Nice to see static defense buffed, I still think there's absolutely no need to buff the hands down best harass unit in the game (Banshee).
T has SO MUCH HARASS power already...
Z got nerfed very hard this patch. The turret and thor buff will render Muta harass useless, and the 2 best Z units got nerfed too in late game. Roach upgrade is now laughable. This is just terrible for the race as a whole.
On March 31 2010 03:51 kilika wrote: wait so is this patch live already? i hope the servers aren't down for too long i want to play as soon as work is done.
As if Psi storm hasn't been nerfed enough as it is. :/ It's nice to see an improvement in the static defenses. The missile turret still seems kinda weak to me compared to the others. That is unless it's 12x2.
I can't download the patch yet though, so it must not have hit the US yet.
looks like thors are a good counter to Mutas now. Splash o.o Zerg looks really able to expand better now with static d. Organic bonus being nerf seems huge. Looks like end game roaches aren't nearly as good anymore
the high templar one was understandable... Sure, terran has emp, but when protoss gets a decent sized army with a couple of templars they can just demolish just about anything within a couple of seconds.
I dont like how they are trying to streamline everything. At the start roach regen was something special now its just a gimmick. Templars was already nerfed from BW to SC2 and now theyre slowly removing the impact they have on the game.
o Thor + Anti-Air damage has been decreased from 10+6 light to 8+4 light. + Anti-Air attack now deals splash damage in a 0.5 radius.
omfg, I disagree with almost every change in this patch, wow. Especially this one
o Roach + Organic Carapace no longer grants bonus regeneration to unburrowed roaches.
Ok, I take it back, these are really good. And the imbalord nerf is needed, but I don't think lowering the primary damage was the way to go about that. It's imba for another reason.
o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
o Spore Crawler + The cost has been decreased from 100 to 75.
I love how protoss is nonstop nerfed -_-;;. Can I get a buff please? Canon buff is cool tho, might make PvZ fe easier., sucks about the storms tho. When will patch be available, anyone know how long the system will be down for? edit: nvm, dling
P can't complain, Z got nerfed twice as hard. Late game Z was basically destroyed and Muta Harass against T is gone. Why Blizz felt the need to buff T even more?
Blizzard is really on the ball. I can't think of many changes they haven't been on top of, really. Except for high ground mechanics, which they can always change later without effecting too much of other balance (since map design will balance that stuff).
Blizz, keep it up!
EDIT: except I think Ultras should shrink in size a bit, and DTs and archons should be buffed somehow. Also, I'd rather have an observatory for Toss instead of more expensive observers, because then you can kill the tech building to prevent detection.
On March 31 2010 04:05 McCain wrote: Well, Roaches have pretty much no identity now. Just a Hydra with more health and less DPS.
It'll still have its uses but it's unfortunate that Blizzard is killing any uniqueness left in Zerg's units.
Same thing already happened to the stalker. It went from a devious harass unit with blink to the multi-purpose backbone with a blink "gimmick" for later. The Immortal was too good at the purpose as a backbone unit being 4 psi and super powered, and was moved back to robotics ages ago.
To balance SC2, the final product comes closer to looking like a slosh of half-baked new ideas with each patch.
I think Blizzard is trying to encourage the possibility of Protoss FE, which is definitely necessary on some maps (metalopolis) against a safe expanding zerg with AA.
Organic carapace is a tier 3 upgrade i dont see how it will change zvz? if anything it will simplify it because timing push for lair will no longer be a viable strategy.
you guys have no idea how ridiculous TvP lategame was, when all P needed to do is warp in HT's everywhere and destroy every Terran army before it can reach any possible expansion. i'm still not sure about the roaches, as I definitely don't encounter t3 roaches much at all.
On March 31 2010 04:08 zazen wrote: P can't complain, Z got nerfed twice as hard. Late game Z was basically destroyed and Muta Harass against T is gone. Why Blizz felt the need to buff T even more?
we dont complain about PvX we just complain about the HT nerf
The organic carapace nerf was primarily because of ZvP and specifically vs storms. The fact that they now made it useless, makes roaches almost fucking trash in ZvZ
On March 31 2010 04:08 zazen wrote: P can't complain, Z got nerfed twice as hard. Late game Z was basically destroyed and Muta Harass against T is gone. Why Blizz felt the need to buff T even more?
Oh please don't tell that zerg was not imbalanced... Z > T.
On March 31 2010 03:47 Archerofaiur wrote: o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
Does the decreased attack period on the Spine make it do more DPS? Wonderful if it does^^
Storm was really crazy late game with the way units bunch up and how players are forced into using small sized units all game, the damage you can put on an army is obscene
On March 31 2010 04:11 CharlieMurphy wrote: The organic carapace nerf was primarily because of ZvP and specifically vs storms. The fact that they now made it useless, makes roaches almost fucking trash in ZvZ
So you're making it to T3 in ZVZ regularly with a large roach army? I think you know something most of us don't.
YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
On March 31 2010 03:47 Archerofaiur wrote: o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
Does the decreased attack period on the Spine make it do more DPS? Wonderful if it does^^
It's like a 42% dps increase to light armor between both changes, and 28% dps increase to armored with the shorter attack period. Of course I think these % dps increases aren't totally the most useful information- in practice it's more about things like a spinecrawler now two-shots even +1 armor marines.
On March 31 2010 03:47 Archerofaiur wrote: o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
Does the decreased attack period on the Spine make it do more DPS? Wonderful if it does^^
it does more damage, faster. so ya, it does a shit load more.
Does this mean I can now use spine crawlers to protect my mineral line vs hellions? I hope so. (I hate creating ZvT builds revolving around hellion>banshee timings)
On March 31 2010 04:11 CharlieMurphy wrote: The organic carapace nerf was primarily because of ZvP and specifically vs storms. The fact that they now made it useless, makes roaches almost fucking trash in ZvZ
So you're making it to T3 in ZVZ regularly with a large roach army? I think you know something most of us don't.
Nerfing organic carapace in makes no sense, its not like it was a major issue (after they cut it in half last patch)... I mean its a bit of a buff to hydras in ZvZ lategame I suppose, but really I don't get the point other than to counteract the ZvP effect of a psi storm nerf.
On March 31 2010 04:13 De4ngus wrote: YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
the problem for forge expand is the timing where toss didnt have many unit for prevent drop/nydus, but now the nydus get nerf from previous patch for you can kill it bfr it spawn with worker
On March 31 2010 04:11 CharlieMurphy wrote: The organic carapace nerf was primarily because of ZvP and specifically vs storms. The fact that they now made it useless, makes roaches almost fucking trash in ZvZ
So you're making it to T3 in ZVZ regularly with a large roach army? I think you know something most of us don't.
Well since the last patch (where they nerfed the regen upg), I haven't been using the same strat but yes. It's important to tech in ZvZ, and the primary reason for t3 was to get this upgrade..
Now that they nerfed it again, it's totally worthless. t3 is only for crackling and maybe broodlord now.
On March 31 2010 04:13 De4ngus wrote: YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
are you kidding? templar > collosus since the collo nerf
On March 31 2010 04:13 De4ngus wrote: YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
are you kidding? templar > collosus since the collo nerf
uh, no? situational, but i still prefer robo builds because the counters are hard counters.
Welllll...good changes to Static Defense, good change to Thor, somewhat baffling change to Banshees (were they not already good enough?), okay change to HTs (Storm w/ smartcasting was somewhat overpowered at lower levels of play, with smartcasting allowing even poor players to instantly blanket an entire army with Storm; I think, though, that a damage buff would be helpful to offset this nerf), and I'm ambivalent about the Roach change. As not a Zerg player myself, I don't know how useful the above-ground regen actually was in practice; but I do hate to see such a unique feature depart.
Good to see terran get a solid option against mutalisks, and nice to see static D get buffs all around. Although, I'm very surprised at the HT nerf... it's not like they were overpowered...
what is the point of going t3 as zerg if they are just going to nerf everything about t3, ultras are already questionable, broodlords got a 20% dps nerf. Organic carapace nerf... why even tech to hive? This just encourages even less choices by the zerg and after all these interviews saying they want to increase zerg army diversity i'm starting to wonder how they plan on doing that.
Wow, I can't believe they nerfed organic carapace. That was the only reason I got roaches in the first place late game. Without those, they are nearly useless. This must be a ploy to get people to use ultras, but I think they'll just use hydras instead.
However the spine crawler change is very interesting. Not as good against roaches, but better against everything else. Still only 2 shots lings though.
I can only guess blizzard has stats of over all % of races win and units involved . I only hope that they only look at the stats across the gold and plat divisions. It is such a bad idea If they take lower lvl player's games into balance consideration. I can see how at lower levels , T dies to storms, since it's easier to cast than to counter/dodge. but at high level, T can counter with ghost emp/snipe etc, and players move and dodge much better. Anyway it doesn't make sense to me why templars is nerfed so much...
AMagadd, they changed something again! Oh noes now game is bad than it was before(I don't really know this coz havent played the new patch yet, but how can I be wrong about something)!!!
Awful patch. 1) Banshee deals the most fucking damage in the game allready, you dont need to buff it. 2) This roach upgrade is a total waste now. Like who has even the time to burrow roaches during the battle?
As a P player I can understand blizzard not wanting psi storm to be the only toss weapon in the arsenal against mid/late game terran. Now with the nerf toss may need a buff elsewhere to compensate, but that remains to be seen.
The static defense buff was a good one, especially for the spine crawler. Though I wonder if they went a little overboard with the turret. It went from doing 10 dmg per attack against muta in SCI to doing 24 dmg in SCII (does anyone know if its attack speed is the same?) That seems like a large increase in power.
The thor change seems solid. It should be better against muta and carriers now (I'm curious to see how well the splash damage affects interceptors).
The banshee buff seems a bit strange, no one is complaining about the weakness of that unit right now.
really surprised how many people are whining about the storm nerf, it was hugely imbalanced against terrans. terran isnt even my main race and i could consistently beat much more skilled players just as long as i survived until storm tech. only problem is its a bit weak against zerg now, but even in sc1 we didnt use every unit in every matchup.
high templar and roach nerf are really questionable? Why is Blizzard reducing the importance of casters? They should be actually increasing it, so its more fun and great when executed well.
These 2 changes make sense for low level play, but are really stupid for medium, high and pro level play.
On March 31 2010 04:13 De4ngus wrote: YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
are you kidding? templar > collosus since the collo nerf
uh, no? situational, but i still prefer robo builds because the counters are hard counters.
the colossus didnt even get nerfed that badly T_T
well it changed the collo to 1 shotting rines to 2. imo the amount of money it costs for 1 collo that can get targeted down with a stim in 2 seconds isn't worth it when I can storm an entire army against terr. (well now since patch maybe 1/2 their army)
On March 31 2010 04:25 member1987 wrote: high templar and roach nerf are really questionable? Why is Blizzard reducing the importance of casters? They should be actually increasing it, so its more fun and great when executed well.
These 2 changes make sense for low level play, but are really stupid for medium, high and pro level play.
Or will the nerf really screw low level players more? Obviously you're gonna have better storming if you're a higher level player, so maybe low level players will just straight up miss(lol). And I'm a Z player, I support the swarm 100%, but even I agree roaches needed that nerf.
I can only guess blizzard has stats of over all % of races win and units involved . I only hope that they only look at the stats across the gold and plat divisions. It is such a bad idea If they take lower lvl player's games into balance consideration. I can see how at lower levels , T dies to storms, since it's easier to cast than to counter/dodge. but at high level, T can counter with ghost emp/snipe etc, and players move and dodge much better. Anyway it doesn't make sense to me why templars is nerfed so much...
Like it or not, Blizzard does and should take into account lower level play. This is probably a good change overall, though I do think Blizzard should offset it by buffing up the damage somewhat.
On March 31 2010 04:25 radeon wrote: spine crawler: Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6? edit: sorry my bad xd
I think that means that it attacks more often, so i would consider that a buff. As for all the other static defense seems like a nice change them but im a little bummed about HT, but i dont think that will be something i notice to much.
I can only guess blizzard has stats of over all % of races win and units involved . I only hope that they only look at the stats across the gold and plat divisions. It is such a bad idea If they take lower lvl player's games into balance consideration. I can see how at lower levels , T dies to storms, since it's easier to cast than to counter/dodge. but at high level, T can counter with ghost emp/snipe etc, and players move and dodge much better. Anyway it doesn't make sense to me why templars is nerfed so much...
Like it or not, Blizzard does and should take into account lower level play. This is probably a good change overall, though I do think Blizzard should offset it by buffing up the damage somewhat.
Absolutely they should. And actually, I like your idea of upping damage to offset the nerf, storms just don't seem to have the punch they used to.
Unbelievable how all those tosses are whining about HT's. Storm was overpowered and you can't disagree with this. Yesyesyes, I know some smart tosses will come and say "make tanks". Tanks are way too expensive atm and they get raped by any toss army.
On March 31 2010 04:20 Rice wrote: what is the point of going t3 as zerg if they are just going to nerf everything about t3, ultras are already questionable, broodlords got a 20% dps nerf. Organic carapace nerf... why even tech to hive? This just encourages even less choices by the zerg and after all these interviews saying they want to increase zerg army diversity i'm starting to wonder how they plan on doing that.
Saying broodlords received a 20% dps nerf is highly misleading. The initial attack was weakened 20%, but the broodlings still do the same damage. The broodlings are really what makes broodlords so good, especially against armies that have tanks in them.
This patch seems to be in the right direction. Damage reduction and slight AOE added to Thor, as well as turret damage increase vs light should definitely put a halt to mutalisk harass, or at least provide a solid option (not that they didn't work before, just better now). Cannon damage increase will help vs early game Zerg, and psi range decrease helps Zerg later on in the game. Overall some nice changes. Hopefully we will start seeing frequent patching as the beta draws to a close in the next couple of months.
On March 31 2010 04:32 mOnion wrote: why are you guys getting so many spine crawlers in zvz anyway?
So that we can try strategies that don't involve spamming 10000 roaches. I've won several games using spinecrawler---> muta --> broodlord/roach builds.
On March 31 2010 04:32 mOnion wrote: why are you guys getting so many spine crawlers in zvz anyway?
So that we can try strategies that don't involve spamming 10000 roaches. I've won several games using spinecrawler---> muta --> broodlord/roach builds.
On March 31 2010 04:34 Irrelevant wrote: Roach upgrade was crazy op(they could literally stand in stacked storm and out heal it), but completely removing the regen is a bit too much
So what are you going to do now as zerg? You only have the hydralisk. One unit type army, awesome diversity!
On March 31 2010 03:55 Quixoticism wrote: As if Psi storm hasn't been nerfed enough as it is. :/ It's nice to see an improvement in the static defenses. The missile turret still seems kinda weak to me compared to the others. That is unless it's 12x2.
I can't download the patch yet though, so it must not have hit the US yet.
still? the turret was the best static in the game before >_< now its a tossup, prolly spines are on top.
I don't know what the big deal is about the banshee buff.
#1: Scout the starport.
#2a: Get static D which is now stronger (and that z move around as needed) #2b: Get AA units #2c: some combo of a and b (which is also more viable because of static d buff)
Zerg need to get used to the face that maybe spore crawlers will become more necessary since scourge don't exist anymore.
EDIT: Also, any patch that makes roaches less used is good IMO. They are destroying racial identity as a cheap tank for what should be the expendable/fast/suicide race.
On March 31 2010 04:32 mOnion wrote: why are you guys getting so many spine crawlers in zvz anyway?
So that we can try strategies that don't involve spamming 10000 roaches. I've won several games using spinecrawler---> muta --> broodlord/roach builds.
No, zerg needs a real anti-armor unit. This won't stop zvz from revolving around roaches.
Everybody seems to be sharing their opinions, so I figure I'll share mine, too...
Preface: I'm a Terran player. I was a Protoss player but switched after getting my face pounded in by good Terrans.
The banshee buff seemed unnecessary. They've been a major part of a lot of my builds and it's particularly difficult for Protoss to properly respond to them
Static defense buffs in general were a good call. The Terran missile turret needed this buff vs mutas incredibly badly, and the thor splash damage is nice as well.
The broodlord (GGLord?) nerf was way needed. I actually would have rather seen the overall damage stay the same but have them changed to one attack and therefore only one broodling spawn, but I suppose this works too. I still think they're a bit too high on HP, but I guess they're a "capital ship" and should stay as they are in that regard. It just feels like my units hardly hurt them. Even vikings.
Even as a Terran player, and understanding the frustration of being psi stormed into our bio mass, I STILL disagree with the psi storm nerf. I would have been OK with this change if archons were made more viable, but this really makes the templar tech tree look even more abysmal. Why not add a 0.5 radius to splash damage to the archon as well? Does protoss struggle against mutas as bad as terran at the moment? I really have no idea.
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
that is a good point, but I think the problem is that banshees do too much damage as it is. Even if spore crawlers were free, it still kills a drone and takes time. In that time a 2 banshee will kill your queen, and at least 90% of your drones.
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers/sentries to pick off Banshees against a competent player. Almost impossible without blink. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs and your mineral line hugging against it.
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
why would he be joking? At least post *some* reasonings behind your statements.
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly. As of right now, a protoss army with 2-3 templars will crush any sort of bio composition. EMP helps, but any decent protoss will keep his templars spread apart and near the back of their blob until you cast EMP (unless they feedback your ghost). At least now, early on when protoss doesnt have tons of templar, you can actually stand a chance at winning the battle with stim.
Im not sure how it affects PvZ because I don't play that M/U.
Broodlord nerf I see as a good thing, They are really strong lategame ZvT imo, and can be game deciders quite often.
Turret damage increase against mutas was needed imo. Muta harass is really strong in sc2, and although they cannot stack, they still cause alot of damage. When playing a zerg that does a roach opening into muta tech switch is really hard due to your complete lack of marines when fighting against his roaches. Scanning him and seeing 9 muta usually mean automatic death. At least now turrets stand a fighting chance to allow you to get back into the game, and make marines. In sc1 turrets were better due to their range which allowed them to work together. In sc2 with the shorter initial range, a muta tech switch rapes turrets 1 at a time.
Thor splash damage was needed imo. Your argument is that multiple thors will be able to dispel tons of muta is probably correct. However, if a terran player is capable of attaining 2-3 thors then obviously mutalisks wouldnt be a viable tech choice that late in the game. If you are muta harassing him early on, then typically his economy will be hurting too much to produce a thor quick enough to stop you. If he does succeed in producing a thor, then you know its time to switch tech, rather than continue on with muta production. Thors are expensive, and odds are he will be lacking in other areas because of it. I think the upgrade was good, and at least gives terran a splash attack to air other than HSM, and another way to fend of mutas.
The only thing im confused about is the banshee buff. I don't know why they decided to give it more HP. Currently 1 banshee can kill 1 queen in TvZ, and now they just made that easier. TvP once you amass 6-8 banshees, the added 10 will add up, and since you can practically 1 shot stalkers/sentries, that added hp will lead to quite a few more protoss unit deaths. I think this buff will come back to haunt them lol.
On March 31 2010 04:39 FortuneSyn wrote: organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
storm needed the nerf, however temp tech tree is still outclassed by robo early game.
why would you burrow them one by one? late game ZvP you may be up against mass storm, andif he storms your roaches you mass burrow them and run out of the aoe until you regen then unburrow, rinse and repeat.
On March 31 2010 04:05 {88}iNcontroL wrote: wtf is blizz doing to protoss?
P gets nerfed with each patch and we lose more and more games..
At least they didn't randomly make the DT more obsolete lol
They did that last patch already. I don't think anyone at Blizz actually plays protoss I mean they really don't like that race from the looks of it.
This just reeks badly of wow forum 13 year old QQ. It's just as stupid as the people who claim "WAAHHH, obviously the dev's dont play (inset your class here) so they obviously nerf it, WAHH WAHH WAHH." People need to stop taking it so personally when their race gets some nerfs, its all in the name of balance, sorry.
This is the SC crew handling starcraft, not the wow team. There's no favorites here, because an unbalanced game means less money for them.
Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Now here we have a rational thinker who doesn't immediately burn down his house in rage. I cant believe people still doubt the people that made STARCRAFT, the most balanced RTS known to man, and think they somehow make decisions without thought.
The people going 'wtf?' over the banshee buff need to think a little. Blizz just buffed all of the anti-air static defense, so to maintain the previous version's banshee balance, they of course need to give it a buff.
They can always give splash to archons like they just did to Thor. That would really be great IMO. Also, the better Archons are, the more HTs and DTs will be used beforehand.
Doesn't look TOO bad..glad for the storm nerf. I didn't use the late game roach thing much anyway so not too bad there. The static D buff is useful and sort of goes back to some original plans I had for sc2 before playing the beta and seeing how fast buildings die
In my opinion, the reason banshees were buffed slightly in HP is because anti-air in general has been buffed. Protoss anti-air is primarily stalkers, Terran has turrets which contribute, and Zerg obviously received the spore colony buff. Since Banshees are not armored units, they take extra damage from stalkers, turrets, spore colonies, and a number of other things that have been recently buffed, so giving Banshees a bit of extra HP seems plausible.
w00t Turrets! Never really understood the +7 v Armored for Turrets since between their range and static nature they rarely ever had to deal with armored air targets and the few they did (Corruptors and Vikings) seemed to be hurt unnecessarily by the bonus damage.
Very nice Thor buff and that along with Turret buff will help meching Terrans a LOT against Zerg.
Roach looks to be in a period of transition with all of the nerfing to its regen. I can't really argue with that though because 145hp for a 75/25 unit particularly with the mutated larvae macro mechanic is really already enough (but then again it could be argued that Vultures' good speed, respectable damage, excellent harass potential, and ok health was already plenty without having to toss free Spider Mines on a 75 mineral unit xD).
My first thought about the Spine Crawler buff was anti-Hellions although they still die in the same number of hits from it (although it *sounds* like they reduced the cooldown of Spine Crawlers? so that would definitely hurt Hellion harass; only other guess for "attack period" is the time it takes the Spine Crawler to shove its pointy appendage out but 2.2 and 1.6 sound way too long for that and I thought that was treated as more of a missile with a specific animation).
Spore Crawler and Photon Cannon buffs are nice.
The three changes I don't agree with then are the Banshee health buff (it really didn't need it from everything I've seen in every match-up), Psi Storm radius decrease (yeah it destroys bio-balls, but I've been questioning the long-term viability of bio-balls for awhile now; also, key there is "bio-balls"- would really prefer to see superior, less ball-y micro emerge before seeing Storm get nerfed like that), and Brood Lord damage decrease. The latter, unless Brood Lords are making some kind of resurgence in ZvP, I don't feel are much of an issue in TvP as long as the Terran scouts the Greater Spire (given that is going to be relatively later-game, should be using more Comsats by then anyway) and macros up some Vikings, the cost of which is more than justified by the Zerg player paying for Brood Lords that should die pretty quickly to a proper counter.
lol so its time to change race? i mean seriously psi storm was the one and only thing that keept u alive vs T and Z... fu blizzard seriously... wow they changed the broodlord damage but the problem is the same. its a flying ultralisk that shits units without using some kind of mana and survives 30 storms and laugh at phoenix attacks...
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
I think I'm down for a map patch... more maps with better chokes and less backdoors. Then maybe we can FE on a map other than LT/metalopolis or blistering sands
On March 31 2010 04:41 0neder wrote: They can always give splash to archons like they just did to Thor. That would really be great IMO. Also, the better Archons are, the more HTs and DTs will be used beforehand.
Archons already have splash, what are you talking aboot?
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
Seriously, what is your problem? I'm just trying to throw in my two cents and yet you find some need to start flaming me?
I am a Protoss, and ya the HT nerf sucks but overall it was a good patch. Except the Banshee buff (WTF?). Terran fast teching to banshees is going to be hard to deal with. Banshees in TvT are already really strong and I don't like this buff at all.
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
that is a good point, but I think the problem is that banshees do too much damage as it is. Even if spore crawlers were free, it still kills a drone and takes time. In that time a 2 banshee will kill your queen, and at least 90% of your drones.
For what it's worth, it is definitely true that one banshee vs one queen always yields banshee as the victor.
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
Seriously, what is your problem? I'm just trying to throw in my two cents and yet you find some need to start flaming me?
thats not a flame T_T you said only good response is phoenix, i said nuh uh stalkers with obs are good too, and YOU smarted off with "can obs atk banshees?" and that competent players would out micro me, implying i was incompetent.
Seems like every time a patch does something right, blizzard throws in a seemingly crappy change. Cannon buff seems nice and storm radius decreases is sensible since there was an emp buff. Banshee increased health are you kidding? How is that necessary at all
organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
This is probably why Blizzard made this change; to promote more Micro for Zerg players late-game.
Blizzard is trying to make the Roach more micro-intensive and interesting to use, rather than just an a-move unit. Obviously, it's an experiment, and it may not work out at all in practice...but I'm interesting to see how it is used by good Zerg players. It has potential.
On March 31 2010 04:41 Mecha71 wrote: This just reeks badly of wow forum 13 year old QQ. It's just as stupid as the people who claim "WAAHHH, obviously the dev's dont play (inset your class here) so they obviously nerf it, WAHH WAHH WAHH." People need to stop taking it so personally when their race gets some nerfs, its all in the name of balance, sorry.
This is the SC crew handling starcraft, not the wow team. There's no favorites here, because an unbalanced game means less money for them.
I was just going to post the same thing. I'm not sure why everyone wants to see their pet race be OP. An unbalanced game is simply not fun. That's not to say people shouldn't get upset over buffs or nerfs, but they should only w/r/t the grand scheme of overall balance. This isn't WoW or the b.net forums. Use your head.
