EPTwhy is psi storm weaker now?
| Forum Index > Closed |
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
love1another
United States1844 Posts
| ||
|
frozenkatkiller
United States168 Posts
You make a good point about the units bunching up though, but storms do not stack so the only difference is you would need less storms to cover the same amount of army. | ||
|
KiWiKaKi
Canada691 Posts
| ||
|
Licmyobelisk
Philippines3682 Posts
| ||
|
prototype.
Canada4200 Posts
Also I've been told the storm radius has been severely reduced. I dunno.. I play terran in sc2. | ||
|
daewdasd
Germany64 Posts
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. | ||
|
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
Also, Colossus outclass High Templar for Storm in almost every way. The only way HTs with Storm are better than Colossus, is that HTs can't get killed by Vikings in the Air, or by Corruptors. | ||
Excalibur_Z
United States12235 Posts
On June 09 2010 14:50 zhul4nder wrote: I don't see why people say that psi storm is weaker now than it was in sc1. Since the units bunch up like no other in sc2 compared to sc1, wouldn't it mean that sc2 would have a stronger psi storm? Multiple reasons: 1) It literally is weaker, 80 damage instead of 112 (Pre-1.08 it used to be 128!). 2) Many units have much higher hp. Marines have 45 (55). Marauders and Roaches have over 100 and are very early game units. It's still decent because units bunch up tighter than in BW, but it's not the powerhouse it used to be. 3) Smartcasting makes Storm much easier to spam precisely. In BW you either had to position your Templar strategically before casting so that their storms wouldn't overlap when you issued a command with multiple Templar, or you had to quickly individually storm different areas. In SC2 you just T click T click T click T click, and this is even faster with Shift-queuing. | ||
|
nitdkim
1264 Posts
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
The biggest reason why storm is considered so much weaker in SC2 than in SC1 is because despite the introduction of smart-casting, the reduced radius of storm requires more castings of storm in order to achieve the same blanket effect you saw in SC1. Additionally, there are many units with the HP capacity to tank storms. In SC1, lack of micro out of storm is absolutely detrimental, whereas in SC2, oftentimes players, whether Zerg, Terran, or even Protoss, can just ignore the storm and just tank it. Additionally, the very small radius of storm makes it extremely easy to dodge, even with smartcast. As a result, storms end up doing a lot less damage and make a smaller impact in battles overall when compared to SC1. I agree that storm needed to be nerfed from its SC1 incarnation due to smartcasting. However, I feel like they over-nerfed it. It's still strong and viable, but Protoss has many other options that are often better (i.e. Colossus) due to a more reliable damage output. | ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
| ||
|
Despotic
United States10 Posts
| ||
|
Sentenal
United States12398 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:05 blade55555 wrote: Storm is weaker in damage but I don't get this non sense of "storm sucks" when in pvt I see it do good and I think its severly under rated pvz but I would much rather face storm then colossi. Just my opinion on it and as far as I am concerned P's can keep thinking it sucks makes it predictable what their doing and don't have to worry about it :D. Like you said, you would rather face storm than colossi. So, why would it matter if you can predict the fact that they are going to do something that you would rather not face? Because predict it or not, you would much rather have storm out, than colossi. | ||
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
jacen
Austria3644 Posts
really, that annoys me the most about storm. currently storm is at range 6 which is just as much as upgraded hydras. | ||
|
aznhockeyboy16
United States558 Posts
| ||
|
-Archangel-
Croatia7457 Posts
| ||
|
Doko
Argentina1737 Posts
I don't agree with hydrass being able to take a full hit and still have 1 hp left though. | ||
|
prototype.
