|
On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias
Yes, it should. The oracle was initially really fast, but it was buffed to be even faster so players with good control could keep it from dying. It should be a micro intensive unit instead of the fly in and do massive damage and fly out unit that it usually is. Against terran this should mean things mostly like sniiping scvs building things or in transit and only tapping a mineral line when units are out of position trying to intercept it or something. This is especially true in the post-macro mechanic removal economy where worker losses hurt a lot. The cyclone is an ideal solution because of its cost and the tech.
Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years.
|
Thanks Blizz hope for more updates soon!
|
this game is getting dumber and dumber each patch think i'm finally done with it. lol such a waste of the past 4 and a half years facepalm.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 25 2015 04:47 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias Yes, it should. The oracle was initially really fast, but it was buffed to be even faster so players with good control could keep it from dying. It should be a micro intensive unit instead of the fly in and do massive damage and fly out unit that it usually is. Against terran this should mean things mostly like sniiping scvs building things or in transit and only tapping a mineral line when units are out of position trying to intercept it or something. This is especially true in the post-macro mechanic removal economy where worker losses hurt a lot. The cyclone is an ideal solution because of its cost and the tech. Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years.
so you think that for the same cost and supply as an oracle, cyclones should just straight up kill an oracle with no support whatsoever?
how is that even remotely fair? the oracle doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell at killing the cyclone and widow mines 1 shot them. cyclones are also great vs adepts which a protoss wants to make vs marines anyway. so what is this unit suppose to be bad at, exactly?
|
On August 25 2015 05:27 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 04:47 TheWinks wrote:On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias Yes, it should. The oracle was initially really fast, but it was buffed to be even faster so players with good control could keep it from dying. It should be a micro intensive unit instead of the fly in and do massive damage and fly out unit that it usually is. Against terran this should mean things mostly like sniiping scvs building things or in transit and only tapping a mineral line when units are out of position trying to intercept it or something. This is especially true in the post-macro mechanic removal economy where worker losses hurt a lot. The cyclone is an ideal solution because of its cost and the tech. Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years. so you think that for the same cost and supply as an oracle, cyclones should just straight up kill an oracle with no support whatsoever? how is that even remotely fair? the oracle doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell at killing the cyclone and widow mines 1 shot them. cyclones are also great vs adepts which a protoss wants to make vs marines anyway. so what is this unit suppose to be bad at, exactly?
Should a 150/150 main line army unit be able to kill a harass unit? Yes, nothing wrong with that. This is like asking if a stalker should be able to kill a reaper. The harass unit has a speed advantage and is dedicated to killing workers, not engaging straight up.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
It's probably too fast to be a main line army unit that can stand and kill anything without big weaknesses
Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years.
RIP FFE vs zerg
|
Prior to the new patch I had my worries with the new Disruptor, and after playing with it a bit, I heavily dislike it.
The unit falls into the same trap as Swarm Hosts, Tempests and other long-range units: It fires of a free "unit/projectile" that you can attempt to avoid but the unit initself cannot be killed if you have the weaker army value.
With the old Disruptor you had to get close to the enemey to deal damage, which meant that there was a huge risk involved with it. All they had to do was t o remove the post invul thing and replace it with a speed boost while reducing cost and the unit would be fine.
|
On August 25 2015 04:47 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias Yes, it should. The oracle was initially really fast, but it was buffed to be even faster so players with good control could keep it from dying. It should be a micro intensive unit instead of the fly in and do massive damage and fly out unit that it usually is. Against terran this should mean things mostly like sniiping scvs building things or in transit and only tapping a mineral line when units are out of position trying to intercept it or something. This is especially true in the post-macro mechanic removal economy where worker losses hurt a lot. The cyclone is an ideal solution because of its cost and the tech. Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years.
Agreed
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On August 25 2015 04:47 TheWinks wrote:Show nested quote +On August 24 2015 21:45 Cyro wrote:
The main question to ask there: Do you want people who build only cyclones (without marines or a rushed turret or two) to be able to defend very effectively against stuff like proxy oracle?
The reason they were redesigned in the first place was that they were unreasonably good at defending whatever you threw at them without bias Yes, it should. The oracle was initially really fast, but it was buffed to be even faster so players with good control could keep it from dying. It should be a micro intensive unit instead of the fly in and do massive damage and fly out unit that it usually is. Against terran this should mean things mostly like sniiping scvs building things or in transit and only tapping a mineral line when units are out of position trying to intercept it or something. This is especially true in the post-macro mechanic removal economy where worker losses hurt a lot. The cyclone is an ideal solution because of its cost and the tech. Terran should also be allowed to have openings in TvP that aren't reactored marine expands as well. It's been like that for over two years.
