|
Do not use this thread to beg users for beta access or trade access with others. Thanks. |
On September 05 2012 06:25 DuckNuked wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:
Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. But it's true. Without Micro involved, Immortals counter mech core army, as Stalker does, or chargelott, or collossus. Put any thing in Protoss arsenal and it will counter mech easily, and, for most of them, without involving micro. So, if it's not the siege tank, Terran mech NEED one or two great units who stop that. Hi warhound, hi batlle hellion. As Bli² don't want to buff tanks. It's the only way to make TvP out of this stupid bio bullshit.
Hellions already acomplish that to some degree in WoL. One or two volleys from an immortal not going onto a armored target is VERY bad in a fight, and since hellions most often will be upfront, they will be auto targeted. Immortals is, or atleast should, always be microed to get the most out of it. Same goes when facing bio, one or two shots on the marines can be devastating...
|
On September 05 2012 06:25 DuckNuked wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:
Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. But it's true. Without Micro involved, Immortals counter mech core army, as Stalker does, or chargelott, or collossus. Put any thing in Protoss arsenal and it will counter mech easily, and, for most of them, without involving micro. So, if it's not the siege tank, Terran mech NEED one or two great units who stop that. Hi warhound, hi batlle hellion. As Bli² don't want to buff tanks. It's the only way to make TvP out of this stupid bio bullshit.
And you make that assumption because of how you think mech would work in wol or because of the 500 tvps you meched? If it's not the later one I think you are pretty bold.
Just because it can't be stimed and doesn't need permanent kiting/splitting doesn't mean it needs no micro, I'd say perfectly microing an immortal in every possible situation is a lot harder then doing the same thing with a marine.
|
On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable.
I am trying to explain that to people, but they just don't get it. They don't realize how strong that unit is, obviously because they've never play with it. You can literally make just Warhounds against everything that Protoss has except for Air, and you will do great.
People will just say "NO!" because they didn't even try it. Even against Zealots, Warhounds are doing good, and they can kite immortals with 7 range, 9 range missiles and 2.81 movement speed...
|
On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable.
It's not that simple.
Immortal's effectiveness is directly proportional to your ability to target fire during battles. Definitely requires more micro than say, Warhounds+Haywire missiles.
|
On September 05 2012 06:32 Herect wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:21 Achaia wrote:On September 05 2012 05:56 witktom wrote:On September 05 2012 05:54 Achaia wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Aren't Marauders and Siege Tanks already good vs Stalkers? Seems like a lot of overlap. Siege tanks are the worst possible thing to have against protoss after early allins like 1/1/1. EVERYTHING with stalkers involved just rapes them. Marauders aren't mech, and the point of putting warhounds in is just to make mech against protoss viable. Makes sense? No, because with other options vs Stalkers (i.e. Siege Tanks and Marauders) why wouldn't you put a unit in that fills the roles that are needed to make mech play viable without overlapping with Siege Tanks. Obviously you're not going to build just a mass army of Siege Tanks but as it is now there's no reason to build them at all from what I can gather. Just build mass Warhounds and Battle Hellions with maybe some Viking/Raven support. If the Warhounds weren't so good against stalkers you would still have to make Siege tanks making the mech army more diverse and it would make positional play with mech important whereas with mass Warhound/Battle Hellion it would be more of a 1-a blob. No need to be so condescending either by the way dude. It's just a simple discussion. Obviously no one really knows (yourself included) how this will effect the game so we're all just theory crafting with the information given to us. I'm tired to say that just Warhound/BH is a pretty retarded composition. It doesn't have AoE, it doesn't have ground control, it's a nightmare on chokepoints and doesn't have skirmish/sniping potential, and Hellions are the only way to Harass. Archons alone pretty much hard counter it, Storms and Massa chargelot are great too. You need tanks and/or mines to increase ground control/AoE. Warhound/BH it's just the meat shield against mass immortal and mass chargelot that pretty much roflstomp WoL Mech.
