|
On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
[*] I haven't seen info saying Graviton Beam affects only 1 target: this doesn't make any sense - to choose for example 1 Zergling / 1 Marine or 1 Ultralisk / Siege Tank?
I believe you're confused as to what exactly Graviton Beam does. Let me read its tooltip, according to SC2Pod:
"Lifts up a target non-massive ground unit, disabling it and making it targeted as an air unit. Channeled ability."
You'll notice it always speaks in singular terms: "a (...) unit, disabling it and making it (...)". Here's a quote from Karune: "The Phoenix in the latest build uses energy (4 per second) when casting anti-gravity, thus the same Phoenix is not able to attack the target it is lifting with anti-gravity."
Again, no plural terms. "... not able to attack the target it is lifting (...)".
You say it makes little sense to be able to lift 1 zergling / 1 marine / 1 tank / 1 ultra. As it happens, a Phoenix using Graviton Beam (the new name of the anti-gravity ability Karune speaks of) can't lift an Ultralisk- because as the SC2Pod description says, it lifts up a non-massive ground unit. Ultralisks are a massive ground unit, much like Thors and Colossi. Siege Tanks, on the other hand, would be prime targets for Graviton Beam; Marines, not so much, because while you're lifting one of them up, his friends will shoot you out of the air.
On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
What's more AFAIK this spell was supposed to lift buildings into air too, it was described as possible counter against "turtles".
I don't ever recall having read that. At any rate, I believe it only affects units, and not buildings, currently.
On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
Even Dustin Browder himself said in an interview that he considers Mothership as unit made for fun, i.e. not made in competitive games.
You wrote about Carriers being too high in tech earlier even though they are being used and you mention Mothership?
What I meant to say in that occation is:
You have a Zerg army in, say, ZvP. Which unit combinations do you see? Lurker/Ling is used. Muta/ling as well. Lurker/hydra/ling as well. Mass hydra is another. All in all, Zerg can quickly switch between these four unit types, mix and match as they see fit.
Then, you have the Protoss army. You see a lot of Zealot/scout, right? Of course not- Scouts suck. How about Zealot/Carrier? Or Dragoon/Carrier? Not very common combinations either- though it's more likely you'll see them in a PvT. In the case of the Carrier, the problem is it's too high up the tech tree; takes too long to make one for a good timing push, for instance. It's why you can see a lot of midgame Zerg attacks with the 4 units previously mentioned, but not with Ultralisks. It's not that the Ultralisk is a bad unit; it just takes too long to get, so you only see them in the late game.
Carriers are the same, only more often than not, you don't see them- even in the late game. What are the Protoss armies like?
Early game: Dragoons, or Zealots, depending on the matchup.
Midgame: Dragoons + Speedlots + support (observers, reaver+shuttle, templars, DTs)
Late game: Dragoons + Speedlots + support (observers, arbiters, templars, reavers)
In other words... a lot of zealots and goons. Remember the crazy 2-port wraith build Leta's used vs. Zerg? Well, you don't see a 2-stargate Scout build very often. In fact, you can be pretty sure that all game long, the Protoss will be making a lot of zealots and dragoons- unless it's PvZ, and the Protoss goes Corsair/Reaver. That single exception aside, Protoss fighting units are mostly just zealots and goons. I guess Corsairs also count- but Protoss Air should be a much better package in SC2 with Phoenix / Void Ray.
|
Hide the farm. Apparently, pylons require a Nexus to be built now, and I suppose the same is true of Supply Depots with Command Centers. I guess the new tactic will be called Hide the Assimilator?
