|
On June 04 2010 06:13 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On June 04 2010 05:17 Saechiis wrote:And the Terran imba shitstorm continues ... it seems to me that most people would rather complain on TL about everything they lost to, rather than finding a way to beat it. Seriously ... the Planetary Fortress? Doesn't anyone wonder why good terrans always seem to get OC's? That's right. Because they need the scans and extra income by Mule's (and ocassionally Drop Supply). But since TLO spammed PF's once it's imba? (did he even win that game?). First of all PF's are beaten in cost efficiency by photon cannons which for the same cost do more damage, shoot both ground and air and double as detector ... You can outrange the PF --> it's a 550/150 paperweight, attack it by air --> it's a 550/150 paperweight, attack it with cloaked units --> it's a 550/150 paperweight. Or you could just kill them before they turn into PF's, since a CC takes ages to build and then another age to morph it to a PF. But no! I have a better idea ... I will take my army and run it into his PF/ Siege tank/ Turret/ Bunker wall ... that ought to do the trick! :D ... wait what!? my army melted ... imba! So guys, let's try to adapt to the game rather than demanding it to adapt to our every demand. Because on a brighter note, when terrans begin leaving their bases defended by only turrets and PF's ... Ultralisks would become viable! Yeah. PS. To OP ... ofcourse Blizzard designs everything with a certain goal in mind (awesomess) but even in SC, the most balanced game ever according to SC fans, units and buildings were used in original ways to get an edge over the opponent. Muta stacking certainly wasn't a choice of design but people found out about it and used it to their advantage. When you get cannon/ bunker rushed, what are you going to do? Try to convince your opponent bunkers and cannons are for base defense only? Or that it's aesthatically unpleasant?  I feel like your post was just a bunch of rambling. And I'd take a PF over 5 photon cannons as the PF does splash and can be repaired.
Yes, in comparison to your pure objectiveness and multi-layered argumentation my words seem worthless.
PS. I'll just attack your PF with muta's, you just keep using your minerals and SCV's for repairs 
|
My only argument for the planetary fortress' legitimacy is that no player can win the game camping at his PF. As long as someone does that, you have the choice to expand freely around the map.
|
I like grends idea. Paying 400 for extra base defense, or in the picture 800 is outrageous. but the terran race disobeys rule 1, cardio.
|
It's just as 'poorly designed' as spine/cannon... as in it's not.
|
It could start to get overpowered if people start building them as a way of forgoing units, bunkers, and supply depots, but otherwise its fine.
|
Wow i never really realised it had attack priority.
|
I thought PF can be countered with roaches? I saw a recent game where a zerg player did that and easily destroyed the PF.
|
I found a couple of things that were not brought up. at least no in specific detail
we keep bringing up the fact that PF is good against a large ground army. Ok. so large army, now we are assuming for a decently lengthed game. for arguments purposes, lets say its a 12 minute game.
In 12 minutes, assuming it takes 2 minutes to get an orbital command. You are sacraficing 10 mules,
10 mules@270 minerals, you are sacraficing the startup cost of 150gas(not counting minerals as it cost the same as OC) 2700 minerals. so now we are at 2700minerals 150 gas in 12 minutes. From a financial standpoint we just really need to look at the sacrafices a PF really brings to the battlefield.
Also those ignoring the hard counters to a planetary fortress are basically stating that they should be able to counter something in a way that they want to counter it. I mean, seriously, at least 2 counters per race, with or without turrets. Fine by me, ignore what your oppnent is doing and just counter blindly, have fun in the bronze league.
Now on a side note, in gold leage, I do scout before PF or OC and will go PF if i see an early pool, after that I plan to quickly expand as I know I have some econ to make up for.
Theory crafting im working on. Is it worth it to PF the choke up to a essential Zel'naga tower such as on lost ruins? scv to activate/repair light damage on tower. Serves as a massive distraction, excellent map control and some longevity even during a frontal assault.
|
in the eyes of a terran, the PF is mostly a very large very expensive, very long to build seiged tank with high hp that can make scvs and bring back money, unprotected can easily be out ranged w/o upgrade or sniped, its splash isn't much unless your using unarmored units. Many of the theory craft strats ive been thinking about is using it for central map control with bunkers and turrets in the center of a map or at the enemies' natural
|
Cleary it's extremely slow and can't lift and can't attack air.
Enough faults with it, atleast make it worth as a Orbital command.
|
There is a hidden cost of a planetary fortress that everyone ignores. You cant get an orbital command. This in my mind makes it more of an investment than 550/150 but whatever. I would agree that PF may be a little too powerful in the mid/high diamond games I play, but pros have to trouble killing them. If you zerg you can kill one with minimal damage if you use a few roaches and some hydras behind them.
The priority may be imba, I have won a few games because of it.
|
I would be really, really sad if the Planetary fortress was changed in a way that no longer made it worthwhile. I think using it as a ground defense is a good tool. I don't see it as being wrong in design.