Battle hellions with tank support are going to be hilarious against chargelots. They will get hit a least once before they charge and after that, they are greated by the warm embrace of a flamethrower that does bonus damage against them and a 135 HP unit.
|
On September 05 2012 06:21 Odecey wrote:
I just thought of something: Wouldn't it be a good solution to not introduce the Warhound, but instead give the Tank the extra damage to Mechanical(Possibly as an upgrade to prevent 1/1/1 and the like from becoming even stronger)? It wouldn't change a thing in TvZ, while at the same time giving the tank a use in TvP. With the Battle Hellions to combat Zealots, I think mech would become a strong alternative in PvT.
Sounds like a cool idea,
But then terran would only get 1.5 new units and casuals would flip out
|
On September 05 2012 06:35 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. I am trying to explain that to people, but they just don't get it. They don't realize how strong that unit is, obviously because they've never play with it. You can literally make just Warhounds against everything that Protoss has except for Air, and you will do great. People will just say "NO!" because they didn't even try it. Even against Zealots, Warhounds are doing good, and they can kite immortals with 7 range, 9 range missiles and 2.81 movement speed...
Woh ho? 9 range missle?!?! When did that happen? I am all for a crazy damage unit with long range, but make the thing a glass cannon. It does not need crazy HP with ranges like that.
|
On September 05 2012 06:23 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. You don’t understand. The Immortal has the two features that make it as skillless-A-move-Unit: A: it is not a terran unit B: You can use the A-move command to make it attack-move This is what is required to be a skillless-A-move-unit. Really, some terran players will not be happy until they remove the attack-move command from all protoss and zerg units. And control groups.
You both should start to read the quotes before writing dumbshit.
Those units are hardcounters and doesn't need heavy micro, as you would say for example hellions, which is a unit which hardcounter light melee units, but requires micro to do it efficiently. That was the point i was answering the whining guy.
The guy speaking about how micro intensive the inmortal is... is just hilarious. You don't need to have intensive micro on TvP if the other guy goes mech with inmortals. You could, but you don't need to. You could say the same for warhounds.
Stop the nonsense, noone of you had played the game yet to speak about balance. Dumbing stuff down? You should be asking then to make more complicated the stuff which is already an a-move unit which hard-counters stuff before.
|
Problem is: Chargelott roast Hellion right now. Especially with some collossus help. And that's why Tanks are freekill after that. I Don't even talk about the non-effectiveness of tanks in TvP before they reach a critical mass.
And as it is, i'm meching/Skymech in all match-ups. And as it is, lots of protoss units are great with micro. But most of these protoss units are great against mech with attack move AFK Beer.
|
On September 05 2012 06:39 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:35 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. I am trying to explain that to people, but they just don't get it. They don't realize how strong that unit is, obviously because they've never play with it. You can literally make just Warhounds against everything that Protoss has except for Air, and you will do great. People will just say "NO!" because they didn't even try it. Even against Zealots, Warhounds are doing good, and they can kite immortals with 7 range, 9 range missiles and 2.81 movement speed... Woh ho? 9 range missle?!?! When did that happen? I am all for a crazy damage unit with long range, but make the thing a glass cannon. It does not need crazy HP with ranges like that.
Yes, I've been saying that for like last few pages... Warhounds have 7 range, which is already more than most ranged units, and their Haywire missiles have 9 range since ever, since they are supposed to counter Colossi and Siege Tank lines. Immortals won't even touch them.
|
On September 05 2012 06:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. It's not that simple. Immortal's effectiveness is directly proportional to your ability to target fire during battles. Definitely requires more micro than say, Warhounds+Haywire missiles.
But that target firing is only one click. The haywire missile is as many clicks as you have Warhounds every cooldown, assuming pros turn off autocast to target fire.
Thinking through this, maybe it's not the number of clicks. Honestly, I'm not even sure what makes a unit A-move anymore. The only A-move I can think of are zerglings, zealots, and battle helions in bipedal mode, but all still require positioning.