This is so unnecessary, I wish someone would point out to them that it's more or less a non-issue in SC. SC and by extension SC2 is probably BETTER OFF with building hiding during annihilation races as it's so easy to find and kill buildings. You might buy a few minutes at most but it's really easy to deal with in SC unlike WC3 where it can be incredibly hard to find farms (hidden off the edge of the map or entirely obscured from view). The main problem was never farm hiding in any case, it was Night Elf players hiding mobile buildings among trees.
|
On October 11 2009 01:37 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
[*] I haven't seen info saying Graviton Beam affects only 1 target: this doesn't make any sense - to choose for example 1 Zergling / 1 Marine or 1 Ultralisk / Siege Tank? I believe you're confused as to what exactly Graviton Beam does. Let me read its tooltip, according to SC2Pod: "Lifts up a target non-massive ground unit, disabling it and making it targeted as an air unit. Channeled ability." You'll notice it always speaks in singular terms: "a (...) unit, disabling it and making it (...)". Here's a quote from Karune: "The Phoenix in the latest build uses energy (4 per second) when casting anti-gravity, thus the same Phoenix is not able to attack the target it is lifting with anti-gravity." Again, no plural terms. "... not able to attack the target it is lifting (...)". You say it makes little sense to be able to lift 1 zergling / 1 marine / 1 tank / 1 ultra. As it happens, a Phoenix using Graviton Beam (the new name of the anti-gravity ability Karune speaks of) can't lift an Ultralisk- because as the SC2Pod description says, it lifts up a non-massive ground unit. Ultralisks are a massive ground unit, much like Thors and Colossi. Siege Tanks, on the other hand, would be prime targets for Graviton Beam; Marines, not so much, because while you're lifting one of them up, his friends will shoot you out of the air.
In the link you gave Karune says that the same Phoenix that is casting this spell can't attack at the same time - that's why it's singular. I'd like to know in what context
"a (...) unit, disabling it and making it (...)" was written, could you give a link to this quote please?
Again I refuse to believe that this spell affects only 1 target - on the same SC2pod page it's said it drains 50 energy + 4 per second. In March when it was just 4 energy per second it could be a single target but with 50 for starters? Well, whatever, I guess we will see.
Show nested quote +On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
What's more AFAIK this spell was supposed to lift buildings into air too, it was described as possible counter against "turtles". I don't ever recall having read that. At any rate, I believe it only affects units, and not buildings, currently.
http://forums.battle.net/thread.html?topicId=10697501059&sid=3000&pageNo=1
+ Show Spoiler +19. Re: Karune Q&A Batch Archive 10/02/2008
---StarCraft II Q&A Batch 28---
"The Hallucination ability has been cut from the High Templar. Instead, it will have an Anti-Gravity ability in addition to its classic Psi Storm ability. This ability will allow a High Templar to lift up buildings and units in the air, disabling their movement and attack, while also making them an air target. This ability can be cast on Supply Depots blocking choke points, as well as incoming Thors, or other threatening units. This has been the first ability the Devs have been comfortable with, in giving players a real choice to be made, to use Psi Storm or the Anti-Gravity ability. This ability is still being balanced, in terms of the duration units and buildings will stay in the air, energy cost, and if it will be a channeling spell (which means the High Templar will be unable to move or cast other abilities while casting the Anti-Gravity ability)."
There it is but you are right on this one - they can't lift buildings now 
Show nested quote +On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
Even Dustin Browder himself said in an interview that he considers Mothership as unit made for fun, i.e. not made in competitive games.
You wrote about Carriers being too high in tech earlier even though they are being used and you mention Mothership?