Canada4200 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:16 aznhockeyboy16 wrote: It's like how everyone thought tanks sucked at the beginning. The stats are worse, the cost to get it is more, and although the game has changed to make it still viable, there are other options available to a player who wants the I'm gonna crush large swaths of troops simultaneously effect. What? Who thought tanks sucked? | ||
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
Ryuu314
United States12679 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:19 -Archangel- wrote: Another reason for weaker storm are less and more expensive Zerg units. This storm already kills hydras like crazy, but a stronger storm would be too much. Zerg no longer has T1.5 75/25 1 supply hydra that he can spam like crazy and leave to die in storm because there are already 20 more coming. With the state of Zerg units storm cannot get more powerful, especially since Zerg has no direct counter to it like it does for a Colossi. In SCBW it had spawn Broodling. No one ever used spawn brooding to counter storm. It was possible, but rarely (if ever) used. The counter to storm in SC1 was micro and muta-micro. Not spawn broodling. Storms don't kill hydras in 1 hit even if they just sit in it and that's a pretty big disadvantage for storm. Additionally, roaches are a very good counter to storm. If a Zerg just switches over to roaches or an even roach/hydra composition, storm tech becomes practically worthless simply because roaches have so much hp. Additionally, storm is not like tanks in that tanks actually received multiple buffs in response to its resource nerfs. Not only was the AI improved, but the damage was jacked up by a LOT. Tanks now do a flat 50 damage to everything, whereas in SC1 zealots and other small units could withstand tank fire pretty well. Storm was buffed in terms of UI through smartcasting, but it was also nerfed in damage AND radius. The cost is still the same as SC1 and so the potential of smartcasting in blanketing the battlefield in storm is quite nullified as it takes more storms to cover the same area and do the same total damage, while the resource cost has not been changed at all (the cooldown time also hurts that but it's not as big an issue). In high level play with good macro, it is very unlikely that the Protoss player will have enough high templar to utilize the potential of smartcasting. @ zhul4nder: That would be a good strategy (FF+storm) except for the fact that both sentries and HTs cost an insane amount of gas. In order to get enough sentries and HTs to pull off a force field block along with storm would require a prohibitively large amount of gas. Additionally, in that orb vod, he (orb) was very ahead in army size and could've won without the cute FF surround and storm. | ||
|
RoieTRS
United States2569 Posts
just vs protoss because they have chargelots and blikstalkers and immortals and every unit P makes are really good vs tanks. | ||
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
nujgnoy
United States204 Posts
| ||
|
squintz
Canada217 Posts
| ||
|
Neon_Monkey
United States270 Posts
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... | ||
|
YoureFired
United States822 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:15 zhul4nder wrote: I guess storm can still be used as a pushing measure against zerg. As you storm, they run back and you push forward. But one thing though...I have yet to see amazing play with storm and FF. trapping units and storming was the first thing i thought would start happening when sc2 was coming out. I haven't see that happen yet in pro videos :S Two casters makes things a lot more hectic, especially when were so used to simply having to Fspam or Tspam | ||
|
SLChem
United States6 Posts
| ||
|
Phootaba
Sweden28 Posts
6range for storm is a bit weak imo, like someone said, hydras can have 6 range :< The second is that storm have a lot larger animation then the area of effect. Storm have some 1.5 radious if I recall correctly. But the animation seems to have 2-2.5 radious. That just seems stupid to me. They could shrink the thor accordigly, why can't they shrink the storm? | ||
|
zhul4nder
United States189 Posts
| ||
|
ZnAkE
Denmark6 Posts
| ||
|
Merikh
United States918 Posts
 . I think orb was the only person who only used just sentry's and high templars (That's when he started to get known for his rage).@Znake - no they don't stack Personally I think the sentry play had a huge role in the change. As you can see in that video. Sentry's also had a roll in the mothership nerf that "removed" forcefields when in present. (Because of the whole Forcefield around the vortex then collosus rape the bunched up ball) | ||
|
PhiliBiRD
United States2643 Posts
| ||
|
blade55555
United States17423 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:19 -Archangel- wrote: Another reason for weaker storm are less and more expensive Zerg units. This storm already kills hydras like crazy, but a stronger storm would be too much. Zerg no longer has T1.5 75/25 1 supply hydra that he can spam like crazy and leave to die in storm because there are already 20 more coming. With the state of Zerg units storm cannot get more powerful, especially since Zerg has no direct counter to it like it does for a Colossi. In SCBW it had spawn Broodling. Will I would say for SCBW it was more muta  . | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
Oh and make archons good again | ||
|
SkyTheUnknown
Germany2065 Posts
| ||
Hyde
Australia14568 Posts
On June 09 2010 16:11 ZnAkE wrote: Does storms have the abillity to stack in SC2? Since you can spam them like crazy, it could help a bit. Storm does not currently stack in SC2, I think it would be too good if it did and would probably receive a nerf if it were allowed to stack. Stacking is not the answer. | ||
|
LunarC
United States1186 Posts
I think that the changes to Psionic Storm in SC2 are short-sighted and just make the game worse. Why should it have higher dps for lower total damage? All that does is make Psionic Storm a spell that is impossible to micro out from under. This discourages army control and micro entirely. Similarly, Colossi were given faster attack speed but lower attack. This only makes them less useful with micro and encourages less control. It's depressing, but most units are moving towards higher hitpoints, less damage in favor of higher damage per second, and very homogeneous movement and attack styles, which both kills off micro and tense situations that hinge on army control. Personally, I really REALLY despise these design choices. Incidentally, that video of orb is more a testament to the power of Force Field rather than Psionic Storm. | ||
