On December 20 2012 04:37 awesomoecalypse wrote: [quote]
I disagree. Making the projectile dodgable tests at least one player's skill. It turns Fungal from an ability which makes countermicro impossible into an ability which heavily incentivizes countermicro. Like Marines vs. Banelings, it brings in higher potential for "wow" moments--and just like with banelings, fungal being dodgable ensures you never want to be relying solely on fungal, but rather using it to support other compositions. Banelings are one-sided too--perfect marine micro is not something pure banelings can counter with any amount of good control. That doesn't mean we should alter the cool marine-baneling dynamic into one where random chance decides what happens.
Random crapshoot determining whether the opponent's army is rendered utterly incapable of micro is not a good thing.,
It just means that it is useless in highlevel play. I cannot see someone like MKP, Life or Parting ever getting hit by a projectile that is designed to be dodgeable. Hence, the ability won't get used for such purposes.
"Random crapshoot" at least means that it is going to be useful. It also means that you can just walk away from a unit with such a power upon seeing them, like you do with Tanklines. And I haven't heard that tanklines are badly designed.
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed.
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
On December 20 2012 01:16 Cyrak wrote: Do these guys just get high all day, eat donuts and make random ass nonsensical changes to the game?
No, they are professional game developers who have a ton of data to look on and massive playing experience. They discuss a lot of options internally and try the most promising ones out. When they are convinced they have a good solution, they include it in a patch.
I lol'd, please tell me you aren't serious. There are 5 people working on starcraft balance that randomly try shit, if you read the hots patch history, especially the first couple patches, you can tell that they have no idea what they are doing.
They have ideas and Dayvie even tells us some of their ideas. Please google Dunning-Kruger effect.
On December 20 2012 04:37 awesomoecalypse wrote: [quote]
I disagree. Making the projectile dodgable tests at least one player's skill. It turns Fungal from an ability which makes countermicro impossible into an ability which heavily incentivizes countermicro. Like Marines vs. Banelings, it brings in higher potential for "wow" moments--and just like with banelings, fungal being dodgable ensures you never want to be relying solely on fungal, but rather using it to support other compositions. Banelings are one-sided too--perfect marine micro is not something pure banelings can counter with any amount of good control. That doesn't mean we should alter the cool marine-baneling dynamic into one where random chance decides what happens.
Random crapshoot determining whether the opponent's army is rendered utterly incapable of micro is not a good thing.,
It just means that it is useless in highlevel play. I cannot see someone like MKP, Life or Parting ever getting hit by a projectile that is designed to be dodgeable. Hence, the ability won't get used for such purposes.
"Random crapshoot" at least means that it is going to be useful. It also means that you can just walk away from a unit with such a power upon seeing them, like you do with Tanklines. And I haven't heard that tanklines are badly designed.
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Also, if you get like 2 full hits of psi storms on a mostly marine based army, even the best reactions won't safe you. So no, the counter to psi storm is not dodgin them, but to build less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place.
Please watch this video, then tell me you can't counter storm by dodging
It just means that it is useless in highlevel play. I cannot see someone like MKP, Life or Parting ever getting hit by a projectile that is designed to be dodgeable. Hence, the ability won't get used for such purposes.
"Random crapshoot" at least means that it is going to be useful. It also means that you can just walk away from a unit with such a power upon seeing them, like you do with Tanklines. And I haven't heard that tanklines are badly designed.
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Anyone else feel the real problem here is that blizzard has a fear that they might have something stay the same as it was in broodwar? I don't get why game companies fear building upon foundations. It's just scrap everything we did previously and redo it all. They fear it so much that we just get rehashed versions of everything including bnet regardless of if it's better for the game or not.
It just means that it is useless in highlevel play. I cannot see someone like MKP, Life or Parting ever getting hit by a projectile that is designed to be dodgeable. Hence, the ability won't get used for such purposes.
"Random crapshoot" at least means that it is going to be useful. It also means that you can just walk away from a unit with such a power upon seeing them, like you do with Tanklines. And I haven't heard that tanklines are badly designed.
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Also, if you get like 2 full hits of psi storms on a mostly marine based army, even the best reactions won't safe you. So no, the counter to psi storm is not dodgin them, but to build less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place.
Please watch this video, then tell me you can't counter storm by dodging
He was spreading before the storms were even casted. That's not dodging, that's prespreading. Basically any command he gave which countered a storm was given before the storm was starting.
On December 20 2012 04:52 awesomoecalypse wrote: [quote]
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
On December 20 2012 04:52 awesomoecalypse wrote: [quote]
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Also, if you get like 2 full hits of psi storms on a mostly marine based army, even the best reactions won't safe you. So no, the counter to psi storm is not dodgin them, but to build less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place.
Please watch this video, then tell me you can't counter storm by dodging
He was spreading before the storms were even casted. That's not dodging, that's prespreading. Basically any command he gave which countered a storm was given before the storm was starting.
On December 20 2012 05:59 Utukka wrote: Anyone else feel the real problem here is that blizzard has a fear that they might have something stay the same as it was in broodwar? I don't get why game companies fear building upon foundations. It's just scrap everything we did previously and redo it all. They fear it so much that we just get rehashed versions of everything including bnet regardless of if it's better for the game or not.