Oracle was buffed partially because of the harassment, but the second part of the patch was meant in the way "so the unit is usable later in the game, not for evaporating SCVs in the early game". Without the speed you cannot consistently tag the Terran army with vikings. I personally think that the speed buff was horrible and it could be accomplished by using a different approach... but Oracle wasn't only about mineral harassment.
|
I agree the cyclone should be better anti-air, especially early game. Remove the damn lock-on from ground PLS and give it to anti-air with a descent damage output but not OP, and maybe decrease its gas cost and build time
|
On August 25 2015 20:38 Hider wrote:
Prior to the new patch I had my worries with the new Disruptor, and after playing with it a bit, I heavily dislike it.
The unit falls into the same trap as Swarm Hosts, Tempests and other long-range units: It fires of a free "unit/projectile" that you can attempt to avoid but the unit initself cannot be killed if you have the weaker army value.
The old Diruptor had an absolute fine design in that it had to get close to the enemey to deal damage, which meant that there was a huge risk involved with it. All they had to do was t o remove the post invul thing and replace it with a speed boost while reducing cost and the unit would be fine.
I think the old one wasn't good to be honest. I don't think there would be any good way to make the old disruptor work without some invulnerability or get-away mechanic. A speed boost alone wouldn't be that great, unless it was some sick value like a speedzergling on creep or possibly even more - at which point I think it wouldn't be all too different from just blinking it away or moving away invulnerable.
Also I think the invulnerability when moving in was also not very good.
The way the new one works is that you can attack it at all times, so in general you could attack it, while its ball is chasing other parts of your armies. That's a good thing imo. The damage and range feel too much though. Disruptors still have the inherent dynamic that - due to their inconsistent attack rate (and clunky to use attack, since you need to manually control the activation) paired with their insane damage/splash radius and big range - you either get the big hits and win, or you miss them and you lose horribly.
|
A speed boost alone wouldn't be that great, unless it was some sick value like a speedzergling on creep or possibly even more - at which point I think it wouldn't be all too different from just blinking it away or moving away invulnerable.
Well you have your Warp Prism to pick it up too. Speed boost would just be there so a Warp Prism + disruptor wouldn't be 100% mandatory.
The few times I played with it and against it, I always enjoyed it.
The way the new one works is that you can attack it at all times, so in general you could attack it, while its ball is chasing other parts of your armies.
If the enemy protoss player has a larger army value than you, then it can force an engagement, which I do not find to be a healthy dynamic. Becasue the only way you can kill the Disruptor is if you attack the protoss army (that includes the Disruptor). Otherwise the Disruptor ball will just slowly poke away at your army.
The problem is that this makes it much more of a deathball unit as it needs protection. The old Disruptor was anti-deathball as it functioned very wel by itself.
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 25 2015 21:16 ffadicted wrote:
I agree the cyclone should be better anti-air, especially early game. Remove the damn lock-on from ground PLS and give it to anti-air with a descent damage output but not OP, and maybe decrease its gas cost and build time
you'll be missing the ground attack vs ultras, be careful what you wish for.
On August 25 2015 21:18 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 20:38 Hider wrote:
Prior to the new patch I had my worries with the new Disruptor, and after playing with it a bit, I heavily dislike it.
The unit falls into the same trap as Swarm Hosts, Tempests and other long-range units: It fires of a free "unit/projectile" that you can attempt to avoid but the unit initself cannot be killed if you have the weaker army value.
The old Diruptor had an absolute fine design in that it had to get close to the enemey to deal damage, which meant that there was a huge risk involved with it. All they had to do was t o remove the post invul thing and replace it with a speed boost while reducing cost and the unit would be fine. I think the old one wasn't good to be honest. I don't think there would be any good way to make the old disruptor work without some invulnerability or get-away mechanic. A speed boost alone wouldn't be that great, unless it was some sick value like a speedzergling on creep or possibly even more - at which point I think it wouldn't be all too different from just blinking it away or moving away invulnerable. Also I think the invulnerability when moving in was also not very good. The way the new one works is that you can attack it at all times, so in general you could attack it, while its ball is chasing other parts of your armies. That's a good thing imo. The damage and range feel too much though. Disruptors still have the inherent dynamic that - due to their inconsistent attack rate (and clunky to use attack, since you need to manually control the activation) paired with their insane damage/splash radius and big range - you either get the big hits and win, or you miss them and you lose horribly.
can you pick it up in a warp prism while it's attack is out? or will that cancel the attack?