Edit - I guess broodlords, voidrays, and some others too. Idk
Edit 2 - maybe not voidrays
|
On September 05 2012 06:45 unteqair wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. It's not that simple. Immortal's effectiveness is directly proportional to your ability to target fire during battles. Definitely requires more micro than say, Warhounds+Haywire missiles. But that target firing is only one click. The haywire missile is as many clicks as you have Warhounds every cooldown, assuming pros turn off autocast to target fire. Thinking through this, maybe it's not the number of clicks. Honestly, I'm not even sure what makes a unit A-move anymore. The only A-move I can think of are zerglings, zealots, and battle helions in bipedal mode, but all still require positioning. Edit - I guess broodlords, voidrays, and some others too. Idk Edit 2 - maybe not voidrays
See thats one of the biggest issue in our community, there is no universally accepted definition of whats an amove unit and what isn't. On the one side we have people telling you that all other races just a move because they can split some m&m. But honestly you probably need to do some micro with every unit in the game. Lings require surround, with zealots you sometimes have to kite and it's important to not waste charge. Broods need splitting and there is a lot of micro in charging voids and keeping them so. Can't say much about bm hellions, but there is gonna be something there too.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On September 05 2012 06:38 Erik.TheRed wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:21 Odecey wrote:
I just thought of something: Wouldn't it be a good solution to not introduce the Warhound, but instead give the Tank the extra damage to Mechanical(Possibly as an upgrade to prevent 1/1/1 and the like from becoming even stronger)? It wouldn't change a thing in TvZ, while at the same time giving the tank a use in TvP. With the Battle Hellions to combat Zealots, I think mech would become a strong alternative in PvT. Sounds like a cool idea, But then terran would only get 1.5 new units and casuals would flip out
Nerfing the tank way way way back in its damage down to 35 vs light was a mistake imo. I understand it was good vs lings, but it was only imbalanced at the time due to the maps imo.
|
On September 05 2012 06:36 SarcasmMonster wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. It's not that simple. Immortal's effectiveness is directly proportional to your ability to target fire during battles. Definitely requires more micro than say, Warhounds+Haywire missiles.
yeah it's that simple. I understand the problem, you need to target fire armored units with immortals...
however you'll only have 2-3 immortals in most fights, they dont have any special ability that makes them micro intensive, you can shift+click stalkers/roaches with them (not really pivotal in pvz cuz 80% the time there actually are no other units than roaches) and forget, just micro them back if they get focussed. the sole reason 99% of the time to micro them is just that they are expensive. which only makes it an apm problem to micro them- do you have the apm to micro every unit? if not, you're supposed to micro the most expensive unit 1st cuz u lose the most rescources. that's not a good way to be "micro intensive".
on topic, warhounds destroy just about everything cost per cost+supply per cost. even non mech. unacceptable
|
On September 05 2012 06:51 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:38 Erik.TheRed wrote:On September 05 2012 06:21 Odecey wrote:
I just thought of something: Wouldn't it be a good solution to not introduce the Warhound, but instead give the Tank the extra damage to Mechanical(Possibly as an upgrade to prevent 1/1/1 and the like from becoming even stronger)? It wouldn't change a thing in TvZ, while at the same time giving the tank a use in TvP. With the Battle Hellions to combat Zealots, I think mech would become a strong alternative in PvT. Sounds like a cool idea, But then terran would only get 1.5 new units and casuals would flip out Nerfing the tank way way way back in its damage down to 35 vs light was a mistake imo. I understand it was good vs lings, but it was only imbalanced at the time due to the maps imo.
Probably...I feel a lot of balancing decisions were made due to maps and metagame.