What I meant to say in that occation is: You have a Zerg army in, say, ZvP. Which unit combinations do you see? Lurker/Ling is used. Muta/ling as well. Lurker/hydra/ling as well. Mass hydra is another. All in all, Zerg can quickly switch between these four unit types, mix and match as they see fit. Then, you have the Protoss army. You see a lot of Zealot/scout, right? Of course not- Scouts suck. How about Zealot/Carrier? Or Dragoon/Carrier? Not very common combinations either- though it's more likely you'll see them in a PvT. In the case of the Carrier, the problem is it's too high up the tech tree; takes too long to make one for a good timing push, for instance. It's why you can see a lot of midgame Zerg attacks with the 4 units previously mentioned, but not with Ultralisks. It's not that the Ultralisk is a bad unit; it just takes too long to get, so you only see them in the late game. Carriers are the same, only more often than not, you don't see them- even in the late game. What are the Protoss armies like? Early game: Dragoons, or Zealots, depending on the matchup. Midgame: Dragoons + Speedlots + support (observers, reaver+shuttle, templars, DTs) Late game: Dragoons + Speedlots + support (observers, arbiters, templars, reavers) In other words... a lot of zealots and goons. Remember the crazy 2-port wraith build Leta's used vs. Zerg? Well, you don't see a 2-stargate Scout build very often. In fact, you can be pretty sure that all game long, the Protoss will be making a lot of zealots and dragoons- unless it's PvZ, and the Protoss goes Corsair/Reaver. That single exception aside, Protoss fighting units are mostly just zealots and goons. I guess Corsairs also count- but Protoss Air should be a much better package in SC2 with Phoenix / Void Ray.
OK let's stay with Carriers in PvT for now - you wrote
On October 05 2009 03:07 Zato-1 wrote:
Do you remember Battle Report 1? David Kim owning some Protoss player as Terran? The unit combo with which he ran the Protoss over was Hellion - Marauder - Banshee. Hellions tore up the Zealots, Marauders were effective against Stalkers and Colossi, and Banshees helped to dismantle the Colossus threat. These units have something in common: none of them can attack air. In SC1, you got something similar in Tanks + Vultures, but the only serious air counters are Zealot bombs on top of the tanks + mines, and Carriers- Carriers are so far up the tech tree and such a huge investment, they're not something you can build to support your standing army. Unlike, say, Reavers or Templars.
I assume you've said this in BroodWar context, that you based it on how your BW PvT games look like.
You haven't ever seen Carriers used to win a game? I know that they are far in tech and it's better to use them on certain maps to abuse cliffs but I understood this part of your post as "Carriers are useless, they shouldn't be used at all".
I disagree about Carriers not being able to support your main army because (beside winning games with just pure Carriers) it's not uncommon to make Terran overreact about Carrier threat, spend money on Turrets and Goliaths while Protoss doesn't commit himself to just Carriers and attacks Terran's answer mainly with ground forces.
Similarly in SC2 if sources are correct Interceptors and thus Carriers are even more powerful so they should be used more often.
I try to follow changes done to SC2 units and so far I see lot's of attempts to make all of them useful, to avoid putting units that may be considered as useless in.
Mothership is the only unit that doesn't follow that trend but as devs said multiple times by now it's hard to balance it because most of the games played don't last long enough. I hope Mothership finds it's niche through beta.
|
On October 12 2009 09:10 beetlelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 11 2009 01:37 Zato-1 wrote:On October 10 2009 22:29 beetlelisk wrote:
[*] I haven't seen info saying Graviton Beam affects only 1 target: this doesn't make any sense - to choose for example 1 Zergling / 1 Marine or 1 Ultralisk / Siege Tank? I believe you're confused as to what exactly Graviton Beam does. Let me read its tooltip, according to SC2Pod: "Lifts up a target non-massive ground unit, disabling it and making it targeted as an air unit. Channeled ability." You'll notice it always speaks in singular terms: "a (...) unit, disabling it and making it (...)". Here's a quote from Karune: "The Phoenix in the latest build uses energy (4 per second) when casting anti-gravity, thus the same Phoenix is not able to attack the target it is lifting with anti-gravity." Again, no plural terms. "... not able to attack the target it is lifting (...)". You say it makes little sense to be able to lift 1 zergling / 1 marine / 1 tank / 1 ultra. As it happens, a Phoenix using Graviton Beam (the new name of the anti-gravity ability Karune speaks of) can't lift an Ultralisk- because as the SC2Pod description says, it lifts up a non-massive ground unit. Ultralisks are a massive ground unit, much like Thors and Colossi. Siege Tanks, on the other hand, would be prime targets for Graviton Beam; Marines, not so much, because while you're lifting one of them up, his friends will shoot you out of the air. In the link you gave Karune says that the same Phoenix that is casting this spell can't attack at the same time - that's why it's singular. I'd like to know in what context was written, could you give a link to this quote please? Again I refuse to believe that this spell affects only 1 target - on the same SC2pod page it's said it drains 50 energy + 4 per second. In March when it was just 4 energy per second it could be a single target but with 50 for starters? Well, whatever, I guess we will see.