The change to static defense kinda offsets the Banshee HP increase when harassing, but also makes it a more formidable straight-up fighter, which it already was?
Seems like a real powerhouse staple now, which is weird given that it's also a stealth flyer. Imagine wraiths with like 180 hp.
On March 31 2010 03:47 Archerofaiur wrote: o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
Does the decreased attack period on the Spine make it do more DPS? Wonderful if it does^^
It's like a 42% dps increase to light armor between both changes, and 28% dps increase to armored with the shorter attack period. Of course I think these % dps increases aren't totally the most useful information- in practice it's more about things like a spinecrawler now two-shots even +1 armor marines.
9.(09) DPS -> 15.625 DPS, a ~72% increase 13.(63) DPS -> 18.75, a 37.5% increase
HTs are still OP, but they should be, they're the best dps magic caster in the game, always have been. If you're not using HTs you're just bad at the game.
The only change that is just stupid is the further roach nerf. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
Hey everyone US Server is back up, DLing patch now. Seems that Blizzard tracker is down, but HTTP is going strong. Anyone else able to DL yet?
Edit: Didn't want to double post so:
On March 31 2010 04:50 danl9rm wrote: HTs are still OP, but they should be, they're the best dps magic caster in the game, always have been. If you're not using HTs you're just bad at the game.
The only change that is just stupid is the further roach nerf. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.
I agree that HTs are powerful but I wouldn't say they are overly so. Late game versus Zerg especially when they have an air/ground army you cannot try to counter their ground with Colossi anymore because Corrupters and Mutalisks will tear them up. Carriers don't really work to well if your opponent get a bunch of Corrupters either (not that you should no Carriers, but massing them isn't exactly viable). So it comes down to the HT, if you make them too weak you will gimp toss late game to the point of stupidity. The AOE size nerf should put it down to a more BW size, which was a big enough AOE as far as I'm concerned.
On March 31 2010 04:49 RPGabe wrote: The change to static defense kinda offsets the Banshee HP increase when harassing, but also makes it a more formidable straight-up fighter, which it already was?
Seems like a real powerhouse staple now, which is weird given that it's also a stealth flyer. Imagine wraiths with like 180 hp.
180? More like 500+++ Banshees are the most overpowered unit in the game. It has one of the highest DPS, a crapload of life and is super mobile. 2 Banshees propable can kill a queen and 2 hydralisks now. This is like 2 port wraith from hell.
People are saying banshees are a problem in PvT. What the hell? Ever heard of scouting and going for some stalkers?
I seriously have never even been close to losing vs banshees as toss. It's an all in build that relies on the toss having either no detection or no anti air. Seeing as how almost any build today include early stalkers AND observers vs terran I don't understand how you can lose ever to banshee.
Terran just got a lot stronger vs muta! I'm looking forward to starting to go thors / turrets in my build instead of marines. Marauder / medivac / helion / thor gogogo! ><
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
Seriously, what is your problem? I'm just trying to throw in my two cents and yet you find some need to start flaming me?
thats not a flame T_T you said only good response is phoenix, i said nuh uh stalkers with obs are good too, and YOU smarted off with "can obs atk banshees?" and that competent players would out micro me, implying i was incompetent.
dont act like your all innocent.
I simply said competent players can out micro your Stalker/Sentry especially being able to abuse terrain such a cliffs. Did I even imply that you're an incompetent player? Even with Stalkers guarding your mineral lines, it's still very easy to lose workers even if the Stalkers can get a few pot shots off. Phoenix, on the other hand, will drive away the threat completely. Of course Obs are necessary if the T gets cloak and overcommits, but I still find Phoenix to be the best counter when the Banshee numbers grow, especially since you can recycle them to harass the T when the Banshee harass is gone or to lift units in battle.
And no need to point fingers regarding who's flaming who and blah blah...I assume you're more mature than the average 2nd grader. Point fingers is certainly not going to get us anywhere, especially online in a forum.
organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
This is probably why Blizzard made this change; to promote more Micro for Zerg players late-game.
Blizzard is trying to make the Roach more micro-intensive and interesting to use, rather than just an a-move unit. Obviously, it's an experiment, and it may not work out at all in practice...but I'm interesting to see how it is used by good Zerg players. It has potential.
I'll shift click your roaches with my overseer, while you try to "micro" burrow. Let's see who wins.
On March 31 2010 04:54 StarBrift wrote: People are saying banshees are a problem in PvT. What the hell? Ever heard of scouting and going for some stalkers?
I seriously have never even been close to losing vs banshees as toss. It's an all in build that relies on the toss having either no detection or no anti air. Seeing as how almost any build today include early stalkers AND observers vs terran I don't understand how you can lose ever to banshee.
Terran just got a lot stronger vs muta! I'm looking forward to starting to go thors / turrets in my build instead of marines. Marauder / medivac / helion / thor gogogo! ><
thats what i said! >_< people get angry if you provide solutions though.
This patch has some interesting implications to the PvT matchup (mostly just through the storm nerf). Do you guys think that Dark Templar might become a more viable tech route in PvT because of this, since HT won't decimate bio armies with 2-3 storms?
An Immortal Drop + DT warp-in could be a very effective harass to keep a Terran from pushing out with EMP, however I don't know if the timings would necessarily work.
I like most of the changes (how could I not, being a Terran player ). But does anyone else think that hellions are gonna go from minimal use to pretty much none at all, seeing how fast they'll be shut down by spine crawlers?
On March 31 2010 04:56 c.Deadly wrote: This patch has some interesting implications to the PvT matchup (mostly just through the storm nerf). Do you guys think that Dark Templar might become a more viable tech route in PvT because of this, since HT won't decimate bio armies with 2-3 storms?
An Immortal Drop + DT warp-in could be a very effective harass to keep a Terran from pushing out with EMP, however I don't know if the timings would necessarily work.
Sensor tower usually solves. But its all hear say anyways, not many terrans besides me have started to use sensor tower in pvt tvz tvt
On March 31 2010 04:54 StarBrift wrote: People are saying banshees are a problem in PvT. What the hell? Ever heard of scouting and going for some stalkers?
I seriously have never even been close to losing vs banshees as toss. It's an all in build that relies on the toss having either no detection or no anti air. Seeing as how almost any build today include early stalkers AND observers vs terran I don't understand how you can lose ever to banshee.
Terran just got a lot stronger vs muta! I'm looking forward to starting to go thors / turrets in my build instead of marines. Marauder / medivac / helion / thor gogogo! ><
Viking buff was not enough to make you guys stop bitching about muta, so blizzard throws another bone, rather than working on REAL issues like zerg unit diversity, infestor range/abilities, etc. Yep.. GG.
organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
This is probably why Blizzard made this change; to promote more Micro for Zerg players late-game.
Blizzard is trying to make the Roach more micro-intensive and interesting to use, rather than just an a-move unit. Obviously, it's an experiment, and it may not work out at all in practice...but I'm interesting to see how it is used by good Zerg players. It has potential.
I'll shift click your roaches with my overseer, while you try to "micro" burrow. Let's see who wins.
Roaches do not deal any damage. They are meatshields. You do not micro meatshields.
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
Seriously, what is your problem? I'm just trying to throw in my two cents and yet you find some need to start flaming me?
thats not a flame T_T you said only good response is phoenix, i said nuh uh stalkers with obs are good too, and YOU smarted off with "can obs atk banshees?" and that competent players would out micro me, implying i was incompetent.
dont act like your all innocent.
I simply said competent players can out micro your Stalker/Sentry especially being able to abuse terrain such a cliffs. Did I even imply that you're an incompetent player? Even with Stalkers guarding your mineral lines, it's still very easy to lose workers even if the Stalkers can get a few pot shots off. Phoenix, on the other hand, will drive away the threat completely. Of course Obs are necessary if the T gets cloak and overcommits, but I still find Phoenix to be the best counter when the Banshee numbers grow, especially since you can recycle them to harass the T when the Banshee harass is gone or to lift units in battle.
And no need to point fingers regarding who's flaming who and blah blah...I assume you're more mature than the average 2nd grader. Point fingers is certainly not going to get us anywhere, especially online in a forum.
teching to phoenix is equally as all in as teching to banshee. you're over committing just to get a unit that cant be attacked by banshees when you could merely macro the army you're going to be getting anyway and use that to defend.
Ok, so it's true :o , I just got the patch and i'm with the US server. Nice finaly banshee is no longer a paper plane with powerful attack. I totaly agree with the change about the zerg and about the toss but it's hard to take about the psystorm, more and more this game begin to be boring to watch because blizz nerf everything who is powerful because noob cry about it. It's like the reaver in Sc/Bw whould not do splash dmg because ppl cry about this is too strong
On March 31 2010 04:34 Irrelevant wrote: Roach upgrade was crazy op(they could literally stand in stacked storm and out heal it), but completely removing the regen is a bit too much
On March 31 2010 03:52 Koffiegast wrote: Roach + Organic Carapace no longer grants bonus regeneration to unburrowed roaches.
Without decreasing the cost? Seems like it becomes like blink but without the real virtues.
I really like the static defense buffs, seems going spine crawlers might be much better for defense against roach when it is ZvZ.
Hopefully we get more diverse zvz play due to the static buff
And pvp! Maybe fast forge will actually be a viable build now, stopping 3gate madness. my guess on the banshee buff is to make it still viable to harass along with the static defense buff. Roaches make total sense cause......roaches...
On March 31 2010 04:58 lew wrote: This shows how egoistic some people are. If you are honest then you agree that storm was OP. I really don't get it why people are crying about it...
High Temps need to be powerful or Toss late game will be gimped. But I think the sensible ones here can agree that the AOE it had prior to this patch was OP.
On March 31 2010 04:42 TerranUp16 wrote: My first thought about the Spine Crawler buff was anti-Hellions although they still die in the same number of hits from it (although it *sounds* like they reduced the cooldown of Spine Crawlers? so that would definitely hurt Hellion harass; only other guess for "attack period" is the time it takes the Spine Crawler to shove its pointy appendage out but 2.2 and 1.6 sound way too long for that and I thought that was treated as more of a missile with a specific animation).
Spines take out Hellions in 4 hits instead of 5. And the higher DPS helps.
organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
This is probably why Blizzard made this change; to promote more Micro for Zerg players late-game.
Blizzard is trying to make the Roach more micro-intensive and interesting to use, rather than just an a-move unit. Obviously, it's an experiment, and it may not work out at all in practice...but I'm interesting to see how it is used by good Zerg players. It has potential.
I'll shift click your roaches with my overseer, while you try to "micro" burrow. Let's see who wins.
Roaches do not deal any damage. They are meatshields. You do not micro meatshields.
uh, you should! micro's good vs protoss late game, you'll be all suave dodgin storms underground, poppin up, sniping templar, yer!
interesting notes, like the static defense buff dunno bout the storm nerf. i guess it was owning zerg pretty bad but against terran this is gonna be pretty big. banshee +10 hp whut? unnecessary but okay i guess !
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
Yeah, except static defense sucks against Banshees. The only good response from P is Phoenix.
and stalkers and obs and sentries ohmy!
Can Obs attack Banshees? Also, try to micro around your stalkers to pick of Banshees against a competent player. It's especially a nightmare on maps with cliffs.
OH against a competent player? sorry i misunderstood, i thought we were talking about banshees being controlled by a 4 year old. my bad dude, your right, placing stalkers with obs to give vision at key points behind your minerals is a dum dum dummie idea.
Seriously, what is your problem? I'm just trying to throw in my two cents and yet you find some need to start flaming me?
thats not a flame T_T you said only good response is phoenix, i said nuh uh stalkers with obs are good too, and YOU smarted off with "can obs atk banshees?" and that competent players would out micro me, implying i was incompetent.
dont act like your all innocent.
I simply said competent players can out micro your Stalker/Sentry especially being able to abuse terrain such a cliffs. Did I even imply that you're an incompetent player? Even with Stalkers guarding your mineral lines, it's still very easy to lose workers even if the Stalkers can get a few pot shots off. Phoenix, on the other hand, will drive away the threat completely. Of course Obs are necessary if the T gets cloak and overcommits, but I still find Phoenix to be the best counter when the Banshee numbers grow, especially since you can recycle them to harass the T when the Banshee harass is gone or to lift units in battle.
And no need to point fingers regarding who's flaming who and blah blah...I assume you're more mature than the average 2nd grader. Point fingers is certainly not going to get us anywhere, especially online in a forum.
teching to phoenix is equally as all in as teching to banshee. you're over committing just to get a unit that cant be attacked by banshees when you could merely macro the army you're going to be getting anyway and use that to defend.
It's not all in if you make one Stargate for their two Starports + two Tech Labs and cloak research. Also, Phoenix's build fast, especially with chrono boost, making them perfectly adequate each time I've encountered them against a 2 port Banshee user. They're also faster and deal damage quite quickly against them when they're retreating back to their base. You can easily just halt production when they transition out of their harass and use remaining Phoenixes for anything you please later on.
On March 31 2010 04:58 lew wrote: This shows how egoistic some people are. If you are honest then you agree that storm was OP. I really don't get it why people are crying about it...
They are OP in pvt, but useless in pvz, which is a much harder matchup... and now it's even harder! Thanks!
I would prefer to leave the cannon hp untouched and get some attack speed upgrade.Its so lame to see zerglings just passing by and you killing 3 out of 20.
And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
I believe that Phoenixes will still kill Banshees in the same amount of hits (they did (5+5) x2 before, 6 hits = 120 damage, 7 hits = 140. The same thing for Vikings who do a straight 10 x 2 I believe. There was essentially a 10 damage "overkill")
Now with the Banshees facing stronger (or cheaper) static D it makes sense to give them a bit more HP without making them any strong to AA air Units, what is supposed to hard-counter them to begin with, at least that is what I believe.
Thor change is nice, it almost makes me think of the thor as some kind of walking static defense...? Like siege + turret combined.
I agree with the HT Storm radius nerf a bit, mainly because it could be really really ridiculous vs a bio army. However, I think toss should get a little something, somewhere else to compensate, but I'm unsure what.
Cannon buff is great, they were too squishy before, expecially against marauders. Now they'll need an extra 5 marauder shots to kill (correct me if I'm wrong).
Broodlord nerf, doesn't seem entirely unreasonable, they still have those silly little broodlings.
Spine Crawler buff is HUGE (well, maybe not HUGE :D ) but still pretty strong. Zerg, unless they get speedlings can be pretty vulnerable. Spore crawler reduction is cost is nice, might make sense to throw one up every game, worse comes to worse you can move it around.
As for Organic Carapace, I can't really comment because I've never really seen it in play at an end-game stage.
On March 31 2010 05:06 Integra wrote: And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
not necessarily, its not just the static was weak, but that the macro was fast. early game gets rolling a whole lot faster than in BW with spawn larvae, chrono, and mules. youre able to shell out way more units way faster which is why FE's are so difficult
On March 31 2010 05:06 Integra wrote: And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
:X facepalm i dont make sunkens not because they dont do dmg but because they die in 1 shot. also because they have a 20 minute build time. in sc1 if u managed to lay down a sunken u succesfully repelled bunker rush in sc2 hatch dies before crawler finishes morphing.
On March 31 2010 04:41 hugman wrote: Bye bye muta harass
couldnt have said it better myself~
what is harass in your eyes? wolfing through static defense with a-move? turret cost 100 and u needed at least 2 of them to actually do anything against 9+ mutas. thats so much money that u didnt actually have to harass with the mutas to make them pay for themselves. turrets actually kill mutas now rather than delaying them while marines come and i think thats great
all static defense was buffed and i think that was a great idea because it will encourage ppl to think of "force spine crawlers" like we forced sunkens in sc1 with early pushes. but in sc2 its been "force units" which wasnt the same thing. so its awesome blizzard is learning that static defense should be better at defending than normal units
cannon buff was awesome, in sc1 u could defend cannons with nice walls and zealots and probes so they didnt need much hp but in sc2 lings run through probes or/and kill them very quickly while baneling can destroy buildings fast. so its good that the cannons got buffed
spine crawler cooldown buff was also great because before i could just kill all drones while ignoring thhe spine crawler along with the queen, they had no say. just like cannons with vultures vs probe in sc1 where u were forced to pylon wall. but z cant do that so they needed this instead
the banshee buff was unnecessary. its supposed to be a cloak anti ground unit but it seems like blizzard wanna push them towards being used in greater numbers and in battles, i dont like the fact that 2 banshee can own about 15 marine with good micro and kill stalkers so easily. i dont like this change, id prefer if they made the banshee worse in fact xd
thor boost was great. now u have a purpose to build them. u can make 1-2 of them into ur attack against a zerg with many mutalisks. they might still be too weak and shallow but at least they got some purpose now
broodlord nerf, awesome. i believe broodlords will get nerfed again, on their hp sometime in the future cause they r pretty untouchable, even with vikings
i dont like how they deal with the roach. i agree it needed to be nerfed but making their late game ability worse in burrow doesnt seem to change the situation at all, it just encourages ppl to never use the burrow ability in late game. id prefer them to simply changing something else about them rather than their late game ability of burrow... lol
the storm needed a nerf, it killed everyyything in 1 storm. the only reason u would need multiple hts would be to just survive the ghost strike and not to boost the actual storming. i dont believe this will change the situation a lot, its still gonna kill everything but at least now it takes more skill for protoss to pull it off
On March 31 2010 04:36 Bear4188 wrote: Everyone raging about +10 hp banshees, please keep in mind they also just buffed cannons, turrets, and spores.
they only buff the dmg of turret, hp/shield of canon and cost of spore so no the buff didn't help for protoss ok canon won't be snipe and maybe zerg im not sure though because the spore will be easier to get with the cost lower, but i still think the range of static defence is to much low please blizzard bring back the old range
On March 31 2010 05:06 Integra wrote: And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
:X facepalm i dont make sunkens not because they dont do dmg but because they die in 1 shot. also because they have a 20 minute build time. in sc1 if u managed to lay down a sunken u succesfully repelled bunker rush in sc2 hatch dies before crawler finishes morphing.
Ya its pretty ridiculous that if you start morphing a crawler cross positions on Kulas Ravine at the same point the enemy starts moving from his main your crawlers still wont be ready when he gets in. It's almost like it'd be worth more to just let the drones gather a few more minerals for those extra pair of zerglings.
And guys quit whining about banshee buff, every single race got their static aa buffed so it only makes sense to give the banshees a slight health boost for them not to become one hit punch timing units like cloak wraiths in SC1.
I really am impressed at the work they've put in to the balancing, I remember there being much more controversy around WC3 patching and now it seems like there's just a few slight things here and there that need to be thought about before approving. Really like the fact that static defences were buffed right after Drone's great article, shows that they really pay attention to what the competitive players have to say.
YES !!! major sunken buff omg!! They were so terrible before, in a zerg vs zerg, I had just done a failed attack with roaches, so he was countering with roaches, and I had 3 sunkens and 8 roaches versus 15 roaches. His roaches completely slaughtered me, losing like 6 lol. The time between attacks decrease will fix a lot of the issues with the sunkens.
lets look at pvz. late game zerg is going to have a billion roaches with uber regain. you storm they burrow take no damage unburrow you storm they burrow, etc now your out of storm. roaches just don't freaken die, you can just burrow them and move them into a protoss army then unburrow to screw with ai and dodge storm, wtf. I guess the counter to mass roach armys late game is carriers. srsly maxed out ground armies is a joke in favor of zerg. one they have early map control, they max faster than you, they have the ability to freaken triple expand eazy mode... toss has a few timing windows, to abuse which can be countered quite easily. now a static buff as well for zerg qq. mutas still gay as well...
On March 31 2010 05:08 newbcake wrote: did anyone else get all their stats and friends list reset again?
No... did you?
I got kicked out of a game I was going to win in the next 10 seconds. ^^'
But who cares - nice patch!
I just wanted a bit better Archons and of course no Protoss-player will like the Storm-nref, although Storm is very good and will still be viable I guess.
On March 31 2010 03:57 See.Blue wrote: Wow- a static defense buff right after Drone's article. It's like Blizzard reads feedback or something!
Fuckin psyched.
For the newcomers or oldtimers that are out of the loop: There has been so far as many as 5 different Blizzard employees posting replies, and some of them have even been a part of the the really big discussions threads where they made +10 posts!
On March 31 2010 03:57 See.Blue wrote: Wow- a static defense buff right after Drone's article. It's like Blizzard reads feedback or something!
Fuckin psyched.
For the newcomers or oldtimers that are out of the loop: There has been so far as many as 5 different Blizzard employees posting replies, and some of them have even been a part of the the really big discussions threads where they made +10 posts!
On March 31 2010 05:06 Integra wrote: And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
not really roaches and muradors still roll through them like a hot knife through butter, in sc1 you had to get tanks to safely bust static d. lol screw that now you can just use tier 1.5 units instead to decimate static d.
On March 31 2010 03:50 zazen wrote: Nice to see static defense buffed, I still think there's absolutely no need to buff the hands down best harass unit in the game (Banshee).
I apologize if this has been posted already, but I strongly believe that the Banshee buff, which is a slight one, has to do with the Stalker buff.
Also they have been nerfed big time for TvT, Tank/Viking it will be.
Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
On March 31 2010 05:06 Integra wrote: And now Blizzard removed the only problem I saw with SC II which was too weak defense early game. Early expansions should now be as viable as it was in SC 1.
not really roaches and muradors still roll through them like a hot knife through butter, in sc1 you had to get tanks to safely bust static d. lol screw that now you can just use tier 1.5 units instead to decimate static d.
different game, different rules
also in sc1 that sunken was precious cuz you only got 3 larvae max, but now you can get 7 so you can make more spines and it evens out ^_^
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by more than 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by more than 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by more than 50%, GG no re.
Uh what The Psi Storm radius has been decreased from 2 to 1.5. is definitely not over 50%, if you mean compared to SC1 then you have to account for the fact that in SC2 a lot more units clump in to a smaller area compared to the old game.
As said before Banshee buff is not really a buff because of increased efficiency of static defense.
Also you need to realize that we currently do not have any up to date information on how well the races compare to each other, the latest information is what over half a month old while Blizzard has real time access to all the data, surely they wont nerf a certain race if it would be losing too much.
bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
WTF toss is so hard vs zerg and now they NERF TOSS AGAIN ? what does blizzard think ? (oh zerg win every tournament lets nerf toss and buff zerg GOGO) ......
psi storm radius from 2 to 1,5 is so funny i mean first nerf colossus now nerf ht what should p do vs mass hyds roaches now ?
o Banshee + The health has been increased from 130 to 140.
o Missile Turret + The damage has been changed from 7+7 armored to 12.
o Thor + Anti-Air damage has been decreased from 10+6 light to 8+4 light. + Anti-Air attack now deals splash damage in a 0.5 radius.
Banshee buff: Minor, since they die easily anyway once you can get something to kill them, still not sure why they did it though, very popular cheese units, maybe they want them used straight up, since they are crap vs units that hit air atm.
Turret buff: Very nice help vs muta. Slightly weaker vs viking/void ray. seems fair, turrets were really strong vs armoured.
Thor are now excellent anti muta, which I think is a good change. Muta harass can very easily pin down a terran and let zerg comeback from ridiculous situations. Overall: Solid terran buffs, still the most difficult race the play BY FAR unless you just FE and mass marauder.
o High Templar + The Psi Storm radius has been decreased from 2 to 1.5.
o Photon Cannon + Life and Shield values have been increased from 125/125 to 150/150.
Psi storm was really, really powerful vs terran, this helps bio quite a lot. I also thing the focus was too much on colossus and templar as mainstream instead of support. If toss really suck bad without these then it's the units that need buffing, not the colo/templar.
Static buff solid since they're never used which is a bad thing. Solid IMO.
ZERG o Broodlord + Damage has been decreased from 25 to 20.
o Roach + Organic Carapace no longer grants bonus regeneration to unburrowed roaches.
o Spine Crawler + Damage has been increased from 20+10 armored to 25+5 armored. + Attack period decreased from 2.2 to 1.6.
o Spore Crawler + The cost has been decreased from 100 to 75.
I really dislike the organic carapace nerf. With roaches being the characteristic hardcore tank units that zerg always lacked, this really removes some of their diversity IMO. Burrow mechanic is gimmick. Roaches were high armoured, high hp, and high regen which encouraged focus fire and gave zergs a good mineral heavy backbone to their army. (Previously you only had ultra really.) With the strength of immortals/marauder lategame roaches weren't all that used from what I can see.
Needed nerf for the mustachio lords. Everyone was like: OK: I have broodlords I win now gg. MASSIVE buff to spinecrawlers which were pretty crap before. Buff to spore crawlers too. Zerg/Protoss static D was NEVER used so that's really important I think.
Overall, aside from roach nerf I think this patch is O.K; I do think terran needed a buff, only strong terrans now just FE Mass marauder mostly so these changes won't affect them much. (I know LiquidJinro likes Thors but on the whole they're unpopular, and I think people know about ravens to run from seeker missiles now so thors becoming a verrrry good counter to the mass muta harass.
Overall I'm really pleased with the patch. All of the changes make sense to me.
At first the storm nerf surprised me, but having had more time to play about with it (and have it used on my hydras), I think it's not too bad. With smart-casting, easily viewable health bars, clumping units and overall easier spell micro in this game, you have more time (in a way) to position each storm more effectively, making the decrease in radius less of a nerf than it might seem.
As far as the banshee goes, stalkers are become a weaker counter to them because terran players are learning to incorporate a raven in their banshee pushes. One PDD shuts down stalkers, making them bait for banshees.