|
Boonbag
France3318 Posts
On June 09 2010 17:25 LunarC wrote: In my opinion, Psionic Storm in Brood War is OP. But it was accepted, because it was hard to get enough High Templar to use it often and could be out-microed against both because it was hard to cast and was possible to dodge. I think that the changes to Psionic Storm in SC2 are short-sighted and just make the game worse. Why should it have higher dps for lower total damage? All that does is make Psionic Storm a spell that is impossible to micro out from under. This discourages army control and micro entirely. Similarly, Colossi were given faster attack speed but lower attack. This only makes them less useful with micro and encourages less control. It's depressing, but most units are moving towards higher hitpoints, less damage in favor of higher damage per second, and very homogeneous movement and attack styles, which both kills off micro and tense situations that hinge on army control. Personally, I really REALLY despise these design choices. Incidentally, that video of orb is more a testament to the power of Force Field rather than Psionic Storm. Well MMO spirit seems to live on in their game design. WoW ftl | ||
|
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. | ||
|
Mensab
United States27 Posts
On June 09 2010 15:28 prototype. wrote: What? Who thought tanks sucked? Cause most people who played BW saw that Zealots can charge, Drago-I mean stalkers can now blink next to your tanks and zerg could throw endless number of 75 mineral 25 gas 1 supply units with 145 hp at your tank line. And to top it off they were more expensive and took more supply. The big thing with the most recent patches is that zerg can no longer throw a stupid amount of roaches at you. As for mech vs p. I dunno its not even release yet, would give it 6 months and see what happens, provided blizzard doesn't do anything drastic. | ||
|
Stratos_speAr
United States6959 Posts
On June 09 2010 14:50 zhul4nder wrote: I don't see why people say that psi storm is weaker now than it was in sc1. Since the units bunch up like no other in sc2 compared to sc1, wouldn't it mean that sc2 would have a stronger psi storm? Radius is reduced and it does significantly less damage compared to BW whereas units have noticeably more health than in BW. | ||
|
WiljushkA
Serbia1416 Posts
| ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
| ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
| ||
|
wintergt
Belgium1335 Posts
| ||
|
Executioner.zealot
United States60 Posts
On June 09 2010 14:52 love1another wrote: It only does 80 damage. Which is < than hydra hp, and only 20 more than marine hp, whereas in BW, storm did almost 3x marine hp and 1.5x hydra hp. Yeah dont know why they changed that. Its easy to micro out of and the Protoss HT is useless for the next 5 minutes of the game after it casts(one of the reasons they decreased merge time on the archons). | ||
|
ProoM
Lithuania1741 Posts
Everyone. In the beginning in beta. | ||
|
indczn
United States18 Posts
On June 09 2010 18:58 LunarC wrote: I made a custom map testing my suggested changes to Psionic Storm. DPS is very low, but the increased radius makes up for it. It works rather beautifully and feels more like a Starcraft Brood War Psionic Storm: very high damage but very much dodgeable. 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. Your suggestion would make me stop using storm. If I have templar (every pvt/pvz), I have zealots as the basis for my army. Its already requires alot care to not catch my zealots, thanks to freaking slow templar, low range, and fast zealots + charge. Makes for a bad combination. Your suggestion makes this worse because people will micro backwards out of storm, and storm will linger long enough for your army to run through it. I like storm how it is now. I'd like it to be easier to storm the back half of the bioblobs easier with either a faster movement speed on the templar, or more range, but it is functional right now. It last long enough to chase people into running (which means not attacking) gives zealots time to close, and does enough damage to justify using. | ||
|
tarsier
United Kingdom223 Posts
the spell is slightly better than it's broodwar counterpart because of the increased pathing/grouping and also smart-casting! | ||
|
gillon
Sweden1578 Posts
| ||
|
LaustinSpayce
United Kingdom58 Posts
So, cheeky tech switch to HT's, no longer a problem. The intention of HT's and Colossus' are to be used as support units, I mean, if Colossus are so good, why not make an army out of only Colossus? Same with HT, they're not supposed to insta-pwn an army, they soften the army up so your gateway units can deal with them more effectively. | ||
|
Seltsam
United States343 Posts
Why do boats suck so much compared to cars? Seriously, they should enclose you, put in a better engine, better seats, and 4 wheels. That would make boats so much better. Boats suck, for srsly. | ||
|
funk100
United Kingdom172 Posts
| ||
|
FabledIntegral
United States9232 Posts
On June 09 2010 14:52 love1another wrote: It only does 80 damage. Which is < than hydra hp, and only 20 more than marine hp, whereas in BW, storm did almost 3x marine hp and 1.5x hydra hp. Uh, 80 dmg = hydra hp. It's just the regen of 1 hp. And it's 25 more than a marine, not 20. Also hydras can't storm dodge like they could in SC1 cuz they are so dabmn slow offcreep (they can do it fine on creep). | ||
|
SirGlinG
Sweden933 Posts
So pvx lategame in sc2 is 2 storms per HT which makes them stronger than the ones in BW. Just watch out for Emps! | ||
|
TLOBrian
United States453 Posts
A solution to the current storm problem would make them overlap, and then I think they would be just as good as starcraft 1 storm. On another note; why don't people pull templar back that have no energy to chill in a corner of their base or something so that they can regain energy instead of them getting killed in battle? Its like using 150 gas for 80 damage if you only get one storm out of it, and they get picked off ALOT. | ||
|
Rkie
United States1278 Posts
| ||
|
Roggay
Switzerland6320 Posts
| ||
Chill
Calgary25980 Posts
| ||
| ||