You point out a lot of advantage of the planetary fortress, but does it actually make the terran too strong? It has yet to be proved.
Blizzard have the numbers, and they will nerf it if needed. On my side, I very much appreciate the role of the PF.
|
I've always felt that the PF is underpowered in the sense that it's nearly always worse than an orbital command. If it were to be weakened, I would like it to be changed so that instead of doing massive amounts of damage to enemy armies, it acts as a defensive building... charging nearby vehicles and aircraft with energy or health.
To weaken the planetary fortress so that it can be easily killed by moderately sized armies is to remove it from high level play.
|
I'm a crappy Terran player, but I wouldn't mind at all if they lowered the attack priority of the PF. I think it should probably be a higher attack priority than the SCVs next to it, though. Just my opinion, of course.
|
On June 03 2010 19:01 Grend wrote:
Granted it costs 400 extra minerals, but as the replays show, this apparently is viable in even very high levels of play.
-Visual clutter
- A new defensive structure, that is cheaper than the planetary fortress, but it has a smaller size (Less scv`s able to help), less hp, less damage, but still AoE. This would look alot better than 3 Command Centres (Which are huge and ruin pathing too) clumped together.
Doesnt it cost an extra 150/150? 450/150 if you count the CC
Visual clutter? how?
I dont really think that many scvs will be available to repair the planetary fortress.
|
I think the PF is just fine for how much it costs. it costs heckuva lot.
the only problem I may have is that it has attack priority, and even then I'm not too sure I care.
I play zerg.
|
On June 03 2010 19:33 cArn- wrote:
550/150 is not an investment already ?
when you see the mineral income advantage that mules give, no its not at all.
Even though im not a zerg(protoss) i find one of this alone is enough to deter me from attacking a base, they are soooooo fucking strong its not even funny.
i even lost games attacking into one of these because of it..
something has to be done about them, increase the gas cost a bunch or higher in the tech tree
On June 23 2010 06:07 sadeiko wrote:
I found a couple of things that were not brought up. at least no in specific detail
we keep bringing up the fact that PF is good against a large ground army. Ok. so large army, now we are assuming for a decently lengthed game. for arguments purposes, lets say its a 12 minute game.
In 12 minutes, assuming it takes 2 minutes to get an orbital command. You are sacraficing 10 mules,
10 mules@270 minerals, you are sacraficing the startup cost of 150gas(not counting minerals as it cost the same as OC) 2700 minerals. so now we are at 2700minerals 150 gas in 12 minutes. From a financial standpoint we just really need to look at the sacrafices a PF really brings to the battlefield.
Also those ignoring the hard counters to a planetary fortress are basically stating that they should be able to counter something in a way that they want to counter it. I mean, seriously, at least 2 counters per race, with or without turrets. Fine by me, ignore what your oppnent is doing and just counter blindly, have fun in the bronze league.
Now on a side note, in gold leage, I do scout before PF or OC and will go PF if i see an early pool, after that I plan to quickly expand as I know I have some econ to make up for.
Theory crafting im working on. Is it worth it to PF the choke up to a essential Zel'naga tower such as on lost ruins? scv to activate/repair light damage on tower. Serves as a massive distraction, excellent map control and some longevity even during a frontal assault.
You arent losing any minerals and the chances are from what the OP described its going to be defending a base with an OC already there, i mean what are your other OC doing? idle? Unless you completly dont make the OC's at all you arent losing mining speed even in the slightest
|
changing it's attack priority to be below an SCV that is repairing, but above SCVs who are mining would fix the major problem with it that I see. Melee units that can't get to the PF will run around behind the SCVs repairing not attacking them. Yes you can micro your way to victory by individually killing each scv, but by then you've lost your army to the massive splash.
|
On June 03 2010 19:11 shlomo wrote:
I don't so much mind the planetary fortress in itself, but I do think it's a little too cheap / easily available. Should be more of an investment imo.
It costs over 500 minerals + gas (I think) and the time it takes to make the CC + morph it.
That is a STEEP cost in most phases of the game.
As for "feels wrong", that's a personal opinion that you can't just throw on it and say we should change it. I for one love the PF and think it looks fine to build it places. The thing you take for granted is the incredibly steep cost that could go towards another expansion.
Not only that, it's pretty easily taken out by most non-squishy things (Marauders, Roaches can work, Ultralisks destroy it) and any type of air because static defense sucks against air (Mutalisks, Void Rays, etc... all destroy static defense in good numbers).
Finally, you're sacrificing both Scans and MULEs to make a Planetary Fortress (+ the option to move it).
Sounds like a great idea on paper, but get into a game and try to use if to good effect. It's a terrible idea early game because of the resource sink.
|
Does the splash damage hit friendly units as well? If so, microing melee units next to repairing SCVs seems pretty worth it even if you have to queue-attack all of them individually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