One thing I find interesting is that for the most part, Blizzard continues to patch new things, the only "takeback" they did was to change the reactor back to a long build time (even longer than the original 40 sec build time).
Wow with this patch I think the game took a major step towards getting balanced. The banshee buff is huge for terran players and in some ways the thor was buffed too making it more effective against large group of units like perhaps mutas.
The broodlord nerf is really awesome too in my opinion. They should have been nerfed ages ago.
Yay for Static Defense buff. The Banshee buff, though...I don't know. Perhaps they saw that it was far too vulnerable to AtA attacks, although it still doesn't answer it completely.
As for the HT nerf...eh. I guess Psi Storm DID slaughter Marauders and Marines. However, a 44.75% decrease? That's HUGE. Assuming the area of Psi Storm is indeed circular, it's area of effect dropped from ~12.5 matrices to ~7 matrices.
I would have liked to see another buff to Stalkers, but whatever ^_^
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by more than 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
You're both wrong, only the radius decreased by 25%, not the area
the problem i see is HT radius nerf is perhaps ok for pvz but in pvt it was the only way deal with this mass marauder/marine combo since coloss no more 1hit marines and now its even harder to storm terran also very bad for ht eco stormdrops (seems even more useless then before now) ... and emp who was nerfed from 3 to 2 now is bigger then storm ;(
Storm needed a nerf tbh, i've played both pvt and tvp in this patch and if protoss somehow does manage to get 2+ bases with templar and storm, its pretty much over for the terran if hes going MMMG, unless the toss badly screws up and lets his ghosts get EMP'd
On March 31 2010 05:30 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: the problem i see is HT radius nerf is perhaps ok for pvz but in pvt it was the only way deal with this mass marauder/marine combo since coloss no more 1hit marines and now its even harder to storm terran also very bad for ht eco stormdrops (seems even more useless then before now) ... and emp who was nerfed from 3 to 2 now is bigger then storm ;(
Yeah I feel that EMP and storm need to have an equal radius though, seeing as EMP damages the toss pretty bad too
I'm finding it hard to justify spending 150 gas (not to mention the 200 gas for templar archives, 200 gas for psi storm research, and 150 gas for the energy upgrade) for one rather weaksauce AoE spell. It'd be one thing if I was guaranteed to get 2+ storms per templar, but that's just not the case in most situations. Robo tech is always safer than templar tech, and, at this point, I'm pretty sure that I'd rather have the sustained damage from colossi. Also, it's not as though storm in its previous incarnation was even that good against air.
I understand why they nerfed the AoE on psi storm, but I think that Blizzard needs to compensate by either cheapening the tech cost or making archons worthwhile.
On March 31 2010 05:24 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: WTF toss is so hard vs zerg and now they NERF TOSS AGAIN ? what does blizzard think ? (oh zerg win every tournament lets nerf toss and buff zerg GOGO) ......
psi storm radius from 2 to 1,5 is so funny i mean first nerf colossus now nerf ht what should p do vs mass hyds roaches now ?
On March 31 2010 04:41 Jyvblamo wrote: The people going 'wtf?' over the banshee buff need to think a little. Blizz just buffed all of the anti-air static defense, so to maintain the previous version's banshee balance, they of course need to give it a buff.
Like I said before, the unit does too mcuh damage as it is. So we don't care about this directly or argue it's equality to the turret/spore/thor buffs. The problem is that it needs damage nerfs.
On March 31 2010 04:41 0neder wrote: They can always give splash to archons like they just did to Thor. That would really be great IMO. Also, the better Archons are, the more HTs and DTs will be used beforehand.
Archons already have splash, what are you talking aboot?
lol, archon splash is not anything like it was in BW. Archons suck ass in sc2, blizzard even stated that they are just an extra unit now, something to do with spent templar. They did this on purpose. What the guy meant, was now they can get a better spash radius like thor has.
On March 31 2010 05:24 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: WTF toss is so hard vs zerg and now they NERF TOSS AGAIN ? what does blizzard think ? (oh zerg win every tournament lets nerf toss and buff zerg GOGO) ......
psi storm radius from 2 to 1,5 is so funny i mean first nerf colossus now nerf ht what should p do vs mass hyds roaches now ?
pretty much die....
lol yeah, zvp is as close as an impossible matchup there is and bad toss players are still whining
edit: they NEED to nerf force field to last a max of 5 secs, cap the energy at 50, remove the damage output of sentries, or the entire ability from the game. it's very close to a I WIN-button vs zerg, AND vs terran...
On March 31 2010 05:34 TheAntZ wrote: Storm needed a nerf tbh, i've played both pvt and tvp in this patch and if protoss somehow does manage to get 2+ bases with templar and storm, its pretty much over for the terran if hes going MMMG, unless the toss badly screws up and lets his ghosts get EMP'd
On March 31 2010 05:30 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: the problem i see is HT radius nerf is perhaps ok for pvz but in pvt it was the only way deal with this mass marauder/marine combo since coloss no more 1hit marines and now its even harder to storm terran also very bad for ht eco stormdrops (seems even more useless then before now) ... and emp who was nerfed from 3 to 2 now is bigger then storm ;(
Yeah I feel that EMP and storm need to have an equal radius though, seeing as EMP damages the toss pretty bad too
micro your ghosts better... srsly 1 emp gg toss. cloak is there for a reason, terran has map control easy before temps come out . use medivac to hide a ghost. feedback really only works well with vision, ie obs scouting. other wise its a scramble to get off feedback/storm before emp comes.
the reason why psi storm is so strong in SC2 is because units dont move out of the way fast enough.. Hydras basically have to take the hit, they cant dodge psi storms anymore.. Roaches kinda can, but not really.. So that was a good needed nerf.. Protoss already has millions of ways to kill zerg without psi storm, so they dont need more.
On March 31 2010 05:25 Slayer91 wrote: Psi storm was really, really powerful vs terran, this helps bio quite a lot. I also thing the focus was too much on colossus and templar as mainstream instead of support. If toss really suck bad without these then it's the units that need buffing, not the colo/templar.
I dont like where this is going.. They are making templar a situational weapon used only against terran bio blob.. They should try and make mech better option so storm can be useful against zerg and air units.. Radius and damage for things other than bio blob is low considering how easy it is to dodge it with this small radius.. Fungal growth is more powerful.. I mean only suicidal people would make marines against army with templars or reavers in sc1..
On March 31 2010 05:33 semantics wrote: coloss has a 9 range get 2 and they 1 shot rines. get anti air and you're soild. just need to micro hard
so p should micro like a god to get an even game? T can chill and just emp with his 2 radius and deal instant 100 damage + kill all mana and i have no way to micro out of it but terrans can micro out of storms that deal nearly the same damage but over a longer time instead of instant.
Thor change is actually worse. It's AoE added to a damage nerf, so the trade equals out to about the same damage, but it forces damage to be spread, which results in more mutalisks surviving a retreat as it kills individual mutalisks slower.
On March 31 2010 05:38 Skyze wrote: the reason why psi storm is so strong in SC2 is because units dont move out of the way fast enough.. Hydras basically have to take the hit, they cant dodge psi storms anymore.. Roaches kinda can, but not really.. So that was a good needed nerf.. Protoss already has millions of ways to kill zerg without psi storm, so they dont need more.
Marauders need nerf bigtime.
The slow is too good imo very few units can run away after being slowed and that's only if they don't stim.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
the win % will change once players learn to adapt to the adjustments.
I totally expected this patch. Yes, buff Terran more and nerf Protoss so far that they can't play anymore /SARCASM. Static defense buff is very nice. Looks like Protoss cannot punish Zerg for FE with new Spine Crawlers, they were buffed a lot.
it will be interesting to see how protoss can win anything lategame now without storm and the normal fighting units are still terrible compared to the other races
don't understand all this bitching.. templars are now really fucking specific in what they storm. I was tired of all this storming of shit I didn't mean to hit like trees and fucking birds n shit.
On March 31 2010 05:24 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: WTF toss is so hard vs zerg and now they NERF TOSS AGAIN ? what does blizzard think ? (oh zerg win every tournament lets nerf toss and buff zerg GOGO) ......
psi storm radius from 2 to 1,5 is so funny i mean first nerf colossus now nerf ht what should p do vs mass hyds roaches now ?
pretty much die....
lol yeah, zvp is as close as an impossible matchup there is and bad toss players are still whining
edit: they NEED to nerf force field to last a max of 5 secs, cap the energy at 50, remove the damage output of sentries, or the entire ability from the game. it's very close to a I WIN-button vs zerg, AND vs terran...
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
Biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history my ass. Don't you remember how much was EMP nerfed last patch? The radius went from 3 to 2. Feel free to calculate the percetage for yourself.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
Biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history my ass. Don't you remember how much was EMP nerfed last patch? The radius went from 3 to 2. Feel free to calculate the percetage for yourself.
Storm has been a fundamental tool in every match up for Protoss for the past 11 years. EMP was situationally used against one race in some patches, there is quite a difference.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
Biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history my ass. Don't you remember how much was EMP nerfed last patch? The radius went from 3 to 2. Feel free to calculate the percetage for yourself.
Storm has been a fundamental tool in every match up for Protoss for the past 11 years. EMP was situationally used against one race in some patches, there is quite a difference.
On March 31 2010 05:24 ColorsOfRainbow wrote: WTF toss is so hard vs zerg and now they NERF TOSS AGAIN ? what does blizzard think ? (oh zerg win every tournament lets nerf toss and buff zerg GOGO) ......
psi storm radius from 2 to 1,5 is so funny i mean first nerf colossus now nerf ht what should p do vs mass hyds roaches now ?
pretty much die....
lol yeah, zvp is as close as an impossible matchup there is and bad toss players are still whining
edit: they NEED to nerf force field to last a max of 5 secs, cap the energy at 50, remove the damage output of sentries, or the entire ability from the game. it's very close to a I WIN-button vs zerg, AND vs terran...
ure bad at this game.
heh, have you seen the lastest tournament, like the korean playxp? protoss stalker/imm/sentry pushed their way to complete dominance against both zerg AND terran.. 3 tosses in the top 4, and the one terran that got into top 4 is probably the best terran ive seen playing this game. the protoss push requires next to no skill, as all their units inlcuding sentries micro themselves
On March 31 2010 05:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote: don't understand all this bitching.. templars are now really fucking specific in what they storm. I was tired of all this storming of shit I didn't mean to hit like trees and fucking birds n shit.
This will be especially the case when mapmakers start putting in Pandabearguy2.0 on their maps also.
On March 31 2010 05:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote: don't understand all this bitching.. templars are now really fucking specific in what they storm. I was tired of all this storming of shit I didn't mean to hit like trees and fucking birds n shit.
This will be especially the case when mapmakers start putting in Pandabearguy2.0 on their maps also.
Really don't wanna storm that dude by accident.
Haha I was about to post that. I am not sure I agree or disagree yet with the Storm nerf but only one way to find out is to play games and see how it is. It might still be okay so I don't think we should complain yet until than.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
the win % will change once players learn to adapt to the adjustments.
/edit these are very oudated race stats and before reset + patch #6. your argument is irrelevant.
On March 31 2010 05:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote: don't understand all this bitching.. templars are now really fucking specific in what they storm. I was tired of all this storming of shit I didn't mean to hit like trees and fucking birds n shit.
The nerf to Storm isn't indicative of Protoss being weaker. It's more likely indicative of player's over reliance on a very, very powerful spell. Like EMP before, it required little micromanagement to be very effective. People, especially in this community, shouldn't be complaining about anything that makes the game require more skill to play. After all, this is an "easier game," isn't it?
organic carapace nerf is retarded. Who the hell burrows roaches 1 by 1 in a late game fight.
This is probably why Blizzard made this change; to promote more Micro for Zerg players late-game.
Blizzard is trying to make the Roach more micro-intensive and interesting to use, rather than just an a-move unit. Obviously, it's an experiment, and it may not work out at all in practice...but I'm interesting to see how it is used by good Zerg players. It has potential.
I'll shift click your roaches with my overseer, while you try to "micro" burrow. Let's see who wins.
Roaches do not deal any damage. They are meatshields. You do not micro meatshields.
wrong, roaches are totally needed to deal with zeal/templar heavy armies. Even vs collosus, they do pretty well. Now that you can't hit and run zeals late game with regen, and storm is gonna actually do some damage, I think zeal/storm is gonna be really overpowered in this matchup.
On March 31 2010 05:48 {88}iNcontroL wrote: don't understand all this bitching.. templars are now really fucking specific in what they storm. I was tired of all this storming of shit I didn't mean to hit like trees and fucking birds n shit.
This will be especially the case when mapmakers start putting in Pandabearguy2.0 on their maps also.
Really don't wanna storm that dude by accident.
Haha I was about to post that. I am not sure I agree or disagree yet with the Storm nerf but only one way to find out is to play games and see how it is. It might still be okay so I don't think we should complain yet until than.
Well its still good against terran bio blob but not much else like it was in sc1.. Mutas and other air units will laugh at it.. Someone should test if zerglings can run trough a storm and survive..
ppl raging needs to realize that its a beta >.< they have to try some unorthadox changes before the retail release.. or they would have their HQ burned down by nerds.
banshee buffed 10hp, rly not gonna change it a lot. espec. since static D got buffed
The best change so far in this beta is the psistorm nerf, its just way to easy to completly demolish a big portion of some1s army with smartcasting..its not like in sc1 were it took much more skill to use, here just select them all and kablam storm all at once..
what I dont get is why phoenixs suck so hard still... why wont they make a change here? I rarely if ever see them used and when I do I just destroy them with ease/have them destroyed by my enemy.
I think they should have nerfed the dps by extending it over a longer time, but they can keep tinkering with it. No rush to get the game perfect. It's already good *enough* for esports, although it can still improve in a lot of areas.
* PROTOSS o High Templar + The Psi Storm radius has been decreased from 2 to 1.5.
o Photon Cannon + Life and Shield values have been increased from 125/125 to 150/150.
I agree that Storm is pretty powerful. I would have preferred maybe to 1.75 instead though. Not sure if it was THAT powerful, but still no worries. I'll wait to see a few games with it till I start whining.
Cannon <3. Cannons seemed relatively weak up until this point. I support this.
storms were just too powerful in scbw which made mnm not usable at all. they're trying to make mnm viable so the ht nerf is reasonable. It's too crazy to lose 250+ minerals of marines to 1 storm. This is terrible for game changing wow moments but better for balance.
The old area was not 12.7. it was precisely 12.56637061... and so on. The new area is 7.068583471... and so on.
2^2 = 4, 4pi = 12.57 1.5^2 = 2.25, 2.25pi = 7.07
New Area / Old Area = .5625000002, meaning the current area is roughly 56.25% of what it used to be; that's a decrease of 43.75%, rather than 45%.
Just some small errors.
I don't know where the "Psi Storm is only half as powerful" statement is coming from, since it is still quite a bit more than half (an entire matrix more). The 25% statement probably came from dividing the radii, resulting in 1.5 / 2 = 75%, which is just wrong XD The RADIUS may only be 25% less, but the total area is a whopping 43.75%.
Compare this to the EMP: Originally, it was 3 radius, dropped down to 2.
Old area in matrices: 3 ^ 2 * Pi = 9pi = ~28.274 matrices Current area in matrices: 2 ^ 2 * Pi = 4pi = ~12.566 matrices
% area retained after patch: ~44.44...% % area lost after patch: ~55.55...%
EMP was nerfed by more than half, but Psi Storm was "only" nerfed a little less than 1 matrix shy of half (Area being exponential ftw?)
However, EMP remains to be much larger than Psi Storm. Pre-Patch 7, Psi Storm was equal to EMP in radius (Pre-Patch 5 [is that the right one? Can't remember], EMP was more than double Psi Storm's Radius). Post-Patch 7, Psi Storm is again behind by ~5.5 matrices (yet it's MUCH more even than before).
Although Feedback still beats out EMP by 1 matrix at EMP's maximum possible range XD
Wow guess the psi storm is a thing of the past Idk why they need that nerf people go mass collosi a lot more than high templar, I like the static defense buff but why did all of the other defensives get a damage buff but protoss? They only got a health increase. i like the thor but idk if the missile turrent is good on the account that i dont play terran.
On March 31 2010 04:58 bendez wrote:Viking buff was not enough to make you guys stop bitching about muta, so blizzard throws another bone, rather than working on REAL issues like zerg unit diversity, infestor range/abilities, etc. Yep.. GG.
Vikings alone were never a viable push-out counter to Mutas- Zerg could out-produce Terran easily in this respect and this then requires Terran to support Vikings in open-field with some serious ground to air. My main observation was that good Zergs were able to leverage the weakness of Turrets in general and the slow nature of Thors (and remember that even Vikings are relatively slow) to keep Terran contained to 2-3 bases at most until building a critical amount of ground to air and Turrets was built-up and/or Ravens came out with Point Defense and/or Seeker to support the Vikings.
Basically what we have now is that a respectable Turret defense is relatively cheaper now (because of increased DPS Terrans don't need to get quite so many Turrets, particularly if they complement the new damage with Hi-Sec and Building Armor) and Thors enforce more of a timing window on the Muta harass like Vessels did (except Thors are more like an extremely expensive Goliath/Vessel hybrid that is extremely slow- but they should allow you to push out with your main force and lighten the burden of Vikings to defend that and everything else).
On March 31 2010 05:01 Crisium wrote:Spines take out Hellions in 4 hits instead of 5. And the higher DPS helps.
Thanks for catching that- for some reason I keep thinking of Hellions as having 80hp (ala Vultures) instead of 90hp.
@Skyze
You've got plenty of tools to deal with mass Marauders. The Baneling buff last patch made those really viable against them (I've first-hand observed as many a Marauder-massing Terran has had his attack force consistently whittled down every single time he tried to move out by Banelings) and of course Hydralisks have always been great against Marauders. Not to mention smart incorporation of Mutalisks into your main forces (not as an A-move unit but rather as an in-battle harass unit ala Dark Templar used in the midst of major battles).
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
Psi storm is absurdly powerful, the nerf isn't that bad.
As for muta harrass? Well it may have been nerfed a little but i don't think it was totally uncalled for, (and no one builds thors anyways), with enough of them turrets still die VERY fast and medivacs come out later making it very difficult for marines to defend 2 bases (too slow without stim)
All in all i like this patch alot (as a random player)
On March 31 2010 06:14 Rucky wrote: storms were just too powerful in scbw which made mnm not usable at all. they're trying to make mnm viable so the ht nerf is reasonable. It's too crazy to lose 250+ minerals of marines to 1 storm. This is terrible for game changing wow moments but better for balance.
Thats easy. Find a new strat against protoss.If you look at liquipedia then you can see that you look for builds under the matchup. So you dont m&m against protoss.
The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
On March 31 2010 06:14 Rucky wrote: storms were just too powerful in scbw which made mnm not usable at all. they're trying to make mnm viable so the ht nerf is reasonable. It's too crazy to lose 250+ minerals of marines to 1 storm. This is terrible for game changing wow moments but better for balance.
There seems to be a big problem with marauders. I'd say something with so much hp should not be able to be healed and and stim. marauders have more life than a hellion and almost a tank, mech units...they might as well be counted as mech units with their suits can be repaired by scv's. Leave the healing to marines and reapers.
On March 31 2010 06:21 zeks wrote: perhaps terran should look towards a mech build vs P now if they're getting their mm stormed to hell
Protoss has good units against massing t1 units so blizz should change something else to make terran mech better instead of balancing those aoe against marines cause then zerg that is supposed to mass units gets more powerful.. I just dont like current TvP with army blobs.. Mech would make it more exiting and strategic like in sc1
On March 31 2010 06:21 zeks wrote: perhaps terran should look towards a mech build vs P now if they're getting their mm stormed to hell
I mean, this is why heavy metal terran was invented in SCI in the first place.
well it's kinda difficult without the mines but sure it's possible, or more likely WILL be possible when there are better maps with easy 3rd.
anyway anyone else thinks buffing HSM (like getting it earlier, less energy requierements etc not damage buff) would solve this Z>T. (at least i believe Z>T especially after reactor marine nerf and bling buff)
Ya I studied maths too and so on, but seriously it is enough to know that storm area is ABOUT half of what it used to be. You can't make any valid statements about balance by just tossing such a number around because there are way more things that factor in. Play some games and try it out. Much better for balancing the game than figuring out the area decrease with a precision of 10e-30.
So let me get this straight... terran now has splash anti-air to deal with mutas.
Protoss, on the other hand, still doesn't have splash anti-air, and the only AoE we had (storm) has now been nerfed making it even harder to deal with mutas.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by more than 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
You should take high school geometry.
well arent we quite the jerk today, sorry i skimmed over radius and thought area.
would you like to chit chat about some matematicas? cuz i almost perfect scored my SAT and made a 5 on my AP test and would LOVE to chew the cud
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
you too! ^_^ why does everyone have to prove their worth so much, jeezy creezy
On March 31 2010 04:58 bendez wrote:Viking buff was not enough to make you guys stop bitching about muta, so blizzard throws another bone, rather than working on REAL issues like zerg unit diversity, infestor range/abilities, etc. Yep.. GG.
Vikings alone were never a viable push-out counter to Mutas- Zerg could out-produce Terran easily in this respect and this then requires Terran to support Vikings in open-field with some serious ground to air. My main observation was that good Zergs were able to leverage the weakness of Turrets in general and the slow nature of Thors (and remember that even Vikings are relatively slow) to keep Terran contained to 2-3 bases at most until building a critical amount of ground to air and Turrets was built-up and/or Ravens came out with Point Defense and/or Seeker to support the Vikings.
Basically what we have now is that a respectable Turret defense is relatively cheaper now (because of increased DPS Terrans don't need to get quite so many Turrets, particularly if they complement the new damage with Hi-Sec and Building Armor) and Thors enforce more of a timing window on the Muta harass like Vessels did (except Thors are more like an extremely expensive Goliath/Vessel hybrid that is extremely slow- but they should allow you to push out with your main force and lighten the burden of Vikings to defend that and everything else).
On March 31 2010 05:01 Crisium wrote:Spines take out Hellions in 4 hits instead of 5. And the higher DPS helps.
Thanks for catching that- for some reason I keep thinking of Hellions as having 80hp (ala Vultures) instead of 90hp.
@Skyze
You've got plenty of tools to deal with mass Marauders. The Baneling buff last patch made those really viable against them (I've first-hand observed as many a Marauder-massing Terran has had his attack force consistently whittled down every single time he tried to move out by Banelings) and of course Hydralisks have always been great against Marauders. Not to mention smart incorporation of Mutalisks into your main forces (not as an A-move unit but rather as an in-battle harass unit ala Dark Templar used in the midst of major battles).
I think theres a difference when you play top level terrans.. They dont fall for baneling busts, or any muta harassment. Hydras die in seconds to MMM, and you may get one or two banelings to go off but any terran who can micro can just slow them with the incredibly lame marauder slow, and move back and take minimal damage. Mutas fail to good terrans who dont allow for easy harass, combined with the new patch doing major buffs to turrets+thor, aka mutas will be almost useless unless they arent prepared (which good terrans will be)
I am talking about top 5 platinum terrans, thats who ive been facing lately, they just dominate me, and its not by skill, cause I take their "harasses" with ease and everything.. I actually LOVE when terrans go hellions, it means a big delay til the MMM gayness comes, so I usually win those games. But marauders + medivacs timing push = too much.
On March 31 2010 06:14 Rucky wrote: storms were just too powerful in scbw which made mnm not usable at all. they're trying to make mnm viable so the ht nerf is reasonable. It's too crazy to lose 250+ minerals of marines to 1 storm. This is terrible for game changing wow moments but better for balance.
So what about HSM against 10+ muta? Just saying.
Blizzard isn't trying to support zerg users to mass mutas versus zerg are they?? exactly. Blizzard's patches are reasonable in that they patch what they want to support in the game. It's already been said that they want TvP to not be mech only and be mnm friendly. I never really said anything about me supporting this. I'm just saying it tones down wow moments which I don't like much, but will accept this if it does make games more variable.
On March 31 2010 06:35 -orb- wrote: So let me get this straight... terran now has splash anti-air to deal with mutas.
Protoss, on the other hand, still doesn't have splash anti-air, and the only AoE we had (storm) has now been nerfed making it even harder to deal with mutas.
What the fuck blizzard?
lol.. change race before its too late.. Blizz will continue to nerf everything protoss has again and again and again..
On March 31 2010 04:58 bendez wrote:Viking buff was not enough to make you guys stop bitching about muta, so blizzard throws another bone, rather than working on REAL issues like zerg unit diversity, infestor range/abilities, etc. Yep.. GG.
Vikings alone were never a viable push-out counter to Mutas- Zerg could out-produce Terran easily in this respect and this then requires Terran to support Vikings in open-field with some serious ground to air. My main observation was that good Zergs were able to leverage the weakness of Turrets in general and the slow nature of Thors (and remember that even Vikings are relatively slow) to keep Terran contained to 2-3 bases at most until building a critical amount of ground to air and Turrets was built-up and/or Ravens came out with Point Defense and/or Seeker to support the Vikings.
Basically what we have now is that a respectable Turret defense is relatively cheaper now (because of increased DPS Terrans don't need to get quite so many Turrets, particularly if they complement the new damage with Hi-Sec and Building Armor) and Thors enforce more of a timing window on the Muta harass like Vessels did (except Thors are more like an extremely expensive Goliath/Vessel hybrid that is extremely slow- but they should allow you to push out with your main force and lighten the burden of Vikings to defend that and everything else).
On March 31 2010 05:01 Crisium wrote:Spines take out Hellions in 4 hits instead of 5. And the higher DPS helps.