|
On September 05 2012 06:35 Ramiz1989 wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:32 transcendent one wrote:On September 05 2012 06:14 TheDougler wrote:On September 05 2012 05:45 Godwrath wrote:On September 05 2012 05:39 Brahoono wrote:On September 05 2012 05:34 Garmer wrote:On September 05 2012 05:28 Ramiz1989 wrote:On September 05 2012 05:25 archonOOid wrote:On September 05 2012 05:21 Buchan wrote:
So i just set up 8 warhounds vs 14 stalkers and crushes through them with my warhounds. I loved it haha what if you micro your stalkers then? You can't... Stalkers have 2.95 movement speed, Warhounds have 2.81, and have 7 range, Haywire missiles have 9, while Stalkers have 6 range and stat wise are completely inferior to Warhounds, and cost 25/25 less... Warhounds definitely need nerf, and I would support the unit. nerf is not needed, warhound is intended to be so strong vs stalker Yeah thats another thing thats wrong with that unit. It ULTRA hardcounters some units without any micro involved...its not even funny. Upon seeing the reaction here I'm fairly certain though that this unit won't make it in the game ~~. Hai, chargelolz, archons, colossi, inmortals may want to have some words with you. Woh now, don't go lumping Immortals in with units that don't require micro. Immortals are among the most micro intensive units in the protoss arsenal. Play a PvZ or two if you think otherwise. In other news this is almost a bit much: On September 05 2012 04:22 L3gendary wrote:On September 05 2012 04:20 Plansix wrote:On September 05 2012 04:19 L3gendary wrote:
Why is everyone discussing the auto rally point and not the initial workers being sent to mining automatically?
Are people missing the part where it says:
"...and order starting workers to harvest there." Doesn't the game already do that? I mean, I rally my workers to a mineral patch to have them mine. No? You still have to box ur workers and send them to the minerals. With this you won't. That is unless blizzard worded it incorrectly. I'm fine with simplifying the game for lower leagues but that's starting to get a little silly... On the other hand, if initial workers start mining I guess that takes out a bit of the initial lag factor and that's kinda helpful. Immortals are not micro intensive. they're as micro intensive as any other unit with a range of 6. you just lose more rescources if you lose an immortal therefore it's advised to micro them. the other note i wanted to mention is that warhounds are the most cost efficient unit in the game vs mech and top3 cost efficient unit EVEN VS NON MECH. also the most supply efficient unit in the game. needs nerf of stats, current stats are unacceptable. I am trying to explain that to people, but they just don't get it. They don't realize how strong that unit is, obviously because they've never play with it. You can literally make just Warhounds against everything that Protoss has except for Air, and you will do great. People will just say "NO!" because they didn't even try it. Even against Zealots, Warhounds are doing good, and they can kite immortals with 7 range, 9 range missiles and 2.81 movement speed...
Why do you care so much? If it's really as bad as you're saying then it'll be fixed shortly before retail. There's nothing wrong with Blizzard leaving a few 'OP' things in the beta and seeing how things go.
|
So there is an option for rally+automine at start? Funny how what was considered a hack in BW now is standard in SC2...
|
On September 05 2012 07:04 OminouS wrote:
So there is an option for rally+automine at start? Funny how what was considered a hack in BW now is standard in SC2...
Yes there is a option but its not final
|
Sheesh. Can't we at least actually wait until the beta has been going for a few days to whine about balance and quality of life. Give Blizzard a chance to observe real beta gameplay and get feedback from beta players. They will adjust as needed.
I for one am very excited about the imminent release of the beta and am looking forward to the iterative balancing process.
|
On September 05 2012 06:55 Brahoono wrote:Show nested quote +On September 05 2012 06:51 ZeromuS wrote:On September 05 2012 06:38 Erik.TheRed wrote:On September 05 2012 06:21 Odecey wrote:
I just thought of something: Wouldn't it be a good solution to not introduce the Warhound, but instead give the Tank the extra damage to Mechanical(Possibly as an upgrade to prevent 1/1/1 and the like from becoming even stronger)? It wouldn't change a thing in TvZ, while at the same time giving the tank a use in TvP. With the Battle Hellions to combat Zealots, I think mech would become a strong alternative in PvT. Sounds like a cool idea, But then terran would only get 1.5 new units and casuals would flip out Nerfing the tank way way way back in its damage down to 35 vs light was a mistake imo. I understand it was good vs lings, but it was only imbalanced at the time due to the maps imo. Probably...I feel a lot of balancing decisions were made due to maps and metagame.
Tanks were nerfed because of 1-1-1 TvZ on maps like Delta and 1-base Marine Tank Timings on Steppes. -_- Yet, apparently they still apply....
I remember a time where Blizzard swore to these crap maps, and pretty much refused any movement towards bigger maps until GSL pretty much gave Blizzard the finger and said they were gonna use their own maps.
If it weren't for TL and the Comp scene we would still be playing on Metalopolis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