I would much prefer Blizzard made something new than just an updated Brood War. As much as I love Reavers and Lurkers do you really want to pay 100+ dollars for Brood War: Shiny Graphics Edition? If they're gonna make something new, make something new.
I like blinding cloud better. can be moved out of and forces change in position like storm kinda. I donno fungal is boring even coming from a zerg perspective. Unfortunately blizzard seems to want to use it as the bandaid to fix zerg,
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Of course, because zerg players don't build infestors in real games.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Of course, because zerg players don't build infestors in real games.
Sorry, I forgot. You a clearly better than proplayers like DRG and Life who reinforce against roaches with 30roaches, when they could just build 5 infestors instead which is way better, because Wen_Jie said so.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Of course, because zerg players don't build infestors in real games.
You guys are turning this into straw man v. straw man, neither acknowledging the other's actual arguments. Sure, fungal growth can be considered "always good" because it always does damage to units, but fungal growth is not "good" in the usual sense of the word against spread out marauders. Given access to infinity infestors, you could chain fungal everything. But in reality you have limited infestors, and those infestors aren't great against marauders / roaches, especially in comparison to their use against marines.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Of course, because zerg players don't build infestors in real games.
You guys are turning this into straw man v. straw man, neither acknowledging the other's actual arguments. Sure, fungal growth can be considered "always good" because it always does damage to units, but fungal growth is not "good" in the usual sense of the word against spread out marauders. Given access to infinity infestors, you could chain fungal everything. But in reality you have limited infestors, and those infestors aren't great against marauders / roaches, especially in comparison to their use against marines.
That's exactly what I said. Where was that a strawman from my side?
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
Of course, because zerg players don't build infestors in real games.
You guys are turning this into straw man v. straw man, neither acknowledging the other's actual arguments. Sure, fungal growth can be considered "always good" because it always does damage to units, but fungal growth is not "good" in the usual sense of the word against spread out marauders. Given access to infinity infestors, you could chain fungal everything. But in reality you have limited infestors, and those infestors aren't great against marauders / roaches, especially in comparison to their use against marines.
The whole point of the infested terran nerf was because after fungalling everything everywhere permanantly, the infestors then have a bunch of energy to dump in infested terrans. You never run out of energy to fungal everything. There's no time when you would not expend the energy to fungal marauders and roaches. Watch those games where Leenock wins with 30-40 infestors.
On December 20 2012 03:24 Plansix wrote:Well Blizzard has said that they do not want the infestor to be massable. They also said they don't want to nerf it to the point where it is useless. I feel safe in saying that if this change makes infestors massable again, Blizzard will nerf it again. Welcome to the world of testing, where you try stuff until it works.
But in what world can an AOE root spell with 8 range be useless? Like really, do you think that the spell was so weak no one would EVER use it? Psionic storm doesn't root, and is quite dodgeable due to the DOT nature of the spell and slow movement speed of HTs, yet the spell is obviously really good. So before, since you could actually sometimes dodge the fungal and the infestor might just die after casting it, the unit was completely useless? ...Really, Blizzard?
I think what they're doing now is just going back to keeping Infestor a core unit of the zerg army that you're going to want to have in damn near every single situation, instead of a support caster that you'd only want to make with/against certain unit compositions.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Tell me that you don't fungal roaches and marauders.
Reading comprehension. I said "It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders". Not, "omg, if you fungal marauders or roaches you make a mistake".
Reading what?
Fungal growth is never bad against roaches and marauders. And if it is, it's because you didn't build enough infestors to chain fungal them.
I'm talking about real games, not about Unit Test Map in which Infestors don't cost anything.
I've played a couple "real" games against the new fungal. It's now stronger than it was in wings of liberty because it's 10 range (11 effective range due to radius). I even had one of those theoretical situations where i moved vikings forward and the opponent was able to fungal them from a range not previously possible -> chain fungal -> vikings all dead.
This means in any situation where you land a fungal (which is often with masters level and up) you are now able to launch fungal from 10 range, and infestors in the back are also able to get off fungals even easier than in wings of liberty.
It was a terrible change. At first glance, you can say, "hey let's wait and see," but it does not take long to realize this +2 range to fungal is an even stronger incarnation than the wings of liberty fungal.
On December 20 2012 04:52 awesomoecalypse wrote: [quote]
Banelings are dodgable. Storms are dodgable, if not in their entirety, than to an extent that vastly reduces their damage output. Both are still used consistently in even pro level matches. The reality is, positioning is important. An ability that is powerful if it hits, but dodgable, still has an important use in forcing your opponent out of position, and in punishing them if they insist on trying to hold their current one. It is also true that even for pros, once army sizes get large enough, simultaneously perfectly controlling every unit becomes impossible--more banelings land, and more storms hit, as players have more and more to control. The same would be true of Fungal, with the additional change that once one Fungal hits, they all hit, since you can chain fungal.