Thanks for catching that- for some reason I keep thinking of Hellions as having 80hp (ala Vultures) instead of 90hp.
@Skyze
You've got plenty of tools to deal with mass Marauders. The Baneling buff last patch made those really viable against them (I've first-hand observed as many a Marauder-massing Terran has had his attack force consistently whittled down every single time he tried to move out by Banelings) and of course Hydralisks have always been great against Marauders. Not to mention smart incorporation of Mutalisks into your main forces (not as an A-move unit but rather as an in-battle harass unit ala Dark Templar used in the midst of major battles).
I think theres a difference when you play top level terrans.. They dont fall for baneling busts, or any muta harassment. Hydras die in seconds to MMM, and you may get one or two banelings to go off but any terran who can micro can just slow them with the incredibly lame marauder slow, and move back and take minimal damage. Mutas fail to good terrans who dont allow for easy harass, combined with the new patch doing major buffs to turrets+thor, aka mutas will be almost useless unless they arent prepared (which good terrans will be)
I am talking about top 5 platinum terrans, thats who ive been facing lately, they just dominate me, and its not by skill, cause I take their "harasses" with ease and everything.. I actually LOVE when terrans go hellions, it means a big delay til the MMM gayness comes, so I usually win those games. But marauders + medivacs timing push = too much.
I know exactly what you mean, Skyze. I'm really relieved when i see hellion or viking or banshee harass because I think 'awesome, i can win this game.' But when they stay in their base, turtling up, I'm like "oh no.. MMM will just come out and pwn me this game'
On March 31 2010 04:58 bendez wrote:Viking buff was not enough to make you guys stop bitching about muta, so blizzard throws another bone, rather than working on REAL issues like zerg unit diversity, infestor range/abilities, etc. Yep.. GG.
Vikings alone were never a viable push-out counter to Mutas- Zerg could out-produce Terran easily in this respect and this then requires Terran to support Vikings in open-field with some serious ground to air. My main observation was that good Zergs were able to leverage the weakness of Turrets in general and the slow nature of Thors (and remember that even Vikings are relatively slow) to keep Terran contained to 2-3 bases at most until building a critical amount of ground to air and Turrets was built-up and/or Ravens came out with Point Defense and/or Seeker to support the Vikings.
Basically what we have now is that a respectable Turret defense is relatively cheaper now (because of increased DPS Terrans don't need to get quite so many Turrets, particularly if they complement the new damage with Hi-Sec and Building Armor) and Thors enforce more of a timing window on the Muta harass like Vessels did (except Thors are more like an extremely expensive Goliath/Vessel hybrid that is extremely slow- but they should allow you to push out with your main force and lighten the burden of Vikings to defend that and everything else).
On March 31 2010 05:01 Crisium wrote:Spines take out Hellions in 4 hits instead of 5. And the higher DPS helps.
Thanks for catching that- for some reason I keep thinking of Hellions as having 80hp (ala Vultures) instead of 90hp.
@Skyze
You've got plenty of tools to deal with mass Marauders. The Baneling buff last patch made those really viable against them (I've first-hand observed as many a Marauder-massing Terran has had his attack force consistently whittled down every single time he tried to move out by Banelings) and of course Hydralisks have always been great against Marauders. Not to mention smart incorporation of Mutalisks into your main forces (not as an A-move unit but rather as an in-battle harass unit ala Dark Templar used in the midst of major battles).
I think theres a difference when you play top level terrans.. They dont fall for baneling busts, or any muta harassment. Hydras die in seconds to MMM, and you may get one or two banelings to go off but any terran who can micro can just slow them with the incredibly lame marauder slow, and move back and take minimal damage. Mutas fail to good terrans who dont allow for easy harass, combined with the new patch doing major buffs to turrets+thor, aka mutas will be almost useless unless they arent prepared (which good terrans will be)
I am talking about top 5 platinum terrans, thats who ive been facing lately, they just dominate me, and its not by skill, cause I take their "harasses" with ease and everything.. I actually LOVE when terrans go hellions, it means a big delay til the MMM gayness comes, so I usually win those games. But marauders + medivacs timing push = too much.
I know exactly what you mean, Skyze. I'm really relieved when i see hellion or viking or banshee harass because I think 'awesome, i can win this game.' But when they stay in their base, turtling up, I'm like "oh no.. MMM will just come out and pwn me this game'
Lore, for example, didnt you own me last night too? I believe you were terran.. lol Maybe not, I did lost afew ZvZ last night too =[
edit: yah, you were Z.. I forget who won, but probably you.. I played so bad last night after like 5 frustrating losses to marauders =/
On March 31 2010 06:35 -orb- wrote: So let me get this straight... terran now has splash anti-air to deal with mutas.
Protoss, on the other hand, still doesn't have splash anti-air, and the only AoE we had (storm) has now been nerfed making it even harder to deal with mutas.
What the fuck blizzard?
lol.. change race before its too late.. Blizz will continue to nerf everything protoss has again and again and again..
Totally agree, what is wrong with these guys LOL
I've thought I'd be always loyal to Protoss but now I win a hundred times more with Zerg, I mean what the hell...
On March 31 2010 06:35 -orb- wrote: So let me get this straight... terran now has splash anti-air to deal with mutas.
Protoss, on the other hand, still doesn't have splash anti-air, and the only AoE we had (storm) has now been nerfed making it even harder to deal with mutas.
What the fuck blizzard?
lol.. change race before its too late.. Blizz will continue to nerf everything protoss has again and again and again..
Totally agree, what is wrong with these guys LOL
I've thought I'd be always loyal to Protoss but now I win a hundred times more with Zerg, I mean what the hell...
maybe your better with zerg! n__n ever think that was the solution, not that protoss was weak? i started winning more when i went from zerg to toss.
storm patch wont affect too much, it will smooth things out, and HEY there's colossus!
im hardly a good player, but all this "ZOMG NERFED STORM" stuff... now you know how us T's felt with EMP =)
On March 26 2010 08:54 floor exercise wrote: + EMP Round radius decreased from 3 to 2.
and everyone said that would destroy the TvP line up as terran would have no counter any more... apparently they still did just fine post patch...
i used to do just fine EMP'ing the P army, now i actually have to slow down and take notice of which parts im targeting, instead of just spamming EMP in their general direction, so im sorry if i feel 0 sympathy to the all the P players out there, hopefully this will do the same for HT's and storm
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I think the health increase for Banshees is due tot he fact that cannons now will have more life and spore crawlers are cheaper so there will be more of them, therefore Banshees wont be able to rely on their cloak as much.
All in all I like it, even though as someone said, the cost of roach upgrade should go down at the same phase as it is getting worse.
Psi Storm nerf, probably necessary due to it's spammability, but I think this might be alittle too much, maybe just making it slightly slightly better from here would be enough.
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I actually think thats the biggest problem in SC2 (what SpoR said), You basically cant retreat from battles in SC2.. Theres so many units that are just either too slow, or units like the marauders which slow you down.. Even like roaches vs stalkers/sentries, you cant run because the roaches are too slow (without upgrade, but even with upgrade i thnk its the same) and they just own you before you can retreat.. Air units are even worse, altho I like that in a way because it means my mutas can dominate like 5 phoenix's when they start running, but it should be fixed imo.
You basically have to commit to attacking in SC2, because you cant retreat. That is probably why we are seeing so many people just sitting in their base massing armies, you cant even really pick off one unit and run back micro because running away doesnt work.
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I actually think thats the biggest problem in SC2 (what SpoR said), You basically cant retreat from battles in SC2.. Theres so many units that are just either too slow, or units like the marauders which slow you down.. Even like roaches vs stalkers/sentries, you cant run because the roaches are too slow (without upgrade, but even with upgrade i thnk its the same) and they just own you before you can retreat.. Air units are even worse, altho I like that in a way because it means my mutas can dominate like 5 phoenix's when they start running, but it should be fixed imo.
You basically have to commit to attacking in SC2, because you cant retreat. That is probably why we are seeing so many people just sitting in their base massing armies, you cant even really pick off one unit and run back micro because running away doesnt work.
The only major design flaw I see so far in SC2.
uh, yes you can. you just, turn around and run. unless you were completely dominated by 36 marauders, you're gonna be able to get away.
muta did the same attack shit while it runs thing in BW, you just gotta get away first.
you dont HAVE to commit by any stretch of the imagination.
Uh, Psi Storm is definitely 43.75% less area than it was before, not 56.25% >.> That's the area it currently does (i.e. the area that is "left") Old area was ~12.5, new area is ~7.07. You can tell what percent of its old area it retains by just eye-balling it.
Also, I don't think the EMP nerf is exactly comparable to the Psi Storm nerf; before, EMP could deal 2800 total damage to shields in a single shot easily (although average seemed to hover around 2000). After the nerf, it can still do 1200 damage to shields quite easily (in fact, it caps out even easier, since you require a smaller radius to max out the damage). Psi Storm could only hit a maximum of around 1000 damage overall, and only if units were perfectly clumped, and only over time. Now, it's maximum is around 560 damage, still over time.
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I actually think thats the biggest problem in SC2 (what SpoR said), You basically cant retreat from battles in SC2.. Theres so many units that are just either too slow, or units like the marauders which slow you down.. Even like roaches vs stalkers/sentries, you cant run because the roaches are too slow (without upgrade, but even with upgrade i thnk its the same) and they just own you before you can retreat.. Air units are even worse, altho I like that in a way because it means my mutas can dominate like 5 phoenix's when they start running, but it should be fixed imo.
You basically have to commit to attacking in SC2, because you cant retreat. That is probably why we are seeing so many people just sitting in their base massing armies, you cant even really pick off one unit and run back micro because running away doesnt work.
The only major design flaw I see so far in SC2.
uh, yes you can. you just, turn around and run. unless you were completely dominated by 36 marauders, you're gonna be able to get away.
muta did the same attack shit while it runs thing in BW, you just gotta get away first.
you dont HAVE to commit by any stretch of the imagination.
uhh. Go try it. Have 5 roaches vs 5sentry/5stalker, try picking off one sentry then running away.. Good luck getting even 1 roach alive when you get back to your base.
Same with roach vs roach even. and obviously Marauders
I agree, when attacking a P or T army as Z, I always feel like I have to commit to winning the battle or I will simply lose the game right after. With M&M (and P, if you have collosi/sentries) it is a lot easier to disengage your army from an attack.
After this patch I've been getting lag spikes...like the game will just hang for a bit and then everything will zoom at super speed for a second. Makes it impossible to get some timings right sometimes (really annoying when it does it right before the first pylon finishes, or right before an early probe finishes).
Anyone else experiencing this? I know I saw it on a stream before the patch, but had never actually experienced it, and now it's happening 3 times per game after the patch.
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
aw i kinda liked how storm was before. if anything, they should just increase the duration by one second. it rapes when it deals the damage quick, so with a longer timer at least itll give faster reactionists a chance to avoid the full force
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I actually think thats the biggest problem in SC2 (what SpoR said), You basically cant retreat from battles in SC2.. Theres so many units that are just either too slow, or units like the marauders which slow you down.. Even like roaches vs stalkers/sentries, you cant run because the roaches are too slow (without upgrade, but even with upgrade i thnk its the same) and they just own you before you can retreat.. Air units are even worse, altho I like that in a way because it means my mutas can dominate like 5 phoenix's when they start running, but it should be fixed imo.
You basically have to commit to attacking in SC2, because you cant retreat. That is probably why we are seeing so many people just sitting in their base massing armies, you cant even really pick off one unit and run back micro because running away doesnt work.
The only major design flaw I see so far in SC2.
uh, yes you can. you just, turn around and run. unless you were completely dominated by 36 marauders, you're gonna be able to get away.
muta did the same attack shit while it runs thing in BW, you just gotta get away first.
you dont HAVE to commit by any stretch of the imagination.
uhh. Go try it. Have 5 roaches vs 5sentry/5stalker, try picking off one sentry then running away.. Good luck getting even 1 roach alive when you get back to your base.
Same with roach vs roach even. and obviously Marauders
why the hell would you try to snipe with roaches when they have shit range? you cant just do whatever you want and hope to get away.
Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
On March 31 2010 07:17 Simple wrote: aw i kinda liked how storm was before. if anything, they should just increase the duration by one second. it rapes when it deals the damage quick, so with a longer timer at least itll give faster reactionists a chance to avoid the full force
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
you could play the race you enjoy o.o everyone's so picky choosy.
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
Fayth just stop this please, we are from the internet, we have the need to construct an argument in which only take facts that supports our claim and ignore facts that disprove of our argument.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
Biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history my ass. Don't you remember how much was EMP nerfed last patch? The radius went from 3 to 2. Feel free to calculate the percetage for yourself.
Storm has been a fundamental tool in every match up for Protoss for the past 11 years. EMP was situationally used against one race in some patches, there is quite a difference.
The game is not even out yet wtf are you talking about. Remember It's not the same game.
On March 31 2010 06:35 -orb- wrote: So let me get this straight... terran now has splash anti-air to deal with mutas.
Protoss, on the other hand, still doesn't have splash anti-air, and the only AoE we had (storm) has now been nerfed making it even harder to deal with mutas.
What the fuck blizzard?
I could NOT agree with this more. It's about time Phoenixes received a buff.
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
On March 31 2010 07:08 Thrill wrote: I play terran.
I don't know what it is.
I haven't won a single game after this patch.
Not. One. Single. Game.
Co. In. Ce. Dence.
Correlating your losses to this patch purely because you find the patch to be a landmark is a fallacy of false cause.
I wouldn't attribute it to coincidence. The more likely cause is that he is simply bad at sc2
As a Terran player, I'm quite happy they nerfed storm. It makes bio play more viable. EMP feels like a much more powerful spell compared to storm now.
Regarding the thor AA splash change, I was experimenting with marine/marauder/medivac/thor army and it seemed really strong o.O. Thors have a long enough range to snipe nat hatcheries plus you can use their special attack to get it down faster. It really forces Z to split up his army quite a bit since you can drop like 3 thors into a Z's base and snipe key buildings and/or hatcheries real quick. Then just run away on the medivacs.
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
And no, roaches do not plough through cannons ez-mode. Cannons are very cost effective against roaches.
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
sure why not?
there's that whole "banshees cost gas" so they should at least be able to take out a photon cannon relatively easy. lets try and be reasonable.
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
you could play the race you enjoy o.o everyone's so picky choosy.
Why bother when I can play another race that I spend a third of the time playing yet get more wins. I don't know about anyone else here but I enjoy winning very much.
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
eah? zerglings are quite bad vs cannonz in sc1 with out any upgrades not to mention with walls/pulling probes ect
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
And no, roaches do not plough through cannons ez-mode. Cannons are very cost effective against roaches.
also they buy you time so that, dun dun dunnnnnn, your whole ARMY can come help your poor hidden expo
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
sure why not?
there's that whole "banshees cost gas" so they should at least be able to take out a photon cannon relatively easy. lets try and be reasonable.
just cause something costs gas does not mean it should be able to do something. 3-4 banshies go in kill 2 cannons with out dieing easy. warped in units die asap, probes die 2 hits, temps get there and have to wait for obs to get over before feedback goes off. stalkers die super fast. imean they are super effective vs collosi. terran has 2 ways to harrass worker lines via air units, at least vs vikings probes can be pulled to help defend cannons.
they buffed hentai-tenticles so much and only gave cannons a 50hp increase =[. I also do not understand the psystorm nerf, or the banshee buff . I see this making maps like kulas really hard for protoss since its so hard for us to FE there and zerg can handle it quite easily now with the upgrade tenticles.
How can they boost banshee? Is this a joke or what?
Anyways.. I have faith in Blizzard.. Next patch nerf queen and boost stalkers! Remove the slow down effect marauder attack has(20 atk vs armored + slow down effect?? Such a joke.. they dont even need to tech that slow down)
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
And no, roaches do not plough through cannons ez-mode. Cannons are very cost effective against roaches.
also they buy you time so that, dun dun dunnnnnn, your whole ARMY can come help your poor hidden expo
so now i have to hidden expo vs zerg every game to stand a chance? i fail to see how im suppose to get a hidden expo when zerg has map control through out the mid game not to mention overlords spewing creep everywhere
They probably buffed banshees because static AA got buffed, which means in my mind they wanted to nerf muta harrass without nerfing it's army supporting ability, but didn't want to nerf banshees as much so they buffed them a bit or something; I don't know that's the best I could come up with.
On March 31 2010 03:55 Quixoticism wrote: As if Psi storm hasn't been nerfed enough as it is. :/ It's nice to see an improvement in the static defenses. The missile turret still seems kinda weak to me compared to the others. That is unless it's 12x2.
I can't download the patch yet though, so it must not have hit the US yet.
On March 31 2010 07:38 Munashiimaru wrote: They probably buffed banshees because static AA got buffed, which means in my mind they wanted to nerf muta harrass without nerfing it's army supporting ability, but didn't want to nerf banshees as much so they buffed them a bit or something; I don't know that's the best I could come up with.
i suppose, but still it, they did not need the buff even with static d buff ><
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
And no, roaches do not plough through cannons ez-mode. Cannons are very cost effective against roaches.
also they buy you time so that, dun dun dunnnnnn, your whole ARMY can come help your poor hidden expo
so now i have to hidden expo vs zerg every game to stand a chance? i fail to see how im suppose to get a hidden expo when zerg has map control through out the mid game not to mention overlords spewing creep everywhere
come on dude, seriously? can we not have a mature discussion about this?
i'd expect this kind of blatant stubborness from the new kids, but you have 5k posts, cant you try to at least act like you know how to post on TL? there's no getting through to you with this attitude of yours
hmm, dunno why this banshee buff is creating so much havoc - stalkers got a buff from taking 17 hits to 13 (now 14) - and phoenix still take the same number of shots to kill a banshee. I don't believe it's that bad - the only problem i find with it is: they were already pretty strong in tvt especially with the rine/reactor nerf. As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
Its easier but the cost is still the same as sc1 while the storm is much weaker.. Few hts could defend an expo against zerg but now not so much. you would need army of hts to do the same
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: hmm, dunno why this banshee buff is creating so much havoc - stalkers got a buff from taking 17 hits to 13 (now 14) - and phoenix still take the same number of shots to kill a banshee. I don't believe it's that bad - the only problem i find with it is: they were already pretty strong in tvt especially with the rine/reactor nerf. As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
Heh, I can easily predict that you are going to mass maradeurs even more :D
I don't like that this is happening, terran games are so boring. They are just spamming maradeurs then stim/hit and run -_-. I would like to see more action/harass/tanks on cliffs so on. Do you agree Demu?
Agree that high templar nerf may be abit much for protoss at their current state, however it was too strong with smartcast. Specially when you can warp in HT with storm ready.
I think protoss needs a buff after this nerf tho, even if its just in making zerg and terran weaker. Slight marauder nerf / queen spawn 3 larva instead of 4.
how about instead of nerfing damage values and radius, they do something interesting like make a unit cost more and be more powerful, you know, maybe so micro'ing it and keeping it alive matters more than massing as many as u can
Honestly, that Psi storm nerf is a non-issue to me. Two storms generally covered the entire terran army. My other 3 templar just sit there waiting. When EMP got nerfed it didn't make EMP non-viable, it just meant you needed more than one ghost to do things right. And templar are easily massed up.
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: hmm, dunno why this banshee buff is creating so much havoc - stalkers got a buff from taking 17 hits to 13 (now 14) - and phoenix still take the same number of shots to kill a banshee. I don't believe it's that bad - the only problem i find with it is: they were already pretty strong in tvt especially with the rine/reactor nerf. As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
Oh wow, you're right. I'd just assumed Banshees were Armored 'till now- the combined effect of the static defenses buff and Stalker buff wasn't harsh only for mutas after all.
Wow the best patch so far! Only bad part is roach thing
I don't understand people complaining about banshee buff - you didn't play T ever or what? That's what beta is for - testing every race! The problem with banshees is that you devote to them and only them usually so you they have little role outside of harass/fighting non anti air units. Plus storm is so powerful, i don't understand people that don't use it - too inexperienced to aim properly or wtf?
Its just a good thing that missile turrets got a buff as well as banshees. Given Terran's lack of detection at low levels, I think it will become mandatory to get a couple to protect your base as soon as you see the other terran drop a starport.
On March 31 2010 07:18 Yamoth wrote: Another Protoss nerf, I would say I am sock if it wasn't for this being the 7 straight neft protoss been getting. As a loyal Protoss player since SC1, I guess not is as good of a time as ever to move to Terran.
cannons have been buffed
so muradors and roaches still plow through them easy mode
so did zerglings in SC1! IMBA, oh wait T_T
eah? zerglings are quite bad vs cannonz in sc1 with out any upgrades not to mention with walls/pulling probes ect
You've obviously never seen how worthless cannons in BW are against run-bys at sub-pro level, or how much lings rape cannons when buildings aren't placed properly.
Once people figure out how to build their structures based on the maps, cannons will appear much more powerful. For example, if you watch Nazgul's PvZ games his building placement is sick good, and he holds off dozens of lings and several roaches with 1-2 cannons.
On March 31 2010 08:14 _Tetsuo_ wrote: I cant see why people complain about all changes. It seens like "all nerfs are welcome, but not in the race i do play".
Basically this haha. Play random like me and have mixed emotions!
what people comparing the ghost nerf to the templar nerf is forgetting that the ghost also got a very nice reduction in gas cost and that templars is needed in 2 matchups, not just 1
On March 31 2010 07:58 TFlame wrote: how about instead of nerfing damage values and radius, they do something interesting like make a unit cost more and be more powerful, you know, maybe so micro'ing it and keeping it alive matters more than massing as many as u can
Yes, lets please make SC2 more like WC3. Ugh, no. I don't want battles to be based on who can micro around units and try to pick off one or two enemy units while losing none, then backing off again. Micro is already hugely important, and there's already units like the mothership, carriers, BCs, etc. which are large and cost a lot.
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: hmm, dunno why this banshee buff is creating so much havoc - stalkers got a buff from taking 17 hits to 13 (now 14) - and phoenix still take the same number of shots to kill a banshee. I don't believe it's that bad - the only problem i find with it is: they were already pretty strong in tvt especially with the rine/reactor nerf.
I think the SCV health nerf is the main reason that banshee harass is so strong in TvT. With 45 health, SCV dies to 2 banshee hits.
i guess they wanna see if they can recreate the situation of sc1 that protoss won't be loved at all... honestly i have nothing against balancing but there are ways to nerf or to buff something.... and the first one is making the game slower and less intense....
On March 31 2010 08:21 Knutzi wrote: what people comparing the ghost nerf to the templar nerf is forgetting that the ghost also got a very nice reduction in gas cost and that templars is needed in 2 matchups, not just 1
The other thing is, the fact the Templars storm obliterated any M&M army incredibly quickly with the size it was at. It was making Bio almost unbearable late game when Protoss have a decent number of templers and you can't get a nice EMP on them all.
It's more a balancing thing, means that two templars on their own can't take out an entire army within like two storms each.
With the crawler buff I can honestly say I will be trying some mass crawler +queen builds, where gas goes towards mutas.
I first thought it would be a total joke build, but it could actually work, pushing with a swarm of crawlers + 3-4 queens to heal+creep tumour, and mutas counter anything that counters spine crawlers quite effectively...
Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
Blizzard wants to make the player base more proportional with the lore. They will continue to nerf Protoss until only a couple hundred survivers huddle in some dark corner of BNET muttering to themselves about artifacts of salvation.
On March 31 2010 08:21 Knutzi wrote: what people comparing the ghost nerf to the templar nerf is forgetting that the ghost also got a very nice reduction in gas cost and that templars is needed in 2 matchups, not just 1
The other thing is, the fact the Templars storm obliterated any M&M army incredibly quickly with the size it was at. It was making Bio almost unbearable late game when Protoss have a decent number of templers and you can't get a nice EMP on them all.
It's more a balancing thing, means that two templars on their own can't take out an entire army within like two storms each.
so terran can't mix their army composition up with mech? i mean terran bio is very mobile.
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
Wrong, blizz loved protoss so much that they made them so powerful that they now need to nerf them in order to make balanced
"OMG STORMS HAVE A CHANCE TO NO LONGER BE OP, OMG ((("
On March 31 2010 08:21 Knutzi wrote: what people comparing the ghost nerf to the templar nerf is forgetting that the ghost also got a very nice reduction in gas cost and that templars is needed in 2 matchups, not just 1
The other thing is, the fact the Templars storm obliterated any M&M army incredibly quickly with the size it was at. It was making Bio almost unbearable late game when Protoss have a decent number of templers and you can't get a nice EMP on them all.
It's more a balancing thing, means that two templars on their own can't take out an entire army within like two storms each.
Unless you're TLO, then you go MM -> Reapers -> Tanks -> Breaking the Stream -> BCs. *-*
I rather would have seen reduced DPS, increased duration like the old storm.
The thing I don't like about this patch that terrans will spam maradeurs even more. They are very cost effective if not countered by storms. And storms got nerfed.
This is kinda boring when you see whole a lot of barracks and maradeurs -_-
I don't agree with the banshee hp, I think they were already plenty strong. The storm nerf was much needed though. It was just too insanely powerful against terran in late game. I have been waiting for that one for a while.
Protoss need to stop bitching, I would be suprised if the actual win-rates have ever been anything outside of a 5% range of 50% for any race the entire beta, post the big terran buff patch.
I expect these forums to be a bit more civil then screaming imba/uselessness at every change.
On March 31 2010 08:35 Archerofaiur wrote: Blizzard wants to make the player base more proportional with the lore. They will continue to nerf Protoss until only a couple hundred survivers huddle in some dark corner of BNET muttering to themselves about artifacts of salvation.
