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.
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).
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.
Yeah I agree. 10range is probably too much, no argument about that. But that's not what I was discussing about.
The more I play HotS, i keep wondering why are they still buffing zergs. TvZ feels almost the same bullshit as in WoL, just with different specifics.... So many zergs on ladder, you feel that their micro is shaking, macro is slipping most of the time and yet they are so hard to beat -.- Vipers and Swarm hosts existence in good player's hand denies mech play so hard, but I don't know if I want to play bio when this buff is coming for the infestor.
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.
It's been pointed out to me in this thread, that people want to dodge upon seeing a projectile or a storm, not that they have to preemtively spread when they see Infestors or Templar. I just took over that terminology. Of course, prespreading and dodging are very similar things.
Futhermore, I should have written the logical "or = and/or" instead of and. I just wanted to say that all of those measures help and are the formula to win. (also that "storms hit" was meant as an "storms hit many units"; not that you have to prevent any storm from even being casted) And yeah, Dragon was very marauder heavy. It nearly looks like a 1:1 ratio, which usually means (as you produce a lot of marines early), that at that time in the game he was using multiple times as much money for marauderproduction as on marineproduction. Which I consider "less marines and more marauders". (also he was on his way to ghosts)
This is an easy fix. Fungal should be broken into 2 spells 1 = fungal growth which is a disease in a DOT just like storm affecting a certain area where units run into that area - doing high damage over a few seconds. range of 9 just like Psi Storm. This does not stop movement speed of unit.
2 = Fungal Snare - which is a like a net that grabs units and holds them in place like fungal growth allowing surrounds etc... and does not cause damage.
Fungal Growth should not be range 10, and stop you from moving and it should be dodge-able just like storm is. The Snare spell should immobilize units and allow zergling surrounds etc...
This makes infestors a support unit only and not a full army on their own.
Also - Infestors burrow movement should be detectable (more so) like cloaked banshee or dts. Also - infestor should have to unburrow to cast anything.
AND/OR
You can remove pathogen glands from the game. Watch the round 2 of parting vs violet and see game 5 and violet forgets pathogen glands and it makes the game a lot more interesting.
about medivac: FC is too much, make armory a requirement and the speed bust 20 or 25 energy cost, that way it wont be so abused and it will be more tactical instead of spam the ability.
also i think the ultra is a litlle too strong vs bio/mech
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Somebody at blizzard must realllly love the infestor. They nerfed the ghost to hell after some ultralisk snipes, they nerfed high templar but they dont't do anything with the infestor, i don't know wtf are they thinking. Rather than pay 40 euros for HOTS better add 10 more and buy Company of Heroes 2.
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
I'll check out the video but if you notice...I left the hellion/colossus/infestor out and maybe a few others. The ONLY overlap would be medic/medivac but being that medivacs and medics could be used differently would solve that. For example, if you open drop play, medivac might be a natural choice for an upgrade instead of making medics whereas if you open barracks/fact with later port, you can just make medics and have 1 dropship later on specifically to harass or if you are in TvZ, you might prefer medics instead of medivacs due to scourge. As for raven/science vessel, it would be a choice between Irradiate(single target undodgeable(slight aoe) vs bio only)/dmatrix/shockwave VS PDD/seeker missile(dodgeable and AOE if kept the same)/turrets).
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
stalker has same stats as dragoon? are you high?
dragoons were extremely high-hp high-power units that could take on pretty much everything
stalkers are the weakest staple unit in the game due to having to balance also being a harass/allin unit with blink
not saying i liked dragoon better, pretty much the contrary, but claiming its the same unit is just silly
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.
I think that highlights the major problem with fungal which so many people have been saying for so long. It's not the range, or whether it's a projectile that is a problem.
It's that in the vast majority of situations if you can land one fungal, this means you can then land more fungals until the unit is dead. Meaning one mis-step from someone playing XvZ and then they are guaranteed to lose so much stuff that it's almost gg. Fungal should always have been slow rather than fix, and i don't think fungal growth will ever be a spell that is good for game quality until this change is made.
On December 20 2012 07:08 vidium wrote: Somebody at blizzard must realllly love the infestor. They nerfed the ghost to hell after some ultralisk snipes, they nerfed high templar but they dont't do anything with the infestor, i don't know wtf are they thinking. Rather than pay 40 euros for HOTS better add 10 more and buy Company of Heroes 2.
By " Some ultralisk snipes" you mean all t2.5 and t3 zerg crushed by 1 unit spamming the r button while cloacked?
Something people don't put on balance with the infestor is that it's big as hell: how many time i get stormed without even knowing they were high templar in protoss death ball cause it's so fucking small, and there is so many laser effect that blind you. Seriously infestor is just a big slow larva that say " hit me" isn't that a counterbalance thing?
I'm not very good really, just a low master zerg, but i don't feel the insane power of infestor like everyone here: people just micro before you get on range to fungal and then a lot of your infestors get insta killed by tank splash or whatever , maybe you get some marines but not enough to chain fungal or justify the high cost of infestor. Am i the only one in this situation?
Edit: Maybe i try to much to fungal with the center of the fg radius?