On August 25 2015 20:38 Hider wrote:
Prior to the new patch I had my worries with the new Disruptor, and after playing with it a bit, I heavily dislike it.
The unit falls into the same trap as Swarm Hosts, Tempests and other long-range units: It fires of a free "unit/projectile" that you can attempt to avoid but the unit initself cannot be killed if you have the weaker army value.
With the old Disruptor you had to get close to the enemey to deal damage, which meant that there was a huge risk involved with it. All they had to do was t o remove the post invul thing and replace it with a speed boost while reducing cost and the unit would be fine.
sort of. with a lesser army value it also has less to hit and you have less to split, so in that way it scales.
|
On August 25 2015 21:32 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +A speed boost alone wouldn't be that great, unless it was some sick value like a speedzergling on creep or possibly even more - at which point I think it wouldn't be all too different from just blinking it away or moving away invulnerable. Well you have your Warp Prism to pick it up too. Speed boost would just be there so a Warp Prism + disruptor wouldn't be 100% mandatory. The few times I played with it and against it, I always enjoyed it. Show nested quote +
The way the new one works is that you can attack it at all times, so in general you could attack it, while its ball is chasing other parts of your armies.
If the enemy protoss player has a larger army value than you, then it can force an engagement, which I do find to be a healthy dynamic. Becasue the only way you can kill the Disruptor is if you attack the protoss army (that includes the Disruptor). Otherwise the Disruptor ball will just slowly poke away at your army. The problem is that this makes it much more of a deathball unit as it needs protection. The old Disruptor was anti-deathball as it functioned very wel by itself.
The old disruptor worked well out on the map with a warp prism. I think this is still the case. But you have a point that the unit has become much more rewarding when used for sieging with deathball protection, since it doesn't have to move forward anymore. But I think that was kind of necessary, at least judging from my previous ZvPs where disruptors often didn't help the protoss army too much if you payed attention to them during the battle. So Protoss didn't really have a solid splash option for engagements.
|
On August 25 2015 21:42 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 21:16 ffadicted wrote:
I agree the cyclone should be better anti-air, especially early game. Remove the damn lock-on from ground PLS and give it to anti-air with a descent damage output but not OP, and maybe decrease its gas cost and build time you'll be missing the ground attack vs ultras, be careful what you wish for.,
With MULE gone, I think it's time to reinstate the marauder
|
SoCal8908 Posts
On August 25 2015 21:57 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 21:42 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 25 2015 21:16 ffadicted wrote:
I agree the cyclone should be better anti-air, especially early game. Remove the damn lock-on from ground PLS and give it to anti-air with a descent damage output but not OP, and maybe decrease its gas cost and build time you'll be missing the ground attack vs ultras, be careful what you wish for., With MULE gone, I think it's time to reinstate the marauder
idk, the marauder has always been way too strong. im sorta glad that the dmg was split up.
|
On August 25 2015 22:04 BluemoonSC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2015 21:57 ffadicted wrote:On August 25 2015 21:42 BluemoonSC wrote:On August 25 2015 21:16 ffadicted wrote:
I agree the cyclone should be better anti-air, especially early game. Remove the damn lock-on from ground PLS and give it to anti-air with a descent damage output but not OP, and maybe decrease its gas cost and build time you'll be missing the ground attack vs ultras, be careful what you wish for., With MULE gone, I think it's time to reinstate the marauder idk, the marauder has always been way too strong. im sorta glad that the dmg was split up.
Period. The Marauder has always been crazy good. Problem is that it simply achieved what the rest of bio units couldn't.
Bio shouldn't be MM. Reapers should be a valid option, Ghost is just kept as a caster, and there should be another bio unit of a higher tier. The HERC was fun as a troll unit, but the concept of a high level unit should be there.
|
On August 24 2015 01:02 mishimaBeef wrote:
I was surprised to see Taeja streaming Legacy of the Void today. Unfortunately for me I was only able to catch his last game. I tell you, it was INTENSE! I am eagerly awaiting more pro players showcasing Legacy of the Void.
Taeja is going to be fine with LotV. His control is sick... love watching that guy play.
|
I really hope splitting warp-in power and building energy power gets tested at some point.
|
United Kingdom20282 Posts
On August 26 2015 01:06 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I really hope splitting warp-in power and building energy power gets tested at some point.
That's pretty much what's being tested at the moment; Warp in takes about 4-5x longer than in HOTS unless a warp gate, nexus or warp prism is in the power field.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