Concerning all the complaining on "why is blizzard nerfing protoss", as Tasteless said in PvT, protoss player can just talk on the phone and attack move while terran player has to burn his heart out. The fact is Protoss with its "perfect counter" units was and maybe still is the easiest most no-micro/no-tactics race by far.
Blizzard have yet to make Protoss harder then Terran, all patches are doing is simply making the playing field more even. Same applies to Zerg. No race should just be dead easy in a matchup versus another.
On March 31 2010 04:17 Bear4188 wrote: It seems like they might be trying to move the banshee from a strictly harass role into also being a main army composition unit.
On March 31 2010 04:13 De4ngus wrote: YES!!! I eliminated someone with 5 seconds left to shutdown lololol. Damn that was close.
LOL @ HT nerf. They suck so much people barely used them in the first place. Cannon buff is nice. Forge FE should be a little easier now. Also the muta problem is less of a problem, although they're still going to be stupid as hell on desert oasis.
are you kidding? templar > collosus since the collo nerf
uh, no? situational, but i still prefer robo builds because the counters are hard counters.
the colossus didnt even get nerfed that badly T_T
With the Viking's buff you don't need to nerf Colossus,
On March 31 2010 08:45 Shiladie wrote: Protoss need to stop bitching, I would be suprised if the actual win-rates have ever been anything outside of a 5% range of 50% for any race the entire beta, post the big terran buff patch.
I expect these forums to be a bit more civil then screaming imba/uselessness at every change.
hive upg for roach is actually useless now though
After the big terran buff patch, the top toss players were at 42% winrate. zerg was at 54. T was at 58.
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
it's also possible that they still consider toss to have a disadvantage and plan on buffing them at some later point, they just aren't sure what to buff. right now they might just be adjusting the parameters of the game better so that it isn't so bland or "gay". storm was good but if the radius is too big it kind of makes it a storm fest and can give the game a high degree of variance which might not be the best for the game. i'm protoss too, i was a bit disappointed first but i think it might be a step in the right direction to make the game better.
i mean it's still really easy to storm a huge radius u just need more energy
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
because in BW the same cost in wraiths do far less DPS, same kind of harassment mobility, and far less HP.
I dont know how else to say it but i would take a cost increase and a damage nerf if the damn things would just cover a wider radius. You cannot defend a hatchery with 3 spore crawlers, let alone a base and a natural with 6 (which is an absolutely insane investment).
I'm not saying throwing down 2 spore crawlers should be permanent safety - all I want is if i throw down a spore on one side of the hatchery, the banshee cant just fly to the other side and kill it.
As of now the Banshee is like going to SC1, making the wraith way stronger, removing overlord detection, weaking spore colonies severely, and making hydra a tier 2 unit
On March 31 2010 06:27 Tdelamay wrote: The banshee is a base raiding unit. Now that static defense is better, it will be harder for banshee to do what they did, so they buffed her health by 10 hp. Which is okay. I don't think a banshee can take down a photon cannon.
fuck i'd hope a photon cannon could take down 2 banshies... ffs
2 banshees > photon cannon fyi.
so dumb
what? what's so dumb about that? lol banshees attack ground only and they're 150/100, you'd expect a cannon to beat 2 banshees?
because in BW the same cost in wraiths do far less DPS, same kind of harassment mobility, and far less HP.
So? You wanna play BW? Go play BW... Wraiths were mainly ATA, banshees are ATG Let's take a look at the only ATG-only unit in SC1 - the guardian. Do you still think that it's ridiculous that they killed cannons? O.o
What was Thor splash radius previously? I noticed that it use to hit about 2 units per volley (when they were not stacked). How many mutas does it hit now (if they are not stacked)? Can't test for myself till I finish work
On March 31 2010 09:03 Atrioc wrote: PLEASE INCREASE THE RANGE ON SPORE CRAWLERS
I dont know how else to say it but i would take a cost increase and a damage nerf if the damn things would just cover a wider radius. You cannot defend a hatchery with 3 spore crawlers, let alone a base and a natural with 6 (which is an absolutely insane investment).
I'm not saying throwing down 2 spore crawlers should be permanent safety - all I want is if i throw down a spore on one side of the hatchery, the banshee cant just fly to the other side and kill it.
As of now the Banshee is like going to SC1, making the wraith way stronger, removing overlord detection, weaking spore colonies severely, and making hydra a tier 2 unit
I couldn't agree more, I always feel like my 3 spores aren't doing the job against an air attack. We should be able to know that at least that expo is safe from being harassed.
Wow the turrets are ridiculously good now... a group of 3 turrets repels 10 mutas pretty easily. An island with 8ish turrets is pretty much untouchable.
On March 31 2010 09:39 AssuredVacancy wrote: Wow the turrets are ridiculously good now... a group of 3 turrets repels 10 mutas pretty easily. An island with 8ish turrets is pretty much untouchable.
I hate banshees almost as much as I hate upgraded hellions, goddammit why are they buffed T_T. Spore crawlers are such a shitty counter to them reducing the cost won't affect it much, what needs to be buffed is the range (as noted above). I can put 4 spore crawlers in my base and banshees will STILL be able to pick off key tech structures or harass my mineral lines... and that's not to mention as banshee numbers begin to build they tear threw spores simply because they are only being fired at one by one.
Actually the static defense ranges are the same as in BW, but the differences with BW are that the main buildings are bigger and units in general have longer ranges.
Main buildings are 5x5 tiles in SC2, compared to 4x3 in BW. Making them 4x4 would improve this a lot.
So only the zerg main air unit has the same range, and toss ranged(but it no longer requires a range upgrade). I don't consider, Banshees and Marauders as equivalents to Wraiths and Marines, I'm just listing common ranged units for each race.
Just increasing the static defense range would probably solve the issue, but it would also affect their power against an assault and the area they cover vs drops(while maps already have a smaller playable area).
It's nice to see static d being looked at but Im a bit worried.
If a terran can turtle up with judicious use of missile turrets and seiged tanks he can basically just mass thors and I can't stop him. Once he has a fair bit of them he can just come out and destroy any unit combination I have at such a cost effective ratio that it doesn't matter if I have nearly twice the bases running. Muta harass was the only way I had of keeping a Terran honest about this sort of crap but with buffed turrets and now buffed thors I don't see a way of stopping this sort of play. Its too cost effective for him to turtle, and then he comes out with a 1 unit army that is again so cost effective it doesn't matter I might have had 1-2 extra expansions running the entire time. If I can't harass I just don't see anyway to keep him from timing his push to flatten me... with a one unit (oh sorry, 2 because of course repairing scvs should be with the thors) type army.
Oh well, I guess I can go back to the fun of ZvZ and using queens as my static D because spore colonies have the range of a burrowed roach still. D=
Still no range buff for Stalkers eh? I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet, it's all they need to be worthwhile backbone/harassment shutdown units that they're supposed to be
I never run into trouble against Banshees unless I plain don't see it coming. The HP buff seems reasonable to me, they die pretty fast. If you're mad because hydras are tier 2... you're doing it wrong.
Storm radius nerf doesn't seem like it's entirely necessary, but I've only played 20 or so games TvP against people who use Storm, so what do I know.
Spine crawler buff makes me really really happy, they were pretty worthless Agreed on the range buff for spore crawlers! They totally need it
On March 31 2010 09:49 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: Still no range buff for Stalkers eh? I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet, it's all they need to be worthwhile backbone/harassment shutdown units that they're supposed to be
On March 31 2010 09:46 Synwave wrote: It's nice to see static d being looked at but Im a bit worried.
If a terran can turtle up with judicious use of missile turrets and seiged tanks he can basically just mass thors and I can't stop him. Once he has a fair bit of them he can just come out and destroy any unit combination I have at such a cost effective ratio that it doesn't matter if I have nearly twice the bases running. Muta harass was the only way I had of keeping a Terran honest about this sort of crap but with buffed turrets and now buffed thors I don't see a way of stopping this sort of play. Its too cost effective for him to turtle, and then he comes out with a 1 unit army that is again so cost effective it doesn't matter I might have had 1-2 extra expansions running the entire time. If I can't harass I just don't see anyway to keep him from timing his push to flatten me... with a one unit (oh sorry, 2 because of course repairing scvs should be with the thors) type army.
Oh well, I guess I can go back to the fun of ZvZ and using queens as my static D because spore colonies have the range of a burrowed roach still. D=
Next time try to use lings, they eat thors for breakfast (another effective units include roaches and broodlords). Or do they get killed by the mighty scvs or what lol?
On March 31 2010 09:49 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: Still no range buff for Stalkers eh? I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet, it's all they need to be worthwhile backbone/harassment shutdown units that they're supposed to be
Completely agree...
If anything they are going to be nerfed again now that they are making up a large part of protoss army i've seen people do nothing but mass them and using blink to cut off units. A range upgrade would just encourage this more.
On March 31 2010 09:49 FakeSteve[TPR] wrote: Still no range buff for Stalkers eh? I wonder why nobody has brought this up yet, it's all they need to be worthwhile backbone/harassment shutdown units that they're supposed to be
Really? Stalkers are as fast as zerglings and faster than so many units in the game. With micro they are so so so sweet with backup. I love them. Range buff would make them even more ridiculous.
If anything they are going to be nerfed again now that they are making up a large part of protoss army i've seen people do nothing but mass them and using blink to cut off units. A range upgrade would just encourage this more.
Stalkers have gone from a "too crappy to even bother with unit" to a "decent enough I'll try him out more" unit. But cost for cost they still don't compare to marauders and still have problems vs things like mass lings early game. I definately see them more in pvp but otherwise I don't think there use is highly prevalent.
the new psi storm blowsssss, it can barely get 4 hydras in one storm and is EASILY dodged...
I just had a game vs a zerg player using hydras on blistering...
6 hydras 4 roaches vs 5 zeals 2 cannons 6 stalkers and a storm, the zerg just busted through after dodging my storm, keep in mind that attk was +1 for me and nothing for him, this is also right after i raped 5 overlords in his main and destroyed his gas...
normally a storm wouldve won me that fight, but instead i hurt maybe 1 hydra, and storming mutas is basically useless
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
ye dude, ht are so brainless... spamming marauder from 7rax is much more skill based
to counter a basic terran unit i've to tech so much for what? a storm with a ridicolous range that can't even kill a marauder? come on... they should buff terran mech and nerf marauder instead nerfing storms, that's the true
On March 31 2010 07:42 DeMusliM wrote: As for the HT nerf - i'm pretty happy with that, as it was far too mindless late game if you had 8 + HT which is very possible to spam the shit out of an army without much thought process.
ye dude, ht are so brainless... spamming marauder from 7rax is much more skill based
to counter a basic terran unit i've to tech so much for what? a storm with a ridicolous range that can't even kill a marauder? come on... they should buff terran mech and nerf marauder instead nerfing storms, that's the true
Stormfests can decide games. Spamming Marauders cannot.
I miss speedlots being so good, I do agree with the general feeling that SC2 has become more of a ranged vs ranged game.
It's also SO much harder to dodge storm with hydras right now (at least prepatch) because they are so friggin' slow offcreep. Been it's ridiculously easy to dodge when on creep. I really dislike this. I think this needs to be fixed (regardless whether or not Z > P that is, just this particularly "can't dodge" part).
Hoooly shit I love this patch. The best thing about the previous patch, conditional bonus damage being moved over to base damage (in this case with the turret), continues to be a trend, which is wonderful. Also we have the static defense buff, which is great! It's good because there are a ton of reasons why static defense needed upgrading and it's also good because this was a big community complaint and Blizzard complied. I'm really happy with how Blizzard has been patching this. They listen attentively to the complaints and suggestions of the community and are continually addressing the racial balance. I have never been more confident that SC2 will be a great multiplayer game.
Pretty good patch imo. The storm nerf was interesting and perhaps unneeded. Storm was arguably OP against terran due to the reliance on bio for TvP in SC2, but I would think that storm is too weak vs zerg now.
On March 31 2010 03:47 Archerofaiur wrote: Bug Fixes * Fixed an issue in which players would desync when matched against others with certain CPUs.
What does this mean?
i'm pretty sure this was happening to me. only happened 1/25 games, but it was an obvious desync, or so i thought, because it couldn't have been anything else imo.
On March 31 2010 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote: I miss speedlots being so good, I do agree with the general feeling that SC2 has become more of a ranged vs ranged game.
It's kinda ridiculous -_- I guess we are going to see 150 limit of maradeurs in TvP. Recent games from Morrow and Demu were so boring, just spamming maraduers whole game. Like some noobs, no offense.
But I think thats because maradeurs are way more cost effective compared to other terran units. Blizzard should've think of that. I've tried new psi storm, it literally sucks. Terran just stims and ran away barely damaged. That skill supposed to counter multiple cheap small units so that opponet didn't mass them. It would force terran to use high level units
It's a Beta. Blizzard is going to make changes that are questionable, changes that are highly experimental, and changes that end up being dead wrong. Then, they look at the information and feedback from us, the players, and they will tweak the changes, alter them, or take them back completely, based on how things work out in practice. This is the reason they have a Beta in the first place; to test the game, the balance, and see what works and doesn't.
Blizzard has so far shown a remarkable ability to respond to feedback and trends fairly quickly. Rest assured, if Protoss is losing too much after this patch, then they will buff Protoss; if HTs aren't used enough, then they will buff HTs; if Roaches aren't used enough, then they will buff Roaches.
If anyone can't handle this, then they really shouldn't be in the Beta in the first place.
On March 31 2010 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote: I miss speedlots being so good, I do agree with the general feeling that SC2 has become more of a ranged vs ranged game.
On March 31 2010 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote: I miss speedlots being so good, I do agree with the general feeling that SC2 has become more of a ranged vs ranged game.
buff banshee's, the strongest thing against toss (which can CLOAK) who have shit AA, and nerf storm to shit, the only thing that keeps toss in the game. Ridiculous patch.
I really dont' get the HT storm nerf. It's already been downsized since SCBW and now an AoE nerf? Storm wasn't imbalanced before anyways because moving out of it was already quite easy. The only people who would get completely roflstomped by it were noobs who just sat and took the entire duration of storm. -.-
Also, I wouldn't be surprised if, now that Storm and Roaches have both been nerfed, we see a Marauder nerf in the near future. With storm and Roaches in their pre-patch state, nerfing Marauders significantly would probably involve almost completely crippling Terran bio. Now, however, after the requisite information is in, Blizzard will feel much more "free" to deliver whatever nerfs are needed for Terran, without having to worry about catastrophic balance losses.
Psionic storm hasn't even been all that overpowered in games that I've observed and now it receives a nerf :[
At least increase the total damage to compensate for area reduction.
Also if structures were not classified as "armored" they would be more durable. Seems like buildings are way too fragile from the way armies can simply run into expansions and snipe the cc/hatchery/nexus before running back out.
Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
Units definitely couldn't clump as close in SC1.
It's both really. Collision size and better pathing makes it much harder to split units. Units clump up more due to less collision size, and the removal of the magic box means that units will automatically try to clump up no matter how they are ordered to move.
I would have prefered a spore crawler range buff to a spine crawler damage buff as a zerg. Tbh it feels like you are forced to fast tech or AI cheese vs terran at the moment. Banshees pretty much destroy me if i dont fast tech. At the same time they made fast tech mutas vs terran worse, so i m wondering about a good strat atm.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
use multiple control groups? just attack in a couple staggered clumps rather than one giant ball and see what happens, I see top players doing it all the time and it works wonders on both collosi and storm. when you do this your units will naturally make a very nice arc when attacking, which is much harder to storm than the giant ball that you get if you 1a your units in. if you arc correctly, those 150 gas templar can hit... maybe 4 marauders with storm.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
Units definitely couldn't clump as close in SC1.
It's both really. Collision size and better pathing makes it much harder to split units. Units clump up more due to less collision size, and the removal of the magic box means that units will automatically try to clump up no matter how they are ordered to move.
I think most people don't understand that Psi,HSM and Fungal growth are suppposed to counter many-cheap-small units. HTs are higher in the tech tree. So if you see HTs then you have to switch to other units which are larger, expensive and deeper in tech. (Thor, BC, air, tanks, Ravens).
Most terrans are stuck with MMM and see everything in MMM perspective. You cannot fight everything with one mix of units. That's totally wrong. Storms supposed to be hard counter to clumped army consisting of low tech cheap units.
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
Units definitely couldn't clump as close in SC1.
It's both really. Collision size and better pathing makes it much harder to split units. Units clump up more due to less collision size, and the removal of the magic box means that units will automatically try to clump up no matter how they are ordered to move.
I think most people don't understand that Psi,HSM and Fungal growth are suppposed to counter many-cheap-small units. HTs are higher in the tech tree. So if you see HTs then you have to switch to other units which are larger, expensive and deeper in tech. (Thor, BC, air, tanks, Ravens).
Most terrans are stuck with MMM and see everything in MMM perspective. You cannot fight everything with one mix of units. That's totally wrong. Storms supposed to be hard counter to clumped army consisting of low tech cheap units.
Thors BC end tech both cost shit tones of min/gas can't mass them or get good #'s to fight with them in any normal game. Tanks are agian alot of min/gas can get the #'s in normal games to do well with them but for most part tanks are VERY meh vs toss and you need ground units to support them MM balls without the MM balls they are worthless unless on def.
ravens caster units lol Banshess cool and all but get taken down easy by stalkers/sents for most part only used for harsments.
Problem for terran is our mech blows big time very bad lol everything is really support to the MM ball /shrug
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
Units definitely couldn't clump as close in SC1.
It's both really. Collision size and better pathing makes it much harder to split units. Units clump up more due to less collision size, and the removal of the magic box means that units will automatically try to clump up no matter how they are ordered to move.
I think most people don't understand that Psi,HSM and Fungal growth are suppposed to counter many-cheap-small units. HTs are higher in the tech tree. So if you see HTs then you have to switch to other units which are larger, expensive and deeper in tech. (Thor, BC, air, tanks, Ravens).
Most terrans are stuck with MMM and see everything in MMM perspective. You cannot fight everything with one mix of units. That's totally wrong. Storms supposed to be hard counter to clumped army consisting of low tech cheap units.
Thors BC end tech both cost shit tones of min/gas can't mass them or get good #'s to fight with them in any normal game. Tanks are agian alot of min/gas can get the #'s in normal games to do well with them but for most part tanks are VERY meh vs toss and you need ground units to support them MM balls without the MM balls they are worthless unless on def.
ravens caster units lol Banshess cool and all but get taken down easy by stalkers/sents for most part only used for harsments.
Problem for terran is our mech blows big time very bad lol everything is really support to the MM ball /shrug
Then why not to buff terran mech? Which is more reasonable than nerfing others. Seriously don't understand blizs -_-
Why is it absolutely necessary that Terrans should be able to go full mech? If slow pushing isn't your style, then by all means, make more MMMs, but don't complain about units being weak because you're not willing to use them where they shine.
'Make more MMMs' - that's what I don't like in recent terran games. So boring, just trying to outmass opponent. Not much of micro, not much of action. Stim-focus-run, Stim-focus-run, Stim-focus-run...
On March 31 2010 13:17 Plexa wrote: So this stops the fast expand 6-7 rax marauder build TvP how.....?
Now marauders need one extra hit to take down photon cannons!
YAAAAARRRRRRR
looooooool Storm sucks so hard against Marauder/Medivac now thanks to stim and micro. It's like Blizzard don't want us to use anything other than robotics units. Furthermore, EMP just rapes what little dignity Storm has left.
On March 31 2010 14:40 hellitsaboutme wrote: 'Make more MMMs' - that's what I don't like in recent terran games. So boring, just trying to outmass opponent. Not much of micro, not much of action. Stim-focus-run, Stim-focus-run, Stim-focus-run...
It's not that "Storm is so bad now", rather that "storm was so ridiculously good and Blizzard realized it and toned it down." Seriously, SC1 storm was like watching the slow tide roll in, but SC2 storm is much faster and effective now. Especially since it's harder to spot HT because of the more crowded units now.
But seriously, what about Terran tanks? The original spine of the Terran army?
On March 31 2010 14:59 Wings wrote: It's not that "Storm is so bad now", rather that "storm was so ridiculously good and Blizzard realized it and toned it down." Seriously, SC1 storm was like watching the slow tide roll in, but SC2 storm is much faster and effective now. Especially since it's harder to spot HT because of the more crowded units now.
But seriously, what about Terran tanks? The original spine of the Terran army?
how the hell is it hard to spot an HT? Blizzard made them these flashy units with a fucking billowing cape behind them to make them stand out. they look nothing like zlots, stalkers, sentries, or immortals. what's hard to spot are ghosts in the middle of a terran bio blob. HT's stick out like sore thumbs in comparison
On March 31 2010 14:59 Wings wrote: It's not that "Storm is so bad now", rather that "storm was so ridiculously good and Blizzard realized it and toned it down." Seriously, SC1 storm was like watching the slow tide roll in, but SC2 storm is much faster and effective now. Especially since it's harder to spot HT because of the more crowded units now.
But seriously, what about Terran tanks? The original spine of the Terran army?
What? Storm wasn't that great before the nerf, it was barely seeing use and now with the nerf it's completely useless. Given that the colossus still rapes everything there is z-e-r-o reason to tech templar anymore. It's more costly, less effective and takes longer to become effective.
HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
To those complaining about storm; look at it this way. It's not -meant- to be imbalanced. ^_^ All you have to do is throw down a few extra now and then Terran (i can't speak for zerg) can't really get out of it, smartcasting makes 'storm blankets' very easy to do, which means storm must be weaker than it was in sc1.
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
On March 31 2010 12:20 FabledIntegral wrote: I miss speedlots being so good, I do agree with the general feeling that SC2 has become more of a ranged vs ranged game.
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
Sorry to blow wind when the fire's burning but perhaps it's time to reset your way of thinking? Clearly the patch really changed game dynamics as well as player mindset (think of how many people want to adjust their strat to try out changed units). Use this info to your advantage and reset your way of thinking about your own strat. Like another poster said, if spine crawlers are stopping your normal build, adjust it to account for something that was probably non-existent when you made the build.
Give it time to sink in before you give up your neutrality
On March 31 2010 15:32 BentoBox wrote: People are always so quick to use the term overpowered, it's truly saddening.
Indeed we called vultures OPed in sc1. Then we called science vessels OPed. Then we called arbitors OPed. Then we called mutalisks OPed. Hmmm... What are we talking about again?
On topic: I think I know what Blizzard wants SC2 to be Step 1 nerf marines Step 2 nerf Protoss' counter against low hp units (collosus and psi storm) Step 3 nerf Roaches Step 4 Boost static defence Result: Tech and less cheese/quick rush, at the same time making tier 1 viable late game
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
Sorry to blow wind when the fire's burning but perhaps it's time to reset your way of thinking? Clearly the patch really changed game dynamics as well as player mindset (think of how many people want to adjust their strat to try out changed units). Use this info to your advantage and reset your way of thinking about your own strat. Like another poster said, if spine crawlers are stopping your normal build, adjust it to account for something that was probably non-existent when you made the build.
Give it time to sink in before you give up your neutrality
lol you have no idea how accurate "blow wind when the fire's burning" applies ^_^ hahaha
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
Sorry to blow wind when the fire's burning but perhaps it's time to reset your way of thinking? Clearly the patch really changed game dynamics as well as player mindset (think of how many people want to adjust their strat to try out changed units). Use this info to your advantage and reset your way of thinking about your own strat. Like another poster said, if spine crawlers are stopping your normal build, adjust it to account for something that was probably non-existent when you made the build.
Give it time to sink in before you give up your neutrality
lol you have no idea how accurate "blow wind when the fire's burning" applies ^_^ hahaha
As if turtelling+teching beats expanding+cannons... -.-°
I've used Canons against Mutas before and it worked and now it works even better. Just go Fast-exe in PvZ with Cannons, block the ramp and u're fine - just like in SC1.
I go for fast +1 and Leg-Upgrade with 1-2 Archons and push afterwards, so you should do well against Mutas when adding some Cannons and staying in base with Archons, but you can also go for Starport first and snipe a ferw overlords, go scouting and be even better against Mutas if you prefer that. The only Problem with FE'ing are certain stupid Maps like DO, (S)Crap Station and Kulas... On those Maps, I go for Zealot+Archons with Leg and +1 Attack very soon, push out and put up a Pylon and a few Canons at the Natural (on SS it's the 3rd - block's the way for ground-Units better) while pushing to Fall back when the opponent has too much stuff and take an Expansion when it's safe.
Archons are imba against Roaches btw. just retreat with them when they're low an health and block the Roaches with Speedlots so the Archons can regain it's shield, which is almost all of it's HP. It also allows you to go Storm very fast and have decent Anti-Air. Archons are also nice against Mass-lings, but only in combination with a lot of speedlots.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
My first thought is - they needed like ages for patch 6 and it felt okay - now they threw out that patch within days - that cant be good. Did they even tested it or where even looking at the real statistics? I dont think so.
So what we see here is propably still an effect of that cheese that worked so well for terran, however, I totally agree to the Thor changes and the Turrets. What I dont see is that they do absolutely NOTHING to change the "MMM all the way" game style of Terran.
Zerg nerfs seem totally reasonable, for my opinion so we'll see.
What I really dont get is (and yes I'm biased as a former Protoss player) that they nerf down Toss EVERY DAMN patch. I mean look at the win rate, thats ridicolous and far far away from reality.
