EPTIt's impossible to buff tank damage without changing how the marine interacts with a lot of other units because the marine "buffer" would be simply too strong.
HOTS Patch notes [9/14/2012] - Page 68
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
Sabu113
United States11048 Posts
It's impossible to buff tank damage without changing how the marine interacts with a lot of other units because the marine "buffer" would be simply too strong. | ||
|
CreationSoul
Romania231 Posts
| ||
|
Mataza
Germany5364 Posts
On September 18 2012 02:44 Crawdad wrote: You're acting like mech will stay lackluster in TvP. First of all, it stomped all over Protoss prior to the last patch, so we have seen that it is possible. Second of all, it will most likely be viable by release, because Blizzard has specifically stated that they're trying to make mech an option in that MU. So no, I don't think Terran is going to be worse than it is now. You mean the patch that removed the mech unit that was viable(overpowered is still viable)? Second it´s not the kind of mech people mean when they say mech TvP. Mech is supposed to be tank centric, not about the fact the unit is built from factory. | ||
|
L0thar
987 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:05 CreationSoul wrote: why can't they add a fusion core/armory upgrade for tanks called "emp shells" that have the effect of a small emp (-25 energy, -10 shields) on just the unit it hit. this way tanks will become more powerfull in tvp and be better only agains infestors in tvz That's actually very interesting idea. I would make it AoE as well and obviously tweak the numbers, but it sounds great. It promotes micro from you (targeting clumps of casters) as well as from your opponent (splitting casters). | ||
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:07 Mataza wrote: You mean the patch that removed the mech unit that was viable(overpowered is still viable)? Second it´s not the kind of mech people mean when they say mech TvP. Mech is supposed to be tank centric, not about the fact the unit is built from factory. Mech is not supposed to be "tank centric", it's supposed to be immobile, and it's meant to foster positional play. Now, the tank exemplifies both of those things, so it IS the "backbone" of mech. And the Warhound was the exact opposite of those things, so it didn't work at all. But it's not like TvP is doomed to stay mech-free just because the Warhound is gone, we're in beta. | ||
Teoita
Italy12246 Posts
On September 18 2012 02:54 Sabu113 wrote: I thiink the change we all want to see is tank damage buffed but it's really hard to buff tank damage with medivacs being so powerful or I guess more relevantly in a protoss context, the marine itself being so powerful (in a 1-1-1). It's impossible to buff tank damage without changing how the marine interacts with a lot of other units because the marine "buffer" would be simply too strong. That is very likely why they buffed the scaling of the siege tank rather than the base damage, and it's a very smart choice actually. | ||
|
Killmouse
Austria5700 Posts
| ||
|
teamhozac
404 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:07 Mataza wrote: You mean the patch that removed the mech unit that was viable(overpowered is still viable)? Second it´s not the kind of mech people mean when they say mech TvP. Mech is supposed to be tank centric, not about the fact the unit is built from factory. Isnt mech just short for mechanical? lol | ||
|
Teoita
Italy12246 Posts
On September 18 2012 04:11 teamhozac wrote: Isnt mech just short for mechanical? lol In theory, yes, In pracitce, for 14 years mechanical has meant "heavy emphasis on siege tanks and positional play with a slow army". The warhound is the complete opposite of what mech has always been in starcraft. | ||
|
Account252508
3454 Posts
| ||
|
Goldfish
2230 Posts
On September 15 2012 03:12 xJonesy wrote: "Immortal Hardened Shield will now reduce the warhound’s Haywire Missile damage." "Warhound This unit has been removed from the game." lalwat? I think this was done just in case the warhound returns. IMO I think it should have stayed a while longer. It had some potential (it just needs to be less "a-move" unit). If Warhound was a hybrid caster and damaging unit (haywire missiles could do more damage, you had to target the ground [like EMP ,except with a slower and more avoidable missile] instead of homing on a unit so you had to aim. Also add longer cooldown and no auto casting), then I can see it working better. About the Oracle - I thought Preordain's ability to let you see what structures were building was a neat idea. IMO, they should combine it make Revelation also let you see what structures are building for the duration of the ability. | ||
|
teamhozac
404 Posts
On September 17 2012 21:48 Asha` wrote: Watching Terran streams is making me sad, almost no widow mine usage from anyone =( With no warhound + widow mines getting minimal usage lots of T play just looks like it's straight out of wings. Even watching mech vP is basically seeing people play like you would do it now anyway. Thats because the widow mine blows... as long as that thing costs supply no one will use it, you can mark my words | ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On September 18 2012 08:18 teamhozac wrote: Thats because the widow mine blows... as long as that thing costs supply no one will use it, you can mark my words I think I saw Morrow make 2 today, at the very start of the game to kill a queen, he never built another one. | ||
|
kmillz
United States1548 Posts
On September 15 2012 03:09 ulfryc wrote: Don't know how these 2 changes mix. Reaper vision seems really strong. I, too, was baffled by this..why change Immortal Hardened Shield VS Warhound when Warhound is removed? | ||
|
Crawdad
614 Posts
On September 18 2012 08:30 Qikz wrote: I think I saw Morrow make 2 today, at the very start of the game to kill a queen, he never built another one. MorroW uses them almost every game, because he actually knows to turn off autocast. They still need a buff, but they're not terrible. | ||
|
hecticSc
Romania76 Posts
On September 18 2012 00:53 starslayer wrote: did i ever say that carriers are bad against mech not i said carrier are useless there terrible bad units.and that warhound(if fixed will help tvp you flaming rage nerds and conti did you read what i wrote you can only go carriers if you are soooooooooooo stupidly ahead like 8 bases to 2 to even think about using carriers and even then you might lose learn to read and stop make stupid comments like that so tell me wheres the fun in that Carriers are used in PvZ more and more in lategame armies vs BL infestor comps. If it's strictly tvp you are talking about then carriers are cost effective vs a wide range of units and they are a bit better than voids vs mech due to longer range. | ||
|
Varesz
14 Posts
| ||
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On September 18 2012 15:53 hecticSc wrote: Carriers are used in PvZ more and more in lategame armies vs BL infestor comps. If it's strictly tvp you are talking about then carriers are cost effective vs a wide range of units and they are a bit better than voids vs mech due to longer range. The other thing I've noticed from meching in WoL is that if they go voidrays they clump up and my thors actually do decent damage. With carriers that doesn't happen so carriers are just soo much better. | ||
|
Grend
1600 Posts
Excellent patch adressing pretty much everything so far :D | ||
|
Fragile51
Netherlands15767 Posts
On September 18 2012 03:05 CreationSoul wrote: why can't they add a fusion core/armory upgrade for tanks called "emp shells" that have the effect of a small emp (-25 energy, -10 shields) on just the unit it hit. this way tanks will become more powerfull in tvp and be better only agains infestors in tvz Oh, i actually really like this idea. Have you tried suggesting it on b.net? | ||
| ||
