Situation report 1 posted! - Page 75

On August 29 2010 01:19 sux2bu wrote:


This is the correct one for lings.
pre 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill lings
100%             1
50%               2
25%               3
post 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill lings
100%             1
50%               2
25%               4

This is the correct one for banelings.

pre 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill blings
100%             1
50%               2
25%               3

post 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill blings
100%             1
50%               2
25%               4

Almost no difference other then the 25% splash radius . And it is easly ignored as the number of tanks start increasing and overlapping the splash ranges. And in SC2 AI never chooses the same target if it would kill with a single shot with multi tanks opposed to BW. Which even makes it easier for tanks to rain destruction.

On August 29 2010 01:20 WickedBit wrote:
It looks like they are moving the seige tank damage closer to what was in SC1. If I am not mistaken they did 70 damage in sc1 with damage halved against smaller units. Now all the need to do is make it something like 30+30 (35+35 ? ) and add the overkill. Will start making for some fun pro games with chargelots and lings suddenly being really good against them.

On August 29 2010 01:38 Grummler wrote:


The engine always rounds down, just checked it. So these are the correct values:

pre 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill lings
100%             1
50%               2
25%               3

post 1.1:
splash        shots needed to kill lings
100%             1
50%               3
25%               5

And yes, most splash will overlap. Therefore most lings will get killed due to splash, not because of direct fire. Thats why the tank nerv is huge. I mean, the splash area increases with its radius. So most unit will get hit by 25% splash, less with 50%, and only very few will suffer the full 100%. I dont see why you still think that tank nerf has no effekt on zerglings and banelings.

Sure there will be situations where a ling gets hit by 50% and then gets shot into its face, so it doesnt matter if the tank deals 25 or 50dmg. But even then there will be a whole bunch of surrounding lings who want that extra tank shot.

On August 29 2010 01:55 oxxo wrote:


SC2 tanks SHOULDN'T be like SC1 tanks. There are units like roach/immortal now. SC1 is not SC2.

On August 29 2010 01:54 phant wrote:
Zerg needs to be harassed in order for Protoss to stay in the game. With the zealot nerf making 2 gate ineffective, I think The Stargate->phoenix opening is going to become much more common.

On August 29 2010 01:20 WickedBit wrote:
It looks like they are moving the seige tank damage closer to what was in SC1. If I am not mistaken they did 70 damage in sc1 with damage halved against smaller units. Now all the need to do is make it something like 30+30 (35+35 ? ) and add the overkill. Will start making for some fun pro games with chargelots and lings suddenly being really good against them.

On August 29 2010 02:02 Gecko wrote:


I like VR and Phoenix opening vs zerg, so maybe people will explore this more. That would be pretty cool.

On August 29 2010 01:20 WickedBit wrote:
It looks like they are moving the seige tank damage closer to what was in SC1. If I am not mistaken they did 70 damage in sc1 with damage halved against smaller units. Now all the need to do is make it something like 30+30 (35+35 ? ) and add the overkill. Will start making for some fun pro games with chargelots and lings suddenly being really good against them.

On August 29 2010 01:58 bobcat wrote:



Both of those units are uneffected by this change.

On August 29 2010 02:28 neobowman wrote:
I would do something about the Zerg's ability to actually know what the Terran is doing. Reaper is just one of many openings that a Terran could pull off. I would move overlord speed to hatchery tech. Or make overseer at hatch tech.

On August 29 2010 02:31 Carthage wrote:


Overseer at hatch tech is very dangerous, because I'm pretty sure stopping buildings in the early game creates some pretty ridiculous timing windows.

On August 29 2010 01:57 lololol wrote:


Only the displayed value is rounded. The actual values are as exact as it gets.
Zerg regeneration will also play a role if the unit does not die immediately.

On August 29 2010 02:28 neobowman wrote:
I would do something about the Zerg's ability to actually know what the Terran is doing. Reaper is just one of many openings that a Terran could pull off. I would move overlord speed to hatchery tech. Or make overseer at hatch tech.

On August 29 2010 02:36 SmoKim wrote:


i would love these changes, don't think anyone would like to sacrifice a pylon/depot everytime they needed to scout

On August 29 2010 02:03 VanGarde wrote:

30+30 AND overkill? No, you won't be seeing any fun pro games with chargelots and lings being good against tanks because no one will use tanks at all.

I don't understand what everyone smoked to make this overkill thing seem like a good idea. Is it just because Artosis said it in a sotb and everyone just accepts it as sensible even though it is really really stupid.

To try and balance the game by intentionally making a unit stupid is well, stupid.

There was a time in the beta when the splash spread was not as effective and tanks were not overkilling and NOONE used tanks, because they were not worth it, they were ineffective and there are other units that can do their damage at a lesser cost and shorter production time. If you give them overkill they will be more useless than they were at that point. Why in the world would anyone use the tank at all then. Especially if it is designed to work best against armored units, explain to me why I would build tanks rather than marauders then?