So except a very micro-intense early zealot push, Protoss has no real opportunity for early pressure except some real gas-heavy cheese (like void ray). In mid-game Immortals seem like the only reasonable opportunity left since DT got nerfed to be only available way too late. Since the trend is towards massive-light armies what has protoss left?
Storm got such a huge nerf that you need at least 50% MORE templars to get a reasonable damage area (remember that's hell a lot of gas) and it is now totally useless in a mass muta + ling army. So what is left? Collossus - easily countered by mutas, Immortals cant attack air, sentries - you've never seen a zerg switch to mass hydras faster than that.
So all that is left is absolute cheesy play for Protoss. Sure, it is something I really liked about the race, beside the challenge to play it properly, but at least one stable standard is needed so I'm not always all-in.
If I go early gas for sentries and higher tech units - I'm screwed by mutas-lings or roaches / marauder push by terran since they slow down ALL my units. Great, just great.
I clearly see that the win rate will drop below 40% for toss since cheese barely works more than once.
EDIT: yes I am sound frustrated since every strategy that seem more or less to work in certain MU get's nerfed and screwed by a patch for no reason and nothing really changed to the troubles that REALLY concern protoss (leak of anti-air for instance).
It seems like Blizzard always looks at ONE strategy that seem to work TOO well and nerf them out if they dont like what they see. Want an example?
well yeah those strategies where all overpowered and needed to dissappear but I feel that blizzard is doing changes WAY too short ranged since it focuses mainly and one side of the 3 race triangle - which will definately not lead to balance for the release date.
Nerfs protoss has been presented in the last 7 patches
Mothership: * Vortex: The energy cost of this ability has increased from 75 to 100. * Vortex: The target radius of this ability has decreased from 3.0 to 2.5. * Temporal Rift: This ability has been removed from the game. * Wormhole Transit: This ability has been removed from the game. * Mass Recall: New Ability. Teleports all of the player's units in the target area to the
* The build time for this unit has increased from 120 to 160. * The food cost of this unit has increased from 6 to 8. * The number of shots fired by this unit has decreased from 8 to 6. * The shield of this unit has decreased from 400 to 350. * The health of this unit has decreased from 400 to 350. * The acceleration of this unit has decreased from 1.3125 to 0.3125. * The deceleration of this unit has increased from 0 to 1.
Gateway: * The build time of this building has increased from 50 to 65.
Nexus * Chrono Boost: The duration of this ability has decreased from 30 to 20. (and no longer possible to cast this ability to allies)
Zealot * The maximum shield capacity of this unit has been decreased from 60 to 50.
Cybernetics Core * Warp Gate research time increased from 60 seconds to 140 seconds.
Colossus * Thermal Lances damage decreased from 23 to 20. Observer: * Cost increased from 25 Minerals and 75 Vespene Gas to 50 Minerals and 100 Vespene Gas. * Build time increased from 33 seconds to 40 seconds.
Dark Templar * Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light.
High Templar * Armor type changed from Biological-Psionic to Biological-Psionic-Light. * The Psi Storm radius has been decreased from 2 to 1.5.
Dark Shrine * Build time increased from 80 seconds to 100 seconds. * Cost increased from 100 Minerals and 200 Vespene Gas to 100 Minerals and 250 Vespene Gas.
So what's next ? I guess immortal damage against armored units is little bit too strong
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
For all those complaining about the storm nerf, playing against it as a Zerg player I haven't seen much of a difference. It still rocks the socks off my Hydra's if I don't micro them out of it and can turn fights against me quite easily. I feel pretty indifferent about the change. I had a guy in a 2v2 use storms effectively against my Mutas effectively as well. I think that it'll just force people to place the storms better, especially against air (using the shadow/ground circles instead of hitting where they are in the air and missing with most of it).
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
Sorry to blow wind when the fire's burning but perhaps it's time to reset your way of thinking? Clearly the patch really changed game dynamics as well as player mindset (think of how many people want to adjust their strat to try out changed units). Use this info to your advantage and reset your way of thinking about your own strat. Like another poster said, if spine crawlers are stopping your normal build, adjust it to account for something that was probably non-existent when you made the build.
Give it time to sink in before you give up your neutrality
lol you have no idea how accurate "blow wind when the fire's burning" applies ^_^ hahaha
As if turtelling+teching beats expanding+cannons... -.-°
I've used Canons against Mutas before and it worked and now it works even better. Just go Fast-exe in PvZ with Cannons, block the ramp and u're fine - just like in SC1.
I go for fast +1 and Leg-Upgrade with 1-2 Archons and push afterwards, so you should do well against Mutas when adding some Cannons and staying in base with Archons, but you can also go for Starport first and snipe a ferw overlords, go scouting and be even better against Mutas if you prefer that. The only Problem with FE'ing are certain stupid Maps like DO, (S)Crap Station and Kulas... On those Maps, I go for Zealot+Archons with Leg and +1 Attack very soon, push out and put up a Pylon and a few Canons at the Natural (on SS it's the 3rd - block's the way for ground-Units better) while pushing to Fall back when the opponent has too much stuff and take an Expansion when it's safe.
Archons are imba against Roaches btw. just retreat with them when they're low an health and block the Roaches with Speedlots so the Archons can regain it's shield, which is almost all of it's HP. It also allows you to go Storm very fast and have decent Anti-Air. Archons are also nice against Mass-lings, but only in combination with a lot of speedlots.
so how does this fe work when they open 1 hatch mass roaches? doesnt that obliterate cannons?
Did anyone question that Blizz favours Z and that there are still things needed to be fixed? I don't think so - but nonetheless this Patch is awesome because of the Static-defense-buff.
It does look like Blizzard doesn't balance Races, but Strategys, but when they're doing that, I really don't know why Blizz doesn't start nerfing stuff like:
- Marauders: I mean - c'mon... 90% of Terran-Games are won by Marauders IMHO...
- Speedlings+Banelings: This combination is just soo strong but rather than nerfing it, it gets buffed...
- Mutas: Too strong since day1, but did Blizz ever really address that?
- Queen: Inject Larva is just way too strong and contradicts the way Zerg should be played. I mean: They have cheaper Hatcheries than any other Main-Building, but don't really need 'em? Yeah, Z doesn't need an expansion much more than the other races, but they can get away with it much easier. They have Anti-Air, Anti-Scouting and strong early defense just because of the Queen, which costs the same amount as an Orbital Command for example, but is also an attacking Unit? They don't need that much gas anymore (I'm not playing Z, but it feels that way when watching reps/vods) and have incredibly strong Units overall? No wonder 90% of the Tournaments are won by Z or have 50% Z in the Top-8.
There are also some obviously underused Units, like:
- Mothership - Carriers - Tanks
which could clearly use some buffs or even bigger changes...
@Changes listed for P abive: The only things I really don't agree with is the DT-nerf, because Detection isn't a big Problem for any race and if you rush for DT's (which was even hard before the nerf) you're risking sth, like in any other rush/cheese. But the big problem is: Now that DT's and HT's are nerfed, the Templar-tech makes even less sense, so Protoss' are basically forced to go stupid Collossi. -.-° Also, DT's were a viable Strategy that wasn't cheese at all against T (and they still are, but just weaker) so that the P had a chance to get an expansion up without getting steamrolled by 1-basing or even FE'ing Terran Marauder-pushes and force the Terran to stay in the base or use up Scans etc. The other Races have lots of options to keep the opponent in the base defending with stuff like Reapers, extremely fast Speedlings, Mutas, Bunker-Containments, Medivac-Drops (you get the Medivacs anyways...), but Protoss can only maybe pressure the opponent with offensive Pylons, but that's often not a good option when you're trying to expand and gather some intelligence about the enemy. DT's and HT-Drops were the way to go if you didn't wanna cheese with voidray-rushes and that's kinda annoying.
Blizzard just keeps pushing players into certain playstyles and into using certain Units, with not looking at the Big picture, but only on certain Strategy's.
- Why don't they get rid of this rock-paper-scissors-System with ridiculously huge DMG-Boni against certain Armor-Types? - Why don't they implement REAL Highground-advantage? - Why don't they care about Units which aren't used in cheese allin-strategies which are obviously too strong?
I really hope it's more a matter of time than a matter of willingness to do these changes, but I just don't see anything that gives us hope that Blizzard listens to the Top-Players, which across the board think the first two points mentioned above should be taken care of to make SC2 as good as it can get. Really: Balancing Units with a bit of HP-bonus there and a bit less DMG here is totally unimportant when comparing it with these absolutely important Gamemechanics, that would make SC2 much more versatile, interesting and strategical.
For me, it's not really all about balacing the races, but also about balancing the Units. I think for the different races, SC2 is balanced rather well, but it's the Units that are often imbalanced. It's the fact that SC2 reinforces Massing over Strategical and Intelligent play, that they basically tell you which Unit to use rather than giving the player a chance to use different Unit-combinations in creative ways to be able to counter certain other Unit-combinations, the fact that positioning is far less important, which leads to the Fact, that you're just turtelling in the base until you push out, rather than getting in an advantageous position on the Map. If you're now positioning yourself on the Map, you get no advantage except Vision and with Units like Marauders (which slow you) or Speedlings, which surround or counterattak you, staying in the base Massing up stuff is just way too good. That has nothing to do with balance between the races, but with how much fun SC2 is to play and how strategical it is, which is IMO more important now than all those little changes. I mean: Changing stuff like HP or DMG is fine, but maybe after some more important stuff that will change the whole balance possibly anyways....
And it's the fact that Blizz does all those "little" changes now that makes my think they won't do anything about the stuff mentioned above, because those little changes could become redundant and that would be soooo sad for SC2. I mean: The game is fun and all, but is sm1 here that really thinks implementing Highground-advantage and getting rid or at least reduce Bonus-DMG against certain Armor-types would in any way hurt the enjoyability of the game?
How are tanks underused ? I agree about carrier but you are super biased and are clearly a protoss. Just listen to all korean pros saying sentrys are too strong.
Hows slings+blings overpowered? its easy to couter and good players once they figured it out will always win vs it. So are prolly all the cheeses that are played atm just give it some time..
Highground def.
But i love the hard counters and its the way SC2 should be.
On March 31 2010 15:26 mOnion wrote: HEY in case anyone was wondering, ZvP one hatch spire, no zerglings, just make spine crawlers. like 6 or 7 of them
Zerg is overpowered as shit now. i used to have no problems with zerg, now this matchup is trash. I've been arguing that the game is balanced amongst these haters this whole time, but this patch fucked things up.
spine crawlers are riDICULOUSLY strong. and muta are too fast and strong. this is unbelievable.
So like, turtling on 1 base to get to muta with spine crawlers.. Why not go 1-2 stargate pheonix? Pretty much lol's at muta from only 2 geysers. Not like defending off 2 base with spine crawlers, he's not at an economic advantage so you can expo even faster than him.
scouting is impossible. when i see gas like that i'm not thinking muta, i'm thinking banelings or power roaches.
its basically a coin flip.
argh sorry, in in rage mode, so my "take advice" muscles arent working.
ill try and see if i can work 2 stargates into this.
Heh, see where you're coming from though as random you never really worry about imba because you get beaten by good players in all match ups.
Here's my thought process on this matter: A zerg's natural instinct is Fast expand. If he's 1 basing, he's basically going to try to kill you. There are 3 main rushes from 1 base gas builds
--> Roach rush -->Baneling/Speedling Bust in --> 4 Mutalisk rush
Assuming you're doing standard 1 gate core --> robo --> gate or 1 gate core gate-->robo, you basically do the following: Stop chrono boosting probes earlier than normal and chrono your gateways, since he's going low econ you are really vulnerable early on, until like 6 minutes replay time. So you get 2 zealots, a fast stalker and sentry. Sentry can hold ling all-ins and stalkers stay in front to soak up baneling busts. You want to keep your gate's pumping while getting a fast immortal in case of roaches, or obs-->immortal, not certain if you can get away with obs first. So, forcefield+stall until immortal can hold off roaches, hopefully stalker hold pos on the ramp can stop him a-moving banelings up your ramp and you should know not to clump your lots/sentry together. Forcefield should also deal with all-in lings especially if you are spamming chrono on your gates. Now if nothing happens, you are pretty sure of muta, so get more stalkers until your obs is out. If you see a spire, get 1 stargate up ASAP. Using all chrono's on pheonix will quickly build up numbers. You SHOULD have roughly enough stalkers/sentry to survive 4-5 alone, the pheonix are there to stop his harass and eventually gain air dominance, and assuming you have enough forces to expand you want to get that expo down pretty fast. He basically can't keep up with pheonix production using all his gas for muta since gas for gas pheonix wins hands down no problem. Once you get air dominance he needs hydra to keep his queens alive and you just stop pheonix production and should have a comfortable advantage.
Now obviously this is kinda chancy, what I've started to do, is say: "Well, he won't have THAT many roaches off just one base and that's not that popular, immortals are pretty bad vs every other 1 base opening so why not go 3 gate mass lot/stalker/sentry. You basically have faster second gate and third gate so you can defend the all-in's more easily and if you push out to find lots of static D you must assume muta pull back add more AA and add a stargate. Again, not only does pheonix stop him harassing you it also means that he also won't be able to expand to his nat without his harass. Pheonix uses most of your gas so you will be making a lot of zealots which is excellent since he will add lings in the same proportion.
I haven't had a whole lot of experience vs 1 basing zergs but I'm just trying to add a thought process as opposed to: "OMFG, He's going muta, crap, attack his main, omfg mass sunkens killed my army now muta rape me FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU BLIZZZZZZZZZZ" or the more popular "Muta pinned me down while he took a third base and massed lots of units and steamrolled me omfg OP units!"
I do think muta are quite strong vs protoss and I hate not going pheonix vs them just because you constantly have to worry about harass and backstabs. If it's a map like desert oasis no way you can attack him without losing your entire economy and giving plenty time for the muta to stop for a cup of tea along the way back to defend.
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:41 eXigent. wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:22 CharlieMurphy wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
I was not aware that the poster of that had false data, so i apologize for that, but i fail to see how that instantly invalidates everything. storm did get a HUGE nerf, down over 40% in power, and toss has been nerfed in every patch blizzard has thus far released. maybe i misunderstood you and you were only talking about us quoting the stats that guy posted, but since the majority of the posts you condemn are dealing with how badly one of the most important toss spells got nerfed it seems like you were calling that garbage, when we were just using simple, unassailable math to show people that a 25% decrease in radius of a spell =/= 25% decrease in power.
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:41 eXigent. wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:22 CharlieMurphy wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 17:08 GoDannY wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:18 mOnion wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
I was not aware that the poster of that had false data, so i apologize for that, but i fail to see how that instantly invalidates everything. storm did get a HUGE nerf, down over 40% in power, and toss has been nerfed in every patch blizzard has thus far released. maybe i misunderstood you and you were only talking about us quoting the stats that guy posted, but since the majority of the posts you condemn are dealing with how badly one of the most important toss spells got nerfed it seems like you were calling that garbage, when we were just using simple, unassailable math to show people that a 25% decrease in radius of a spell =/= 25% decrease in power.
It is also that the stats you were talking about were valid 2 patches ago. 1 patch terran recieved a huge nerf making them the weakest race so it was expected for them to get a buff, the nerf terran recieved last patch was much larger than the nerf protoss recieved this patch.
I know the maths about psi storm, but your whole argument that it is a flawed change since protoss was already extremely underpowered goes down the drain totally. It could be a bad change but it could also be a good change, protoss might be slightly underpowered now but it isn't extreme and to correct that they might want to buff something else than psi storm. Just because it temporarily upsets race balance do not mean that it wont be a good change in the long run.
This is why we have a beta btw, they make some changes they would never be able to make in the retail game allowing for race imbalances to see how the meta game plays out. They still have plenty of time to get it balanced, what matters is to make the game fun to play first by making the matchups play well.
On March 31 2010 14:59 Wings wrote: It's not that "Storm is so bad now", rather that "storm was so ridiculously good and Blizzard realized it and toned it down." Seriously, SC1 storm was like watching the slow tide roll in, but SC2 storm is much faster and effective now. Especially since it's harder to spot HT because of the more crowded units now.
But seriously, what about Terran tanks? The original spine of the Terran army?
What? Storm wasn't that great before the nerf, it was barely seeing use and now with the nerf it's completely useless. Given that the colossus still rapes everything there is z-e-r-o reason to tech templar anymore. It's more costly, less effective and takes longer to become effective.
feedback, well since it works vs like half of terrans units, ghosts medivac, thor, banshi, raven. vs zerg, need like 1 in your army for investors
Good patch. For some reason I lost my first 8 games (longest losing streak I've had in sc2) right after getting this patch. I'm sure its just fluke, but still. RAGE
try out storms with the new patch instead of focusing on percentages. If storms are still viable it doesn't matter that their radius got nerfed by 45%. playing beta > theorycrafting(and no I don't have a key).
On March 31 2010 19:12 FarbrorAbavna wrote: try out storms with the new patch instead of focusing on percentages. If storms are still viable it doesn't matter that their radius got nerfed by 45%. playing beta > theorycrafting(and no I don't have a key).
its so much harder, storm drones you need 3-4 storms to cover the min line now instead of 2. basically all your storms need to hit vs t, vs zerg its not worth getting, get collosi instead much better investment
On March 31 2010 19:12 FarbrorAbavna wrote: try out storms with the new patch instead of focusing on percentages. If storms are still viable it doesn't matter that their radius got nerfed by 45%. playing beta > theorycrafting(and no I don't have a key).
You act like we haven't been playing beta and trying it out.
I think i would have prefered an increase in storm duration (still same damage but takes longer to inflict it) than smaller storm area.
I would also like to add the following to the race win rate stat debate. Protoss loosing more as a percentage does not nessessarily mean they are underpowered. There is just as much chance that protoss players are just not playing them correctly yet.
On March 31 2010 19:34 DeCoup wrote:I would also like to add the following to the race win rate stat debate. Protoss loosing more as a percentage does not nessessarily mean they are underpowered. There is just as much chance that protoss players are just not playing them correctly yet.
Sorry, but this is a misguided argument that won't lead anywhere. You could say the same about every race and thus say none of the races needed the buffs they received and no race needs balance tweaks at all because it's just the players not playing right.
You have to balance based on the players or the game just won't be balanced
lol i played some games and must say the new storm covers nothing. rofl should i now build 100 supply just with HTs to be able storm a 50 supply T bio army marauder only? this storm nerf is just ridiculous. and instead of giving the photon some HP/Shield they should have give it more DPS like the new sunkens. now Ts will go more often just 1 unit and adding 2-3 ghosts as "EMP aka I win Button" support.
On March 31 2010 17:50 w_Ender_w wrote: For all those complaining about the storm nerf, playing against it as a Zerg player I haven't seen much of a difference. It still rocks the socks off my Hydra's if I don't micro them out of it and can turn fights against me quite easily. I feel pretty indifferent about the change. I had a guy in a 2v2 use storms effectively against my Mutas effectively as well. I think that it'll just force people to place the storms better, especially against air (using the shadow/ground circles instead of hitting where they are in the air and missing with most of it).
A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
Of course the area of effect is important. But a spell with twice the area of effect isn't twice as good. A spell with twice the radius is probably more than twice as good though so the rate of the spells increased effectiveness is somewhere between the two.
dear blizzard, force everyone to play random every game so we dont get 99999 whineposts that "their race" has been nerfec "unfairly" "every patch", thannx!
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
Of course the area of effect is important. But a spell with twice the area of effect isn't twice as good. A spell with twice the radius is probably more than twice as good though so the rate of the spells increased effectiveness is somewhere between the two.
because area is 45% less units exit storm faster and so even units you storm directly take less damage.. even units who go trough a casted storm take less damage.. speedlings could probably just run trough a storm with 1 tick of damage. effectiveness vs air is even worse.. If you micro air units should take only 20 damage..
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
What hes saying is that its not a 45% effectiveness nerf because its rare that 100% of a storms area has units under it.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
What hes saying is that its not a 45% effectiveness nerf because its rare that 100% of a storms area has units under it.
correct but now you have to acct for when units move in and out of storm, with a bigger radius you get more damage since there is more surface area, smaller one easier to move out of.
IF the changes create imbalances, thats totally fine. Cause this is BETA. Blizzard trying out things is good. It would be a lot worse if they didnt, considering the gameplay to be already perfected. Furthermore imbalances force people to try out new strategies, and new patches will definitively change things around again anyway...
And as someone said above, the power of the storm hasnt been nerfed 45%, its the area... The power isnt linear with the area, if so you would think you allways casted it on the ground packed with units AND you couldnt cast another storm to cover more area. But this is totally not true. As of now it requires some more micro (then again we have smartcasting...) and more templars. But still 2 templars is enough to cover quite some area in a battle. Its still open to see how this plays out but please do so before screaming...
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:41 eXigent. wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:22 CharlieMurphy wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
Huh? The recent numbers are pretty much the same.
NB Joueurs NB Win NB Lose Ratio % Diff % Protoss 26 1545 1233 55.62% -2.28 Random 11 459 327 58.40% 0.5 Terran 36 1361 887 60.54% 2.65 Zerg 27 1039 756 57.88% -0.01 Total général 100 4404 3203 57.89%
Terrans are in no way "underpowered" as you claim, they've been the top dog for several patches now (as all stats prove) and this recent patch will hardly change that. The only ones who seem to think otherwise are Terran players who are more interested in getting easy wins than a balanced game.
On March 31 2010 20:48 rtano wrote: To many people moves to fast to conclusions....
IF the changes create imbalances, thats totally fine. Cause this is BETA. Blizzard trying out things is good. It would be a lot worse if they didnt, considering the gameplay to be already perfected. Furthermore imbalances force people to try out new strategies, and new patches will definitively change things around again anyway...
And to give people and developers an idea what is wrong they need to know - and that's where the complaining comes in....
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:41 eXigent. wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:22 CharlieMurphy wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 17:08 GoDannY wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:18 mOnion wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
Huh? The recent numbers are pretty much the same.
NB Joueurs NB Win NB Lose Ratio % Diff % Protoss 26 1545 1233 55.62% -2.28 Random 11 459 327 58.40% 0.5 Terran 36 1361 887 60.54% 2.65 Zerg 27 1039 756 57.88% -0.01 Total général 100 4404 3203 57.89%
Terrans are in no way "underpowered" as you claim, they've been the top dog for several patches now (as all stats prove) and this recent patch will hardly change that. The only ones who seem to think otherwise are Terran players who are more interested in getting easy wins than a balanced game.
Thanks for bringing this up. True, I was a little bit raged when i posted that and my arguments weren't perfectly chosen, however, this numbers clearly show that we are, in fact, heading in the wrong direction.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote: As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
Are you an idiot or are you just trolling? Firstly those stats are for 2 patches ago, back before the last patch that made an extreme nerf against terran! After that terran was pretty much the big underdog while toss and zerg were roughly equal. Also those stats are wrong, I ´pointed it out in the original thread and the keeper of the stats changed it acordingly, the real stats shows that protoss had the same race stats as zerg and terran had 2% more wins than them 2 patches ago which basically means that it was almost balanced. http://www.esportsfrance.com/actualites/21327/
Stop posting shit please, next time actually link and you would see that those stats got removed quickly since they were faulthy, and this also goes for these guys:
On March 31 2010 08:30 Chen wrote: Blizzard really hates protoss. seriously when the fuck are they going to stop nerfing toss and give them a buff? when their win rate gets down to 25%? 40% pre-patch and probably going to drop pretty heavily after this one... Terran gets buffed across the board
On March 31 2010 04:41 eXigent. wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:22 CharlieMurphy wrote:
On March 31 2010 04:21 MorroW wrote: awesome patch! liked every single thing about it
I hope you are joking
The storm nerf is not really that big, its radius decreases slightly.
Toss gets a ~40% decrease in the power of one of its most vital abilities (for those of you who are mathematically challenged, 25% decrease in radius=43.75% decrease in area) 1.5^2=2.25 vs 2^2=4 in exchange, they get a 20% buff in cannon HP...
Zerg gets a 25% nerf to the immediate cost of spores, a 25% damage buff to spines(vs non armored) AND a 27% attack rate increase. Roach and broodlord nerf are nice, but those only apply post-hive tech, which isnt really the problem.
On March 31 2010 17:08 GoDannY wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:44 Paladia wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:18 mOnion wrote:
On March 31 2010 05:16 Paladia wrote: Great, the race that had a 42% win rate in the top before the two nerf patches (Protoss) gets even more nerfed, while the race with above 60% win rate gets even more buffed.
Banshee buff and HT nerf makes no sense. The area storm covers was decreased by almost 50%, GG no re.
only decreased by 25%....and where are you getting your stats?
25%? Math ftl mate.
How do you calculate area of a circle?
Area = pi * radius^2
and thus Prenerf: pi * 2^2 = 12.7 Area Storm covers: 12.7
After nerf: pi * 1.5^2 = 7 Area Storm covers: 7
Difference in percent: 1-(7/12.7) = 45%
Total area nerf to Storm: 45%, it is possibly the biggest nerf ever done in Starcraft history.
As for the race stats, they are from esportsfrance. Counting the top 100 rated people in EU.
Race Wins Losses Win % Last patch difference
Protoss 637 834 43.30% -13.52
Random 749 569 56.83% -3.23
Terran 1681 1118 60.06% 7.46
Zerg 800 721 52.60% -1.80
These statistics (thanks for bringing them up!) shows definately that this patch is pure garbage.
All your arguments basically got blown to bits, stop posting so much damn crap in this thread please. These changes were fine, terran was underpowered last patch, terran was slightly overpowered 2 patches ago. Now, can people actually discuss things that are not directly wrong instead of making this forum seem like a clown school?
Huh? The recent numbers are pretty much the same.