Um, I gave a link in the very first piece of text you quoted, here: SC2Pod in the description of the Graviton Beam ability.
Here's a Screenshot of Graviton Beam in action: Each phoenix lifts up a single siege tank, which is kind of what I figured was the greatest use of Graviton Beam vs. Terran. In Battle Report 3, we see David Kim's phoenix lifting up a queen with Graviton Beam, when there are a bunch of workers nearby. Wouldn't he have dealt more damage lifting up a group of workers? Yes, but I'm pretty sure Graviton Beam affects only one unit at a time.
Against Zerg, Graviton Beam could be of great help vs. Lurkers (yes, you can lift Burrowed units); against Protoss, you can lift up the enemy Immortals. It's not a bad ability if you can only lift up a single unit at once, you just have to pick the right units to lift.
|
I'm sorry, I missed that, I stopped reading after words non-massive and focused on this more.
I'm surprised, as I wrote I was more used to it as spell lifting even buildings so changing that to single units was really strange for me. Thanks for screenshot!
|
On October 12 2009 09:10 beetlelisk wrote:You haven't ever seen Carriers used to win a game? I know that they are far in tech and it's better to use them on certain maps to abuse cliffs but I understood this part of your post as "Carriers are useless, they shouldn't be used at all". I disagree about Carriers not being able to support your main army because (beside winning games with just pure Carriers) it's not uncommon to make Terran overreact about Carrier threat, spend money on Turrets and Goliaths while Protoss doesn't commit himself to just Carriers and attacks Terran's answer mainly with ground forces. Similarly in SC2 if sources are correct Interceptors and thus Carriers are even more powerful so they should be used more often.
I don't think Carriers are a bad unit in PvT- I just think they're a huge investment and not something you can transition to easily. Unlike, say, Wraits or Mutas. I'd compare the Carrier more to something like Ultralisks. The Protoss air force looks to be much more accessible in SC2 thanks to Phoenix + Void Rays, to the point that the threat of a serious midgame Protoss air force seems plausible.
As to Carriers in SC2:
I thought the max number of interceptors per Carrier was 4. After doing some research, it turns out I was wrong- still 8 interceptors per Carrier, and they do more damage.
On the other hand, you also have to watch out for the Carrier counters. Carriers are most useful in SC1 in PvT, because Terran doesn't have any unit that can simultaneously match the Carrier's power and mobility. In SC2, the Viking was pretty much made with the intention of being a direct counter to Carriers in mind.
On October 12 2009 09:10 beetlelisk wrote:
I try to follow changes done to SC2 units and so far I see lot's of attempts to make all of them useful, to avoid putting units that may be considered as useless in.
Mothership is the only unit that doesn't follow that trend but as devs said multiple times by now it's hard to balance it because most of the games played don't last long enough. I hope Mothership finds it's niche through beta.
To me, the Battlecruiser and Mothership are still a mystery. What are their strengths? What are their counters?
|
On October 04 2009 10:03 Engineer wrote:
WOW more trash articles from people speculating before the game is even out... Here's a tip.... WAIT FOR IT TO COME OUT
YEAH!!!
close down the sc2 section and delete all the news of zatics build and TL's Blizzcon coverage.
Let's only trash eachother and let Tl burst into flames of flamewar.
I rarely take time to write negative stuff but this was just wrong, keep the sc2 speculations up
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
