not the case. Min/maxing and specialization has always produced more interesting gameplay than homogenization ever has. EDIT: Storm does 80 over 4 sec. That's 20 dps. It should be more along the lines of 110 over 8 seconds, in packets of 10 damage in a radius of 2 or 2.5. That's 13.75 dps. With these stats, it would take 4 seconds to kill a marine and 6 seconds to kill a Hydralisk. What will this accomplish? Storms will be more dangerous, but it will enable Terran to Stimpack out of the Storm radius rather than be completely eaten up by Psionic Storm, and it will encourage Zerg players to be more careful about laying creep to dodge Psionic Storms. In other words, it will create more emphasis on army control. | ||
|
zephon
France26 Posts
One single storm can only crush several units : marines, zerglings (if they stay quiet) and workers (Remember in BW you could shoot a lurker with a single storm!). Storm now comes in late Tier 3, while fungus is Tier 2 and the dreadful ravaging EMP comes in Tier 1.5. EMP is more and more common in PvT and completly disable HTs (feedback is supposed to counter ghosts, but ghosts are hard to snipe in a middle of a marine ball and EMP range is bigger than both storm and feedback) However HTs are fine as they are : feedback is great (especially VS many terran units) and make them more versatile than in BW I guess. | ||
|
zomgzergrush
United States923 Posts
Storm in sc2 also deals all of its damage in a shorter amount of time, = less time to dodge. Given players keeping an eye on their units and actively dodging, you'd need two storms in both SC1 and SC2 to take out a group of hydras. Not to mention there is NO MORE SPEED UPGRADE for hydras in SC2. I feel that more units are beight caught in SC2 though due to the no-gap-between-units-whatsoever policy that the units follow, even if you try splitting them apart they clump right back together immediately. This is rather overlooked as well. If there is one additional unit that manages to get caught in the storm, the storm is doing 80 additional damage. Splash science 101. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
Perhaps it lasts a bit too long. Maybe exactly 100 damage over 6 seconds at 2 radius would be more appropriate. In any case, the exact numbers might have to be ironed out, but I think a stronger storm with lower dps would benefit the game micro-wise. Original Suggestion: + Show Spoiler + Storm does 80 over 4 sec. That's 20 dps. It should be more along the lines of 110 over 8 seconds, in packets of 10 damage in a radius of 2 or 2.5. That's 13.75 dps. With these stats, it would take 4 seconds to kill a marine and 6 seconds to kill a Hydralisk. | ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
It was much easier to take a bunch of mutas and snipe HT. But mutas could be killed by same storm and Archon guardians. Muta sniping could cost too much to be worth it. Anyways, in SC2 with smart casting and hydras being weaker I find storm really powerful and useful. I actually lost more games as Zerg to storm then to colossi. Yes, roaches are more resistant to storm but Zerg has no chance to defeat toss only with roaches. Storm his hydras and then faceroll the roaches. | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
You have to build a lot of queens way before the protoss actually builds his templars, so if you make too much he can simply skip templars and overwhelm your crappy ground army and if you make too little, he'll storm the shit out of you anyway. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:42 Monkeyz_Rule wrote: Storm in SC1 also didn't have a cooldown, so you could often cast 2-3 storms with a single high templar as quickly as you could casting 1 storm from each with smartcasting. Meanwhile the enemy has infinite select making it far easier to dodge the less damaging storm. However I think the ability to warp in and immediately cast storm anywhere you have power is incredibly useful, the only problem is surviving the huge investment needed to get that far into the tech tree without dieing or falling behind in expos. I think that problem would be taken care of if they just got rid of the Dark Shrine... Storm in SC1 had a cooldown. | ||
|
FortuneSyn
1826 Posts
| ||
|
WiljushkA
Serbia1416 Posts
| ||
|
Kuzmorgo
Hungary1058 Posts
In the beginning no one built tanks... Only marine marauder medivac. | ||
| ||