NB Joueurs NB Win NB Lose Ratio % Diff % Protoss 26 1545 1233 55.62% -2.28 Random 11 459 327 58.40% 0.5 Terran 36 1361 887 60.54% 2.65 Zerg 27 1039 756 57.88% -0.01 Total général 100 4404 3203 57.89%
Terrans are in no way "underpowered" as you claim, they've been the top dog for several patches now (as all stats prove) and this recent patch will hardly change that. The only ones who seem to think otherwise are Terran players who are more interested in getting easy wins than a balanced game.
No, those are the correct old numbers, not the new numbers... The old false numbers posted before were never correct for any patch at all, protoss never had 40% wins for top 100 players!!!! The numbers I posted where the worst patch for protoss, after that terran got nerfed which was the last patch, we got no numbers specifically for last patch but we do know that terran did really poorly in all the tournaments helf during that patch.
Now can you guys stop posting your uninformed crap?
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Wait, what? I'm no mathamagician but that makes no sense at all to me. Storm's radius is pretty damn important as to how effective it is. Personally I don't mind if the spell remains this way but I think they really need to re-evaluate the Protoss tech tree. I mean Dark Shrine, really? The main offender though is the critical importance of both observers and immortals, which makes the Protoss Tier 2 building a no brainer for every match up, which is extremely boring.
What hes saying is that its not a 45% effectiveness nerf because its rare that 100% of a storms area has units under it.
correct but now you have to acct for when units move in and out of storm, with a bigger radius you get more damage since there is more surface area, smaller one easier to move out of.
A unit in the middle of the storm used to have to move 2 now its 1.5.A unit traveling across a storm has to go 3 instead of 4. 25% less storm to travel through.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
On March 31 2010 21:00 Yamoth wrote: Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
25% distance to transverse a storm nerf. 45% area nerf.
On March 31 2010 21:00 Yamoth wrote: Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
25% distance to transverse a storm nerf. 45% area nerf.
The true number is somewhere in between.
You also get to take into account that players do not react instantly so 25% less radius do not mean that they take 25% less damage due to moving out of the area in 25% less time. I would say that the nerf is very close to 25%, not to say that a 25% nerf isn't huge though!
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
Dude, what ever crack you are on I want some.
To make full use of the aoe of a spell the entire area should cover units with no free space in between. It's much easier to make full use of a smaller area than a larger one. The larger the area of effect gets the more free space you will inevitably hit. How is that hard to understand?
On March 31 2010 20:48 rtano wrote: To many people moves to fast to conclusions....
IF the changes create imbalances, thats totally fine. Cause this is BETA. Blizzard trying out things is good. It would be a lot worse if they didnt, considering the gameplay to be already perfected. Furthermore imbalances force people to try out new strategies, and new patches will definitively change things around again anyway...
And to give people and developers an idea what is wrong they need to know - and that's where the complaining comes in....
loop di doo
And thats why I wrote:
On March 31 2010 20:48 rtano wrote: Its still open to see how this plays out but please do so before screaming...
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
area =/= effectiveness radius =/= effectiveness
If you're suggesting that effectiveness is independent of a spell's radius (meaning a spell covering 0 area could still be effective somehow), then you are quite simply wrong.
Also, I didn't state they are "==". I pointed out the relationship. See the difference?
On March 31 2010 21:00 Yamoth wrote: Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
25% distance to transverse a storm nerf. 45% area nerf.
The true number is somewhere in between.
You also get to take into account that players do not react instantly so 25% less radius do not mean that they take 25% less damage due to moving out of the area in 25% less time. I would say that the nerf is very close to 25%, not to say that a 25% nerf isn't huge though!
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
area =/= effectiveness radius =/= effectiveness
If you're suggesting that effectiveness is independent of a spell's radius (meaning a spell covering 0 area could still be effective somehow), then you are quite simply wrong.
Also, I didn't state they are "==". I pointed out the relationship. See the difference?
I'm saying that the effectiveness of the spell neither increases linearly with the area of the spell or with the radius of the spell but with some number in between the two.
I am aware of the relation between the area and the radius. My original post however doesn't state anything about them so I was unsure what you meant with your comment.
On March 31 2010 21:00 Yamoth wrote: Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
25% distance to transverse a storm nerf. 45% area nerf.
The true number is somewhere in between.
You also get to take into account that players do not react instantly so 25% less radius do not mean that they take 25% less damage due to moving out of the area in 25% less time. I would say that the nerf is very close to 25%, not to say that a 25% nerf isn't huge though!
No, reaction time is a player variable.
Yes, but reaction time is always bigger than zero.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
area =/= effectiveness radius =/= effectiveness
If you're suggesting that effectiveness is independent of a spell's radius (meaning a spell covering 0 area could still be effective somehow), then you are quite simply wrong.
Also, I didn't state they are "==". I pointed out the relationship. See the difference?
On March 31 2010 21:00 Yamoth wrote: Come on people, think a little bit before you speak. Having small storm are effect a whole hell lot more than just how much potential damage it can do. Now sit there for a second and think this over again. If the storm is smaller, no only does it cover less area, but it takes unit that much less time spent under the storm when they are trying to move out of it. At the epic center, even if you move out as soon as the storm hit you, the unit still suffer somewhat half of the storm effect. The new storm, the unit move out much easier and now a person with good cc only suffer a 4th of the storm effect. So to simplify it even more, the smaller area of the storm reduces both the amount of unit it can damage but also how much damage unit suffer while being stormed. Hell, I'm sure if someone actually sit down and do the math, they will see that a 45% reduction to the storm coverage will caused more that 45% reduction of the storm effectiveness.
25% distance to transverse a storm nerf. 45% area nerf.
The true number is somewhere in between.
You also get to take into account that players do not react instantly so 25% less radius do not mean that they take 25% less damage due to moving out of the area in 25% less time. I would say that the nerf is very close to 25%, not to say that a 25% nerf isn't huge though!
No, reaction time is a player variable.
Yes, but reaction time is always bigger than zero.
On March 31 2010 19:59 DrainX wrote: A 45% decrease in area of effect of a spell doesn't necessarily mean that the spells effectiveness has been reduced by 45%. It's much easier to hit a high density of units with a smaller circle than with a larger one. The larger the circle is, the more unused area there will be. The spells effectiveness doesn't increase linearly with the area of effect.
No, it increases by a quadratic degree (area = π * radius^2).
area =/= effectiveness radius =/= effectiveness
If you're suggesting that effectiveness is independent of a spell's radius (meaning a spell covering 0 area could still be effective somehow), then you are quite simply wrong.
Also, I didn't state they are "==". I pointed out the relationship. See the difference?
So yamato cannon is worthless?
Those spells are totally different. But if you had a fungal growth or a storm with zero radius, this would be pretty much useless if you as me.
So yamato got radius 1? I never noticed, then it would splash over to marines, no?
But really, any single target spell is effectively radius 0. A unit is hit when its own radius overlaps the spells radius, so if you have 0 radius it just means that you hit the unit if you aim at it.
This do not say that having 0 radius is a good thing, just that it doesn't make a spell useless.
Yes, but reaction time is always bigger than zero.
I know this, but reaction time is determined by the player not the game, we aren't discussing storms used against player X we are just discussing storms by themselves.
Also it would take the same effect pre or post nerf.
Yes, but reaction time is always bigger than zero.
I know this, but reaction time is determined by the player not the game, we aren't discussing storms used by player X we are just discussing storms by themselves.
Yes we are, how perceptive of you!
However discussing storms damage as if people had instant reaction times to move outside the area means that you are then always overestimating the effects on damage the radius have since reaction time is never zero. As such the damage is not linear with radius. For example if Storm had 0 radius you would still deal a bit of damage to the unit you targeted even though he could move outsisde of it in an instant.
Seriously, Blizzard nerfs one of the few elements of Starcraft 2 that make army control a necessary skill.
I don't know if anyone's thought this, but isn't Protoss warp-in such a terrible feature? I mean, look at what the Gateway units have had to go through simply because they can be produced so much faster and at any location with pylon power:
Zealot: 60/100 -> 50/100 Stalker: Still fragile as glass. Dark Templar: Tech is delayed, more expensive. High Templar: Psionic Storm nerfed to 80 dmg in 1.5 radius.
It's been nerf after nerf and all the power is going to the Robotics Facility because Warpgates are so damn good at pumping out units.
One solution would be to increase Warpgate cooldown to 45 seconds. The exchange would be warp-in speed for troop mobility. Maybe Gateway units can stand to be a bit stronger with a longer Warpgate cooldown in place.
There's a lack of balance in design I'm noticing in Starcraft 2. Near unlimited unit selection should be balanced with units and abilities that either require skilled army control or force the opponent to skillfully control his army. Yet, most units move virtually the same, units now have counters rather than general effectiveness, and abilities are either impossible to dodge (EMP) or are made easier to dodge (Psionic Storm). Even these abilities are a shadow of their former selves, reducing the need for army control even further.
I think Blizzard has to allow micro to sometimes determine the balance rather than flat statistics and numbers. The first step is to incorporate elements into the game that either allow for more micro or make micro more necessary.
1. Include a method of control that keeps units in formation (like the magic box: a selection box size threshold) or simply have armies move relatively in formation in all instances. 2. Buff Area-Of-Effect abilities and make them dodge-able. 3. More units that rely on good control to be effective. This can be achieved by nerfing hard counters or making them more conditional.
Example: Immortal 150/100. Shield regeneration at 7 per second after not receiving damage for 8 seconds. Move speed is slightly faster than Marines' and Zerglings' off creep.
pot. Damage by traveling through the storm by 1 unit of size 1 square and speed 1 square/s by max distanz D=R*2 squares. Rnew = 1.5 D = 4 -> 80 dmg Rold = 2 D = 5 -> 80 dmg Pot. new / Pot. max = eff = 1 Pot. old / Pot. max = eff = 1
For any distance shorter as max distance the new storm is losing eff, while the old one would had still eff 1 for any distance >= 3
On March 31 2010 21:47 DM20 wrote: Are really arguing that player actions should be taken into account to determine the percent a mechanic of the game was nerfed?
Of course, otherwise you wouldn't get an accurate figure would you? You use as a standard that both players are very good and then check from that how much effect it have. You can't use that both players are super human 0 reaction time people with perfect micro and macro though, that is just a model which can be very accurate in some cases but is extremely inaccurate in others.
Now since the time it takes to notice the storm, select the effected units and order and them to move to a safe location is hardly negligible compared to how the very short time it takes for units to move outside the storm, even for the best of players. If units auto moved outside of it then it would be useless even in its old version.
On March 31 2010 22:20 Dx Fx wrote: cuz they need something to nerf at protoss in the next patch, a patch without protoss nerf wouldn't be acceptable from blizzards point.
Dont worry they are saving some nerfs for later.. I can guarantee that immortal nerf is coming and another collosus nerf to balance it out with nerfed templars so people dont go robo every time..
On March 31 2010 21:47 LunarC wrote: Seriously, Blizzard nerfs one of the few elements of Starcraft 2 that make army control a necessary skill.
I don't know if anyone's thought this, but isn't Protoss warp-in such a terrible feature? I mean, look at what the Gateway units have had to go through simply because they can be produced so much faster and at any location with pylon power:
Zealot: 60/100 -> 50/100 Stalker: Still fragile as glass. Dark Templar: Tech is delayed, more expensive. High Templar: Psionic Storm nerfed to 80 dmg in 1.5 radius.
It's been nerf after nerf and all the power is going to the Robotics Facility because Warpgates are so damn good at pumping out units.
One solution would be to increase Warpgate cooldown to 45 seconds. The exchange would be warp-in speed for troop mobility. Maybe Gateway units can stand to be a bit stronger with a longer Warpgate cooldown in place.
There's a lack of balance in design I'm noticing in Starcraft 2. Near unlimited unit selection should be balanced with units and abilities that either require skilled army control or force the opponent to skillfully control his army. Yet, most units move virtually the same, units now have counters rather than general effectiveness, and abilities are either impossible to dodge (EMP) or are made easier to dodge (Psionic Storm). Even these abilities are a shadow of their former selves, reducing the need for army control even further.
I think Blizzard has to allow micro to sometimes determine the balance rather than flat statistics and numbers. The first step is to incorporate elements into the game that either allow for more micro or make micro more necessary.
1. Include a method of control that keeps units in formation (like the magic box: a selection box size threshold) or simply have armies move relatively in formation in all instances. 2. Buff Area-Of-Effect abilities and make them dodge-able. 3. More units that rely on good control to be effective. This can be achieved by nerfing hard counters or making them more conditional.
Example: Immortal 150/100. Shield regeneration at 7 per second after not receiving damage for 8 seconds. Move speed is slightly faster than Marines' and Zerglings' off creep.
I think that are good thoughts, what do you think? Would you mind post that in the suggestions-board of blizzard as well....
On March 31 2010 22:20 Dx Fx wrote: cuz they need something to nerf at protoss in the next patch, a patch without protoss nerf wouldn't be acceptable from blizzards point.
Dont worry they are saving some nerfs for later.. I can guarantee that immortal nerf is coming and another collosus nerf to balance it out with nerfed templars so people dont go robo every time..
Well that would be the point of all Protoss switching to Zerg including me, right?
On March 31 2010 21:47 LunarC wrote: Seriously, Blizzard nerfs one of the few elements of Starcraft 2 that make army control a necessary skill.
I don't know if anyone's thought this, but isn't Protoss warp-in such a terrible feature? I mean, look at what the Gateway units have had to go through simply because they can be produced so much faster and at any location with pylon power:
Zealot: 60/100 -> 50/100 Stalker: Still fragile as glass. Dark Templar: Tech is delayed, more expensive. High Templar: Psionic Storm nerfed to 80 dmg in 1.5 radius.
It's been nerf after nerf and all the power is going to the Robotics Facility because Warpgates are so damn good at pumping out units.
One solution would be to increase Warpgate cooldown to 45 seconds. The exchange would be warp-in speed for troop mobility. Maybe Gateway units can stand to be a bit stronger with a longer Warpgate cooldown in place.
There's a lack of balance in design I'm noticing in Starcraft 2. Near unlimited unit selection should be balanced with units and abilities that either require skilled army control or force the opponent to skillfully control his army. Yet, most units move virtually the same, units now have counters rather than general effectiveness, and abilities are either impossible to dodge (EMP) or are made easier to dodge (Psionic Storm). Even these abilities are a shadow of their former selves, reducing the need for army control even further.
I think Blizzard has to allow micro to sometimes determine the balance rather than flat statistics and numbers. The first step is to incorporate elements into the game that either allow for more micro or make micro more necessary.
1. Include a method of control that keeps units in formation (like the magic box: a selection box size threshold) or simply have armies move relatively in formation in all instances. 2. Buff Area-Of-Effect abilities and make them dodge-able. 3. More units that rely on good control to be effective. This can be achieved by nerfing hard counters or making them more conditional.
Example: Immortal 150/100. Shield regeneration at 7 per second after not receiving damage for 8 seconds. Move speed is slightly faster than Marines' and Zerglings' off creep.
Yeah I agree. I think small units should not clump together so tight.. Increase space between them.. even a little.. They need to experiment with that so storm can be used for things other than clumped t1 units like in sc1 where they had many uses and its such a cool ability.. Right now if you want to hit bigger units you will hit only 1 of them until they move away from that small radius. And fast units can easily escape that small area without much damage..
Protoss is the most fun, intelligent and diverse race. That's exactly why they are nerfed and nerfed and nerfed. Terran is the cheesiest race, all about unfair play. That's exactly why they are almost always buffed. Looks like Blizzard is trying extremes in this beta, which I like. Push every limit to see how bad Storm should be for players to stop using it; how good Marauder can be until players cry imbalance at all skill levels. But what is sad that mediocre player like me cannot play Protoss unless he wants to lose every time.
On March 31 2010 23:07 goszar wrote: Protoss is the most fun, intelligent and diverse race. That's exactly why they are nerfed and nerfed and nerfed. Terran is the cheesiest race, all about unfair play. That's exactly why they are almost always buffed. Looks like Blizzard is trying extremes in this beta, which I like. Push every limit to see how bad Storm should be for players to stop using it; how good Marauder can be until players cry imbalance at all skill levels. But what is sad that mediocre player like me cannot play Protoss unless he wants to lose every time.
You come off as a Protoss player who recently got beat by a Terran that you thought you should have won because you were more skilled or something like that. All races have their cheese tactics, I am sure Blizzard purposely made Protoss the most fun, exciting, skilled and cool dude race just so they can nerf it and piss you off.
Fizban140 Completely wrong. I play Zerg because I just can't play Protoss on same level and don't enjoy playing Terran. And I admit that i'm quite bad (top 8 Gold at best). I have started preparing to SC2 in 2007 and decided to play Protoss in the future, so I practiced this race in SC:BW. Protoss in SC2 looked brilliant in the videos. Then the beta arrived, and I started playing Protoss. But after massive nerfs to Gateways, Chronoboost, etc I started losing a lot. I have switched to Zerg and reached top 8 of Gold league very fast. I have played a lot of games as Terran as well, and my winrate is about the same as with Zerg, even though I don't like the race and play just bad. But I don't need to be good - just do SVC+Marine rush, Reaper Rush, Hellion drop, Banshee rush, Marauder Push, Stimpack Push or just turtle on 2 bases going BCs. All of this works in Gold even if performed by a bad player, ESPECIALLY against Protoss. And that feels almost as a personal insult.
Wow, is that the area of Storm now? That's bad. That's really bad. Somehow I have a feeling that Blizzard themselves fell for the 25% radius reduction = 25% area, when it's really ~43%. That's really, really bad. I feel embarrassed for Blizzard since that's the best solution their TEAM of developers decided upon. I've rarely seen such a display of lack of creativity out of Blizzard - ever.
They could have just spread the damage out over 5 seconds instead of 4. Or just something that doesn't all but negate the usefulness of only 1 Templar. With it now, your opponent will laugh at you if you have only 1 Templar. Multiple can still be somewhat effective, but is it worth it?
Maybe the problem was Warping them into any Pylon in 3 seconds and having them start out with 75 energy.
Fix that instead, Blizzard. Not every caster has to have the +25 energy upgrade. Give Psi Storm back to it's 2.0 radius, and simply find a different upgrade instead of +25 energy. That's the problem - they're spawning virtually anywhere and attacking instantly.
I am simply astounded at how somethings go over the heads of a team of developers so easily.
This is why people post pictures of face palms. Things like this.
Are you sure? Feedback is still instantly available. And again, I am accusing them of lack of creativity and a stubbornness that all casters must have +25 starting energy upgrade. They could remove that upgrade for Ghosts as well. Or keep it on Ghosts, but imagine an upgrade for HT that allowed Feedback for only 35-40 energy? That would be instead of +25 energy.
But that might go against Blizzard's fetish of the number 25. Every spell is a multiple of 25, every mineral and gas cost is a multiple of 25. It's things like this that make me say Blizzard lacks some creativity in balancing.
This paragraph is a bit off topic, but imagine if Blizzard tweaked gas and mineral costs by 5-15 instead of 25? Tank a little too expensive? Make it 150/115. Hydra too good? Make it 110/50. It could be any number really, but the fetish for 25 is hurting balance, I think. It forces changes to attack damage, speed, HP, when instead just a little resource change is needed (as in 25 is too drastic). Expand your minds Blizzard - leave your fetishes behind.
blizzard want their rts games to be easy to learn. if a unit costs 30 mineral or 55 etc its hard to remember everything. thats why they stick with multiple's of 25. u dont really need to change that to balance the game, they can just change other stuff instead
On March 31 2010 23:07 goszar wrote: Protoss is the most fun, intelligent and diverse race. That's exactly why they are nerfed and nerfed and nerfed. Terran is the cheesiest race, all about unfair play. That's exactly why they are almost always buffed. Looks like Blizzard is trying extremes in this beta, which I like. Push every limit to see how bad Storm should be for players to stop using it; how good Marauder can be until players cry imbalance at all skill levels. But what is sad that mediocre player like me cannot play Protoss unless he wants to lose every time.
Tell me stargate rushing to void ray isn't cheese and you can call Protoss the most intelligent race.
On April 01 2010 00:58 MorroW wrote: blizzard want their rts games to be easy to learn. if a unit costs 30 mineral or 55 etc its hard to remember everything. thats why they stick with multiple's of 25. u dont really need to change that to balance the game, they can just change other stuff instead
Maybe, but at least for the energy level of a spell I don't see why it can't be tweaked. Blizzard has decided that Feedback at 25 (the same as Snipe) would be too much. Fine, whatever. Then try something in between! As an upgrade, of course. Again, because I don't think every caster has to have the +25 starting energy upgrade.
On March 31 2010 08:35 Archerofaiur wrote: Blizzard wants to make the player base more proportional with the lore. They will continue to nerf Protoss until only a couple hundred survivers huddle in some dark corner of BNET muttering to themselves about artifacts of salvation.
On March 31 2010 03:50 zazen wrote: Nice to see static defense buffed, I still think there's absolutely no need to buff the hands down best harass unit in the game (Banshee).
T has SO MUCH HARASS power already...
Z got nerfed very hard this patch. The turret and thor buff will render Muta harass useless, and the 2 best Z units got nerfed too in late game. Roach upgrade is now laughable. This is just terrible for the race as a whole.
good thing zerg macro mechanic is absolutely amazing for fast production switches.
I'm waiting and waiting for a Sentri/Forcefield nerf and Blizzard is insisting on nerfing everything else for reasons i don't understand (i actually unerstand the few buffs)...
I think the Queen nerf is the most need now. From spawning 4 larva to 3. I mean it's beta, if Zerg start losing left and right because of this then change it back. But at least try. Zerg lost some identity with the loss of the drone vs attacker vs overlord balancing that the larva had in the original game. Now you get all 3, and an extra larva to boot too!
Since Chrono Boost was nerfed (and by a greater amount: 1/3 instead of 1/4 as I'm proposing for Queen) I don't see a problem with this.
Wow, is that the area of Storm now? That's bad. That's really bad. Somehow I have a feeling that Blizzard themselves fell for the 25% radius reduction = 25% area, when it's really ~43%. That's really, really bad. I feel embarrassed for Blizzard since that's the best solution their TEAM of developers decided upon. I've rarely seen such a display of lack of creativity out of Blizzard - ever.
They could have just spread the damage out over 5 seconds instead of 4. Or just something that doesn't all but negate the usefulness of only 1 Templar. With it now, your opponent will laugh at you if you have only 1 Templar. Multiple can still be somewhat effective, but is it worth it?
Maybe the problem was Warping them into any Pylon in 3 seconds and having them start out with 75 energy.
Fix that instead, Blizzard. Not every caster has to have the +25 energy upgrade. Give Psi Storm back to it's 2.0 radius, and simply find a different upgrade instead of +25 energy. That's the problem - they're spawning virtually anywhere and attacking instantly.
I am simply astounded at how somethings go over the heads of a team of developers so easily.
This is why people post pictures of face palms. Things like this.
Blizz knows math 1000x better than you for sure, so don't assume Blizz thought like the way you felt, then you again consider your assumption as a fact, and continue bashing based on that so-called fact. Maybe you should learn some logic and math, and please don't feel embarrassed for Blizz. It's one of the biggest and most successful gaming companies, and they dont give a f about you.
Wow, is that the area of Storm now? That's bad. That's really bad. Somehow I have a feeling that Blizzard themselves fell for the 25% radius reduction = 25% area, when it's really ~43%. That's really, really bad. I feel embarrassed for Blizzard since that's the best solution their TEAM of developers decided upon. I've rarely seen such a display of lack of creativity out of Blizzard - ever.
They could have just spread the damage out over 5 seconds instead of 4. Or just something that doesn't all but negate the usefulness of only 1 Templar. With it now, your opponent will laugh at you if you have only 1 Templar. Multiple can still be somewhat effective, but is it worth it?
Maybe the problem was Warping them into any Pylon in 3 seconds and having them start out with 75 energy.
Fix that instead, Blizzard. Not every caster has to have the +25 energy upgrade. Give Psi Storm back to it's 2.0 radius, and simply find a different upgrade instead of +25 energy. That's the problem - they're spawning virtually anywhere and attacking instantly.
I am simply astounded at how somethings go over the heads of a team of developers so easily.
This is why people post pictures of face palms. Things like this.
Blizz knows math 1000x better than you for sure, so don't assume Blizz thought like the way you felt, then you again consider your assumption as a fact, and continue bashing based on that so-called fact. Maybe you should learn some logic and math, and please don't feel embarrassed for Blizz. It's one of the biggest and most successful gaming companies, and they dont give a f about you.
blizz needs to take a step back and change something else in TvP.. Its boring how T can only mass mm all game and now they nerf storm because it was strong against something that terran should not be making lategame
On March 31 2010 13:14 Chairman Ray wrote: Ok, nerfing storms is the worst thing that they can do. Saying psi storms are overpowered when people deliberately ball up their units is like saying mutas are overpowered when you build nothing but zealots. During a battle when all the units are in a big firing line, storms hits like 4 guys. Now that there are high HP units such as roaches and marauders, I don't see what's the problem in 20 dps for 4 seconds on 4 measly units at the cost of a whopping 150 gas. Let's look at sc1. Storms do 114 damage at a larger radius, and the average unit has less HP. Storms are fair because in competitive play, people don't clump up all their units, or at least try not to. The same thing applies in sc2.
My suggestion is to keep storm the same, but make the animation smaller. Right now, the storming animation covers a much larger area than it damages and I think that's why people think it's so good. With a smaller area, people don't need to pull back their entire army, they just pull back 4 units. Problem solved.