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
stalker has same stats as dragoon? are you high?
dragoons were extremely high-hp high-power units that could take on pretty much everything
stalkers are the weakest staple unit in the game due to having to balance also being a harass/allin unit with blink
not saying i liked dragoon better, pretty much the contrary, but claiming its the same unit is just silly
Stalker: 80/80 1armor dps (real seconds, not blizzard seconds): 9.522; 13.386 vs armored; damage per shot: 10 (+4vs armored) range 6; cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
Dragoon 100/80 1armor; dps (real seconds): 8.3333 vs small, 12.5vs medium, 16.666vs large; damage per shot: 10 (+5vs medium, +10 vs large) range 6 (after upgrading); cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
The biggest issue with the infestor is that it is the only caster in the game that is effective when massed. there is no reason for zerg players not to mass them considering how versatile and strong they are.
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
stalker has same stats as dragoon? are you high?
dragoons were extremely high-hp high-power units that could take on pretty much everything
stalkers are the weakest staple unit in the game due to having to balance also being a harass/allin unit with blink
not saying i liked dragoon better, pretty much the contrary, but claiming its the same unit is just silly
Stalker: 80/80 1armor dps (real seconds, not blizzard seconds): 9.522; 13.386 vs armored; damage per shot: 10 (+4vs armored) range 6; cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
Dragoon 100/80 1armor; dps (real seconds): 8.3333 vs small, 12.5vs medium, 16.666vs large; damage per shot: 10 (+5vs medium, +10 vs large) range 6 (after upgrading); cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
yeah, thats the point, its stats actually decreased, while most other units got way higher dps and hp now
dragoon could only be beat by mass (zerg) or trickery (siege tanks/mines).
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'm not saying I just wanted broodwar with shiny new graphics. Here's an example of what I mean.
Zerg: Zergling, add baneling, add roach, hydra, lurker, add WoL queen and turn old queen into an upgrade for WoL queen that has inject/broodling/ensnare/tumor, ultra, defiler, add viper(change blinding cloud to something else), muta, devourer, guardian, scourge.
Protoss: Zealot(keep speed instead of charge), dragoon(add blink), add sentry(something besides FF), templar, archon, darkarchon, darktemplar, add MS core(change recall to something else), remove scout, add voidray, corsair(add graviton beam as an upgrade instead of disruption web?) , add tempest, carrier, arbiter, add oracle, reaver, obs, have warp gate mechanic BUT have it be tied to warpin AT NEXUS and have warp prism be an upgrade for shuttle, add immortal.
I don't know about you, but the mixture of broodwar + WoL units and the modification of a few things look far more interesting and micro intensive than what we currently have in place. There's still plenty of "fresh" new units and abilities while maintaining many of the things that made BW great. It's called building upon the foundation, you know, remove the bad, add more, and improve what's in place.
Balance of it is a whole different debate and sorry for getting slightly off topic from the beta changes.
Dustin Browder explained that extremly well in this video. (it's a really interesting watch) The core idea behind SC2 was, to make it work without many overlaps, so that (nearly) any unit would have a very unique place. Obviously things like hellion+firebat, medivac+medic, all have the potential for a lot of overlapping. Also on the stalker. The stalker has nearly all stats of the dragoon. But because it doesn't have trademark weird pathing and it got blink, it got renamed/remodeled to be a new unit.
stalker has same stats as dragoon? are you high?
dragoons were extremely high-hp high-power units that could take on pretty much everything
stalkers are the weakest staple unit in the game due to having to balance also being a harass/allin unit with blink
not saying i liked dragoon better, pretty much the contrary, but claiming its the same unit is just silly
Stalker: 80/80 1armor dps (real seconds, not blizzard seconds): 9.522; 13.386 vs armored; damage per shot: 10 (+4vs armored) range 6; cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
Dragoon 100/80 1armor; dps (real seconds): 8.3333 vs small, 12.5vs medium, 16.666vs large; damage per shot: 10 (+5vs medium, +10 vs large) range 6 (after upgrading); cost 125/50/2; Gateway Unit, requires Cybernetics Core
yeah, thats the point, its stats actually decreased, while most other units got way higher dps and hp now
dragoon could only be beat by mass (zerg) or trickery (siege tanks/mines).
stalker loses to a marauder 1on1
Not really. Zerglings got a huge dps nerf (15.625-->9.936), marines got some small boosts (while stim was nerfed to from +100% to +50%), roaches (11.04dps, real seconds) do far less damage to stalkers than BW hydras (16.6666dps) did (while having more health and armor) and the marauder got introduced etc. It's a different dynamic. Still the Stalker is as close to a 1-to-1 port of the Dragoon as you can get, apart from the blink.
On December 20 2012 06:50 mhael wrote: This is an easy fix. Fungal should be broken into 2 spells 1 = fungal growth which is a disease in a DOT just like storm affecting a certain area where units run into that area - doing high damage over a few seconds. range of 9 just like Psi Storm. This does not stop movement speed of unit.
2 = Fungal Snare - which is a like a net that grabs units and holds them in place like fungal growth allowing surrounds etc... and does not cause damage.
Fungal Growth should not be range 10, and stop you from moving and it should be dodge-able just like storm is. The Snare spell should immobilize units and allow zergling surrounds etc...
This makes infestors a support unit only and not a full army on their own.
Also - Infestors burrow movement should be detectable (more so) like cloaked banshee or dts. Also - infestor should have to unburrow to cast anything.
AND/OR
You can remove pathogen glands from the game. Watch the round 2 of parting vs violet and see game 5 and violet forgets pathogen glands and it makes the game a lot more interesting.
However - right now - this game is 100% broken.
Will never happen with the current developer crew, makes the game too much broodwar.
EPT