The idea that the previous iteration of Fungal would never be used in pro matches is absurd. What is true, is that it would not be the core backbone of the Zerg army upon which everything else relies--but that is imo very much a feature, not a bug.
No. Neither of them are completly dodgeable. You can mitigate their damage, hence let banelings explode on fewer units, storms go off on fewer units on less duration. But when they go off they will do damage to something.
I'm also not talking about whether this speed change is good or not. That's something only GSL/Proleague etc can show us. I'm against the notion that everything should be dodgeable. Out of all the ways to do damage in SC2, there are like 2 that are completly dodgeable (HSM, Yamato... and only very fast units can do that). All the other splash abilities (including any form of fungal) can be mitigated by preemtive spreading, and in the case of storm even reactionary. That's it. You can't spread after a tank or colossus hits you. You are prespread or not.
Fungal growth would never be *completely* dodgeable. The problem is, in the current form it's *completely* undodgeable. It might as well not be a projectile. Making it into a projectile should have put it into a middle ground where you can get some of your units out of the radius, but not completely ignore it. But right now, nothing is different. If you think this is fine, you can say it, but most people think that fungal growth in it's current form is a problem.
A lot of people were under the impression that it was too dodgeable with 10speed. With 15 speed it's still probably only like 75% of EMP speed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nw9tZ-noLwc
I can't tell you which values are correct. That's what the beta is for. The range buff to 10 however is stupid. Probably.
At 10 speed, it's really hard to hit faster units like phoenixes or mutalisks. But if you're using it against marines, you'll still more than likely get at least half of them. The problem is that there's no way for fungal growth to be in the anti-air/anti-harass role without being so fast that it's completely undodgeable in normal battles.
And that's good. Countering small units like marines is exactly the designed purpose of fungal. I'm all for making it skilldependend to which degree, but if one player makes the strategical choice to run marines into infestors, than the Infestor player should be in the better position. Not so much if the Terran brings siege tanks (because they should be a superior choice to infestors - and hopefully are now with the IT changes)
It's not just marines, but everything. Fungal growth counters *everything* and is completely undodgeable. Winning automatically because you chose to build infestors is wrong. Having unit compositions hard-counter each other without any regard for in-battle micro or any level of skill at all is, at least in my opinion, bad.
Look at the other marine 'counter' psi-storm. Terran players can dodge *most* of the storm if they're good enough, but it's still enough to put the Protoss player in a better position. Not the case with fungal growth. Unless you're completely horrible at the game (which is usually a tenuous assumption), your fungal growths will land on everything, everything, everything.
I disagree. ITs used to be good vs Tanks and Thors and Archons and Immortals. Fungal isn't really costefficient against those. It's not even that great against some medium sized units like roaches or marauders (obviously great against stalkers, because it prevents blink). That's why you see Zergs throwing mass ITs in ZvZ. 3 ITs>1Fungal in WoL, when you fight roach/hydra. (and also that's why you see hydras in ZvZ, as once you have a good infestor count to fungal everything and spam a lot of ITs, it's more costefficient to have some hydras than more infestors; though infestors are more supplyefficient)
Also, if you get like 2 full hits of psi storms on a mostly marine based army, even the best reactions won't safe you. So no, the counter to psi storm is not dodgin them, but to build less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place.
Please watch this video, then tell me you can't counter storm by dodging
He was spreading before the storms were even casted. That's not dodging, that's prespreading. Basically any command he gave which countered a storm was given before the storm was starting.
So no, the counter to psi storm is not dodgin them, but to build less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place.
I believe the point here is not the difference between prespreading and dodging, (of which the former is still a form of dodging), but that you don't need "less marines and more marauders and ghosts and preventing to get hit in the first place" because, as seen in that video, he had MMM, no ghosts, didn't get hit (much) in the first place, and won that fight.
Reason why prespreading is still dodging is because the storms were already commanded to the HTs. Otherwise, the HTs would not have sometimes stormed almost nothing. You can do this with fungal and EMP too. Simply move your army around to somewhere where it wasn't just immediately before, because obviously they are going to target where your army was or is about to be if you don't change directions.
On December 20 2012 03:24 Plansix wrote:Well Blizzard has said that they do not want the infestor to be massable. They also said they don't want to nerf it to the point where it is useless. I feel safe in saying that if this change makes infestors massable again, Blizzard will nerf it again. Welcome to the world of testing, where you try stuff until it works.
But in what world can an AOE root spell with 8 range be useless? Like really, do you think that the spell was so weak no one would EVER use it? Psionic storm doesn't root, and is quite dodgeable due to the DOT nature of the spell and slow movement speed of HTs, yet the spell is obviously really good. So before, since you could actually sometimes dodge the fungal and the infestor might just die after casting it, the unit was completely useless? ...Really, Blizzard?
I think what they're doing now is just going back to keeping Infestor a core unit of the zerg army that you're going to want to have in damn near every single situation, instead of a support caster that you'd only want to make with/against certain unit compositions.
The problem was (I assume) that it couldn't handle fast harassing units like mutalisks and phoenixes anymore, and zerg doesn't really have another good unit to fill that role.
EPT