Please enlighten me on how to not clump all the units? The collision size is so much smaller amongst units accompanied by the fact that most units used are ranged in SC2. Hydras could dodge storm much easier in SC1 and were much cheaper.
It's nigh impossible not to attack in a ball, they almost automatically do it, even if you just tell them to run to the enemy.
It's not collision size it's better pathing. SC1 units could potentially clump like SC2 units do, they just don't because the pathing AI makes them scatter or pause a bit. Also the magic box probably had something to do with it.
Blizzard really needs to implement some sort of hold-formation+move command and, on a completely unrelated note, bring back F2-F4 screen position hotkeys.
Units definitely couldn't clump as close in SC1.
It's both really. Collision size and better pathing makes it much harder to split units. Units clump up more due to less collision size, and the removal of the magic box means that units will automatically try to clump up no matter how they are ordered to move.
I think most people don't understand that Psi,HSM and Fungal growth are suppposed to counter many-cheap-small units. HTs are higher in the tech tree. So if you see HTs then you have to switch to other units which are larger, expensive and deeper in tech. (Thor, BC, air, tanks, Ravens).
Most terrans are stuck with MMM and see everything in MMM perspective. You cannot fight everything with one mix of units. That's totally wrong. Storms supposed to be hard counter to clumped army consisting of low tech cheap units.
Thors BC end tech both cost shit tones of min/gas can't mass them or get good #'s to fight with them in any normal game. Tanks are agian alot of min/gas can get the #'s in normal games to do well with them but for most part tanks are VERY meh vs toss and you need ground units to support them MM balls without the MM balls they are worthless unless on def.
ravens caster units lol Banshess cool and all but get taken down easy by stalkers/sents for most part only used for harsments.
Problem for terran is our mech blows big time very bad lol everything is really support to the MM ball /shrug
Then why not to buff terran mech? Which is more reasonable than nerfing others. Seriously don't understand blizs -_-
This is what i want a buff to terran mech mostly just kill the thor bring back the floating tank make it shoot air and lower tank cost a tiny bit
Wow, is that the area of Storm now? That's bad. That's really bad. Somehow I have a feeling that Blizzard themselves fell for the 25% radius reduction = 25% area, when it's really ~43%. That's really, really bad. I feel embarrassed for Blizzard since that's the best solution their TEAM of developers decided upon. I've rarely seen such a display of lack of creativity out of Blizzard - ever.
They could have just spread the damage out over 5 seconds instead of 4. Or just something that doesn't all but negate the usefulness of only 1 Templar. With it now, your opponent will laugh at you if you have only 1 Templar. Multiple can still be somewhat effective, but is it worth it?
Maybe the problem was Warping them into any Pylon in 3 seconds and having them start out with 75 energy.
Fix that instead, Blizzard. Not every caster has to have the +25 energy upgrade. Give Psi Storm back to it's 2.0 radius, and simply find a different upgrade instead of +25 energy. That's the problem - they're spawning virtually anywhere and attacking instantly.
I am simply astounded at how somethings go over the heads of a team of developers so easily.
This is why people post pictures of face palms. Things like this.
Blizz knows math 1000x better than you for sure, so don't assume Blizz thought like the way you felt, then you again consider your assumption as a fact, and continue bashing based on that so-called fact. Maybe you should learn some logic and math, and please don't feel embarrassed for Blizz. It's one of the biggest and most successful gaming companies, and they dont give a f about you.
They've made balance changes based on math errors in the past, so I wouldn't be too sure.
For example in early WoW they changed Warriors to take 10% less damage instead of doing 10% more damage, motivating it with something along the lines of "The net result is the same while grinding (leveling)". Of course, their math was way of, since if you do 10% more damage, you will at the same time take less damage since what-ever you kills dies much faster and you can proceed to the next mob even faster.
Wow, is that the area of Storm now? That's bad. That's really bad. Somehow I have a feeling that Blizzard themselves fell for the 25% radius reduction = 25% area, when it's really ~43%. That's really, really bad. I feel embarrassed for Blizzard since that's the best solution their TEAM of developers decided upon. I've rarely seen such a display of lack of creativity out of Blizzard - ever.
They could have just spread the damage out over 5 seconds instead of 4. Or just something that doesn't all but negate the usefulness of only 1 Templar. With it now, your opponent will laugh at you if you have only 1 Templar. Multiple can still be somewhat effective, but is it worth it?
Maybe the problem was Warping them into any Pylon in 3 seconds and having them start out with 75 energy.
Fix that instead, Blizzard. Not every caster has to have the +25 energy upgrade. Give Psi Storm back to it's 2.0 radius, and simply find a different upgrade instead of +25 energy. That's the problem - they're spawning virtually anywhere and attacking instantly.
I am simply astounded at how somethings go over the heads of a team of developers so easily.
This is why people post pictures of face palms. Things like this.
Blizz knows math 1000x better than you for sure, so don't assume Blizz thought like the way you felt, then you again consider your assumption as a fact, and continue bashing based on that so-called fact. Maybe you should learn some logic and math, and please don't feel embarrassed for Blizz. It's one of the biggest and most successful gaming companies, and they dont give a f about you.
They've made balance changes based on math errors in the past, so I wouldn't be too sure.
For example in early WoW they changed Warriors to take 10% less damage instead of doing 10% more damage, motivating it with something along the lines of "The net result is the same while grinding (leveling)". Of course, their math was way of, since if you do 10% more damage, you will at the same time take less damage since what-ever you kills dies much faster and you can proceed to the next mob even faster.
Thing is, beta is for experiment and that's what they're doing and hoping to get feedbacks from players. Nobody except Blizz knows exactly what their intention of the math underlying the game is, you can say this is too strong/weak and need to be adjusted, that's great. Even better, suggest the possible solutions. That's about it.
However, if you're just some middle school kid who knows the area of a circle = r*r*pi and talks like you know what's going on over the developers' minds, that's ridiculous and stupid. Also, the change of one unit leads to indirect change of other units. It's not like A is weak vs B, so we should buff A and nerf B at the same time. We need have faith in Blizz and make constructive feedbacks instead of whining. If you don't believe in Blizz, stick to BW.
On March 31 2010 04:24 WiljushkA wrote: really surprised how many people are whining about the storm nerf, it was hugely imbalanced against terrans. terran isnt even my main race and i could consistently beat much more skilled players just as long as i survived until storm tech. only problem is its a bit weak against zerg now, but even in sc1 we didnt use every unit in every matchup.
Well I can say that I've won games I felt I should have lost as T vs P prior to this patch by going defensive mixed units with everything except Ghosts and BCs. Held my half of the map, let them pour zealots and HTs with storms. Marauders with a tiny bit of micro avoid so much storm damage it's nothing to worry about. Bunkers and tanks are also your friends. Upgraded bunkers even more so. Banshees and ravens harass like mad. Hellions run behind lines and snipe a few High Templar.
If I had used ghosts to counter HTs, sure I wouldn't think it an issue. But really... if people just let their units die because they attack move vs psi storm, I have no sympathy.
And be damned if Blizzard is going to nerf specials/balance the game around low level play. That is obviously not the approach that made SC/BW a good game. Many patches to go... nothing is permanent and things are being tested, so let's test and see what happens.
On March 31 2010 09:46 Synwave wrote: It's nice to see static d being looked at but Im a bit worried.
If a terran can turtle up with judicious use of missile turrets and seiged tanks he can basically just mass thors and I can't stop him. Once he has a fair bit of them he can just come out and destroy any unit combination I have at such a cost effective ratio that it doesn't matter if I have nearly twice the bases running. Muta harass was the only way I had of keeping a Terran honest about this sort of crap but with buffed turrets and now buffed thors I don't see a way of stopping this sort of play. Its too cost effective for him to turtle, and then he comes out with a 1 unit army that is again so cost effective it doesn't matter I might have had 1-2 extra expansions running the entire time. If I can't harass I just don't see anyway to keep him from timing his push to flatten me... with a one unit (oh sorry, 2 because of course repairing scvs should be with the thors) type army.
Oh well, I guess I can go back to the fun of ZvZ and using queens as my static D because spore colonies have the range of a burrowed roach still. D=
Next time try to use lings, they eat thors for breakfast (another effective units include roaches and broodlords). Or do they get killed by the mighty scvs or what lol?
I've exactly been confronted to this situation yesterday. But as I had 3 expands, even if he rolled on my main, I rebuilded Sprire/pool, and mass lings&mutas (like 24 mutas) and I raped his Thors (4) Marines/Tank, without leaving him any chance to expand due to muta mobility. Important to notice, he didn't repair his Thors while in combat. Muta seems still up against terran in mass.
On March 31 2010 06:14 Rucky wrote: storms were just too powerful in scbw which made mnm not usable at all. they're trying to make mnm viable so the ht nerf is reasonable. It's too crazy to lose 250+ minerals of marines to 1 storm. This is terrible for game changing wow moments but better for balance.
So what about HSM against 10+ muta? Just saying.
Blizzard isn't trying to support zerg users to mass mutas versus zerg are they?? exactly. Blizzard's patches are reasonable in that they patch what they want to support in the game. It's already been said that they want TvP to not be mech only and be mnm friendly. I never really said anything about me supporting this. I'm just saying it tones down wow moments which I don't like much, but will accept this if it does make games more variable.
I'm good with making TvP bio friendly for T... it makes sense to change it up from BW. But if they nerf storm area/damage, they need to reduce energy costs so it can be cast more often. Upon second casting, a decent micro player will have spread remaining bio army apart preparing for the 2nd cast, etc.
I still say with more marauders up front than marines, you can easy back the marauders out of way of storm with little damage. If the P engages with Zealots at the same time to try to force a fight, the zealots will run into his own storm. With all the EMP vs Storm debates, it seems like people forget that EMP doesn't actually damage your own units.
I think the problem where people believe storm is too good (regardless of how many times it is nerfed), is that they are used to attack move, they want to go all MMM, or they want to meet the Protoss anywhere anytime and be able to react after the fact. Even classic TvP required the T to attempt to force the P to meet on the T's terms. Now it is no different IMO, even though as MMM Terran you "feel" more mobile than BW Terran- you are not more mobile when Protoss AOE comes into play. I think going all MMM past mid-game is a bad idea against competent Protoss and should be. Terran are just spoiled vs players early in the beta who didn't know how to handle mass MMM.
Play to the Terran strengths past early game. Defense with walls, tanks, bunkers, and now more than ever harass... they are all good against a straight forward ground army with HT support. Ravens are great for battles and harass if you avoid feedback. Scout like a mofo. If the Protoss approaches with an army seemingly devoid of HT, scan the back of his army to watch for HT. Plan accordingly or snipe HT with banshees/hellions/ghosts/sieged tanks. Banshees are great vs ground. Vikings are great vs air. Banshees and/or reapers should kill workers or at least force lots of money wasted on cannons.
Tanks and bunkers outright counter psi storm. If the Protoss goes so heavy ground that he can take out tanks/bunkers, you should be outclassing him from the air with banshees, vikings, and ravens or you were outplayed. So while you have to be ahead to simply waltz up and siege/bunker in front a P, if you play defensively in the right moments and inch up when you win a battle you gain ground in a big way. Some maps may be more ground friendly, but banshees and ravens are so good you can never go wrong with them. OMG, raven turrets are incredible. If you win a head to head fight, leftover turrets will be there the next round of Protoss units... they last forever and draw fire to attack moved ground forces really well. Plus they are a free scout if they are "leftovers".
And even if you decide to go all out MMM... if MMM controls the flow of the match the first half of the match, then an AOE counter to MMM is a fair answer to that. If the T commits to pure MMM, he better win sooner. If he techs and mixes it up, the Protoss will have a hard time adapting.
-apologies for any typos or whatnot... out of time hitting post now
the static defense buffs are awesome, but really, storm didn't need that. T is beating P already and just with mass T1 units and ghost support (EMP is pretty much an instant feedbackstorm vs P now, except more damage and bigger AoE)
On April 01 2010 02:51 Haemonculus wrote: AND Terran still has the coolest music by far. NERF PLEASE. Or at least buff protoss music t.t/
i know right?
There are still 1 Terran track, and 5 Protoss tracks left to be released. I guess we would get to listen to it in the final version. This is assuming that each race gets 6 music tracks.
i really dont see what s the reasoning behind buffing Banshees Also broodlords nerf.. idk about it, i think it was fine, it was really hard to tech to broodlords and produce them safely. yes if you actually had them out they were really strong, but you could get killed befor that a lot easier
Another idea for a fix to High Templars would be to revert psi-storm to what it was before Patch 7, but remove the +25 energy upgrade when warping.
Replace it with an "Increased Energy Regen" upgrade? This would help somewhat against EMP and wouldn't be imba imo. And psi-storm wouldn't have to become a weak ability...
The broodlings seem like they need to be nerfed, the AI flips out pretty bad when the broodlings come out. Maybe make it so they are not able to be targeted, which would pretty much just make them a DoT effect.
MT buff was definitely made for anti-Muta as was the Thor splash - Zerg might bring along a few Corruptors to disable MTs
Cannons are only slightly less paper defences with +25 HP/SP (slight anti-Muta boost) - again Zerg might build a few Corruptors if Cannons fare too well V Mutas
Spores -25M cost is nice but pointless if Banshees can pick them off 1 at a time due to range - perhaps Z defences should be given deep burrow to remain hidden(unable to detect/attack) whom will unburrow (not uproot) when Z players wants them to attack
This could be an upgrade or a unique Zerg defensive ability involving Crawlers and Creep Tumors - Crawlers would link upto Tumors by burrowing on top of them (1 Crawler per CT) and gain the deep burrow ability
Nostalgia of Sc1 Creep Colonies
Dark Shrine should once again be part of the Templar Archives - allowing for a quick switch between HT/DT if either is ineffective in a match
200M 300G 75BT 700HP 700SP sounds fair or keep the current Templar Archive cost 150/200/50 but require an upgrade to build DT (100/100/60)
Tanks - increase DPS to 25 in siege mode
Immortals should receive a +25G increase in lieu of a nerf (+10 armored damage from the original 20+20A must have slipped past the Toss Nerf Tribunal or TNT for short
Phoenix - change attack to 10+10L give AG 6R or change ability so Phoenixs can attack ground for 10 seconds for 50 or 75E (light bonus may have to be removed from AtG attack)
Corruptors use energy for their ability so it would make sense(too much for Bliz? that Brood Lords used E for Broodling production
20 base attack - Broodlings cost 25E and are automatically attached to attack unless autocast is disabled (to save up E for the next battle when the outcome is clearly in your favor) base attack becomes 25 when E is used
Infestors - i-Marines can be cast while burrowed but Infestors show just like burrowed units when opponent has detection and can be manually targeted
Overseer - Obs are clocked Ravens can indirectly attack OSs have Changlings - grant second ability such as increase Spore Crawler Range (temp Sc1 Parasite or air Ensnare would also do)
On April 01 2010 20:27 Geo.Rion wrote: i really dont see what s the reasoning behind buffing Banshees Also broodlords nerf.. idk about it, i think it was fine, it was really hard to tech to broodlords and produce them safely. yes if you actually had them out they were really strong, but you could get killed befor that a lot easier
Broodlords really needed to be nerfed, Carrier and BC isnt nearly as effective as broodlord
On March 31 2010 05:22 Skyze wrote: bleh. This is a bad patch IMO, done nothing to stop marauders owning everything a zerg has in first 15 minutes.. Terran is too strong, any good terran wont fall for the "baneling bust" and then just send in their MMM to dominate everything.. I doubt sunkens will be changed enough to actually do any damage to MMM.
Its like BW, cept M&M dont take any damage from sunkens... so theres no way to stop the mid-game push. They dont even need tanks, cause marauders are like a walking tank with slow
agree with this. If you try and cut your losses and retreat from MnM you lose it all. If MnM tries to cut his losses and retreat he kites you into nothing as he retreats or you just let him get away to lick his wounds. Lings are supposed to counter marauders but they really don't, the marauders have too much Hp even if you sruround them, the reinforcements arrive before you finish them off and like I said you can't retreat at this point because you'll get slowed and raped by stim if you try.
This is the same thoughts I've been having, zerg has to flat out win it's battles or terran just keeps getting bigger, marauders are simply too strong vs all other T1, I'd say it's time they get a small HP nerf and an attack speed nerf. That and/or nerf roaches+buff lings...
I actually think thats the biggest problem in SC2 (what SpoR said), You basically cant retreat from battles in SC2.. Theres so many units that are just either too slow, or units like the marauders which slow you down.. Even like roaches vs stalkers/sentries, you cant run because the roaches are too slow (without upgrade, but even with upgrade i thnk its the same) and they just own you before you can retreat.. Air units are even worse, altho I like that in a way because it means my mutas can dominate like 5 phoenix's when they start running, but it should be fixed imo.
You basically have to commit to attacking in SC2, because you cant retreat. That is probably why we are seeing so many people just sitting in their base massing armies, you cant even really pick off one unit and run back micro because running away doesnt work.
The only major design flaw I see so far in SC2.
This is a big deal. On the one hand, you don't want every encounter to be optional. On the other hand you don't want to have to send a scout or scan every inch of the map when you try to move around. Marauders are the most aggravating aspect of this with the slow, no doubt. I wouldn't say all battles are this way... roaches have a ton of HP and can run from other roaches easily. Zealots obviously can run away from other zealots. It's probably a ranged problem/feature.
I guess it sort of goes back to SC/BW situations where if you run zerglings into a pack of marines you are dying if you don't outnumber... not much retreating. Same for goons or most P ground vs tanks in BW.
In summary, marauder needs to be looked at closely to balance in a fun fair way I think.
Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
It made medic/marine useless in any tvp except when cheesing. Do you really want that again?
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
The thing is that in SC2 mech actually does not work because of immortals, there were no immortals in SC1 now were there?
You can't do comparisons like that, so much new has been brought in to the game.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
It made medic/marine useless in any tvp except when cheesing. Do you really want that again?
Hope not, that would be annoying. Brood War seemed to shove Terran to get stuck going Mech in two of the matchups because medic marine just got slaughtered by toss and tanks.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
Problem is that mech isn't viable in SCII. I've tried. I've tried countless times with my practice partner (I'm platinum T, he's platinum P--Both B- / B iCCup). No matter what psi, how I emp or how I setup, P always rolls over T. Until they fix that (if they fix that), storm is a much bigger problem in this game than the previous.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
Problem is that mech isn't viable in SCII. I've tried. I've tried countless times with my practice partner (I'm platinum T, he's platinum P--Both B- / B iCCup). No matter what psi, how I emp or how I setup, P always rolls over T. Until they fix that (if they fix that), storm is a much bigger problem in this game than the previous.
Interesting...
I'm a platinum T player, and I feel the opposite. I feel like TvP greatly favors T currently. Ghosts are quite strong, and nuking is a severely underrated and underused ability right now. If you have ghosts ANYWAY the 100/100 to nuke a protoss base seems borderline unreasonable, to be honest.
Also, psi storm isn't that bad, honestly. Micro out of it, and EMP HTs to prevent it from happening in the first place, if you can. Ghosts have 100 HP and you can put them near the front of your army without feeling bad about it. They are fine fighters, too, against light units. I'm far more scared of colossi than HTs, for sure.
That said, I still feel like TvZ is a bit broken in favor of Z. Either I don't know how to play TvZ at all, but good zergs just roll me over due to the breaking power of banelings, power of zerglings vs bio keeping me in my base earlygame, and the queen/zerg macro mechanics make the matchup seemingly unwinnable.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
Problem is that mech isn't viable in SCII. I've tried. I've tried countless times with my practice partner (I'm platinum T, he's platinum P--Both B- / B iCCup). No matter what psi, how I emp or how I setup, P always rolls over T. Until they fix that (if they fix that), storm is a much bigger problem in this game than the previous.
Interesting...
I'm a platinum T player, and I feel the opposite. I feel like TvP greatly favors T currently. Ghosts are quite strong, and nuking is a severely underrated and underused ability right now. If you have ghosts ANYWAY the 100/100 to nuke a protoss base seems borderline unreasonable, to be honest.
Also, psi storm isn't that bad, honestly. Micro out of it, and EMP HTs to prevent it from happening in the first place, if you can. Ghosts have 100 HP and you can put them near the front of your army without feeling bad about it. They are fine fighters, too, against light units. I'm far more scared of colossi than HTs, for sure.
That said, I still feel like TvZ is a bit broken in favor of Z. Either I don't know how to play TvZ at all, but good zergs just roll me over due to the breaking power of banelings, power of zerglings vs bio keeping me in my base earlygame, and the queen/zerg macro mechanics make the matchup seemingly unwinnable.
You're speaking in terms of pure mech, right? Not biomech? (I don't consider ghosts to be bio in mech build).
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
Problem is that mech isn't viable in SCII. I've tried. I've tried countless times with my practice partner (I'm platinum T, he's platinum P--Both B- / B iCCup). No matter what psi, how I emp or how I setup, P always rolls over T. Until they fix that (if they fix that), storm is a much bigger problem in this game than the previous.
Interesting...
I'm a platinum T player, and I feel the opposite. I feel like TvP greatly favors T currently. Ghosts are quite strong, and nuking is a severely underrated and underused ability right now. If you have ghosts ANYWAY the 100/100 to nuke a protoss base seems borderline unreasonable, to be honest.
Also, psi storm isn't that bad, honestly. Micro out of it, and EMP HTs to prevent it from happening in the first place, if you can. Ghosts have 100 HP and you can put them near the front of your army without feeling bad about it. They are fine fighters, too, against light units. I'm far more scared of colossi than HTs, for sure.
That said, I still feel like TvZ is a bit broken in favor of Z. Either I don't know how to play TvZ at all, but good zergs just roll me over due to the breaking power of banelings, power of zerglings vs bio keeping me in my base earlygame, and the queen/zerg macro mechanics make the matchup seemingly unwinnable.
You're speaking in terms of pure mech, right? Not biomech? (I don't consider ghosts to be bio in mech build).
Maybe I misunderstood. I thought you were stating that mech is unviable, but that psi storm rapes bio as it did in SC1.
You're saying that psi storm is effective against mech in SC2? I struggle a bit to see that, as any sort of spacing at all by tanks makes it unfeasible. It's all a moot point though, because tanks are unfeasible against protoss (almost every unit counters tanks. It's ridiculous). Hellions also don't seem to hold up against anything but zealots. Thors might be better in the matchup than people are giving them credit, but I haven't really tried them or thought it it too much.
On April 02 2010 06:47 Slurgi wrote: You're saying that psi storm is effective against mech in SC2? I struggle a bit to see that, as any sort of spacing at all by tanks makes it unfeasible. It's all a moot point though, because tanks are unfeasible against protoss (almost every unit counters tanks. It's ridiculous). Hellions also don't seem to hold up against anything but zealots. Thors might be better in the matchup than people are giving them credit, but I haven't really tried them or thought it it too much.
He was responding to a post saying that psionic storm was fine in SC1, and therefore, incredibly powerful psionic storm is fine in SC2. His point was that in SC1, psionic storm forced Terran to go mech. In SC2, Terran doesn't have that option because of how comparatively weak mech is right now, so having storm be so strong that it locks out bio would ruin the matchup.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
Problem is that mech isn't viable in SCII. I've tried. I've tried countless times with my practice partner (I'm platinum T, he's platinum P--Both B- / B iCCup). No matter what psi, how I emp or how I setup, P always rolls over T. Until they fix that (if they fix that), storm is a much bigger problem in this game than the previous.
Interesting...
I'm a platinum T player, and I feel the opposite. I feel like TvP greatly favors T currently. Ghosts are quite strong, and nuking is a severely underrated and underused ability right now. If you have ghosts ANYWAY the 100/100 to nuke a protoss base seems borderline unreasonable, to be honest.
Also, psi storm isn't that bad, honestly. Micro out of it, and EMP HTs to prevent it from happening in the first place, if you can. Ghosts have 100 HP and you can put them near the front of your army without feeling bad about it. They are fine fighters, too, against light units. I'm far more scared of colossi than HTs, for sure.
That said, I still feel like TvZ is a bit broken in favor of Z. Either I don't know how to play TvZ at all, but good zergs just roll me over due to the breaking power of banelings, power of zerglings vs bio keeping me in my base earlygame, and the queen/zerg macro mechanics make the matchup seemingly unwinnable.
You're speaking in terms of pure mech, right? Not biomech? (I don't consider ghosts to be bio in mech build).
Maybe I misunderstood. I thought you were stating that mech is unviable, but that psi storm rapes bio as it did in SC1.
You're saying that psi storm is effective against mech in SC2? I struggle a bit to see that, as any sort of spacing at all by tanks makes it unfeasible. It's all a moot point though, because tanks are unfeasible against protoss (almost every unit counters tanks. It's ridiculous). Hellions also don't seem to hold up against anything but zealots. Thors might be better in the matchup than people are giving them credit, but I haven't really tried them or thought it it too much.
Ah, sorry I wasn't clear. No, I don't think psi storm is effective against mech in SC2. I think it is (or was) more effective against bio (maybe since patch that's not the case anymore). But otherwise I agree with your thoughts here.
On April 02 2010 05:06 hacpee wrote: Everyone says storm is too powerful vs m&m. Guess what? Storm was powerful vs medic/marine in sc1 too. It raped medic/marine. No reason to nerf storm just because its good.
The thing is that in SC2 mech actually does not work because of immortals, there were no immortals in SC1 now were there?
You can't do comparisons like that, so much new has been brought in to the game.
Except that immortals are 100% useless in PvT as long as the Terran has a ghost and isn't mentally handicapped
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/mm55/zanderfever/Screenshot000.jpg)
