|
On September 21 2010 00:40 Disp wrote:Show nested quote +On September 20 2010 21:09 ghermination wrote:
Let's get ready for Toss to be nerfed unnecessarily again!
I'm so ready to get 6/7/8 pooled endlessly on 2 player maps now because there's just no way to have a zeal out on, for example, steppes, even if you open 10 gate! that 5 seconds is crucial. That's the reason they buffed warpgates in the first place. Not to mention it's now going to be infinitely harder to sustain any attack in which you do less than steamroll your enemy, considering Zeal/Sentry is your main money sink vs Z and it'll be now be significantly slower. Zeal nerf doesn't seem like a big deal but it really really is.
So you're saying the window is so tight that 5 game seconds (about 3 real seconds) is the difference between holding off an attack and having no chance to defend it?
didn't we already have those later zealots in the beta when they 'accidently' patched in stuff without mentioning it in the patchnotes (and removed it then)?
I don't seem to remember there was a lot of 6pooling back then but whatever.
you know there was this orb thread where he proved mathematically you can't have a zeal out before you have 6 lings in your base so theoretically, yes 5sec can be a big deal in the super early game, honestly 1second can be huge.
|
Has there been any clue as to whether we get new maps this patch, or was that just something I saw in the rumored patch notes?
|
Not being able to defend vs zerglings will be pretty damn annoying.
|
The patch comes out the 21st, no?
"The first feature and balance patch release for StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty will be available next Tuesday, September 21. The maintenance period will begin at 5:00 a.m. and last until approximately 11:00 a.m. PDT."
|
On September 21 2010 04:30 Cadence wrote:
The patch comes out the 21st, no?
"The first feature and balance patch release for StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty will be available next Tuesday, September 21. The maintenance period will begin at 5:00 a.m. and last until approximately 11:00 a.m. PDT."
21st for US, 22nd for EU
|
On September 21 2010 04:28 CagedMind wrote:
Not being able to defend vs zerglings will be pretty damn annoying.
You use your probes to delay the extra five seconds it takes for a zealot to come out. Try putting a couple probes in your choak when you scout them comming.
|
why do they announce the patch 1 month before release when they still dont change a single thing as in the fake notes. im 100% sure there will be nothing different than the notes 1 month old.
|
On September 21 2010 03:31 Renaissance wrote:
Positive for P? You're kidding me. The whole patch pretty much make bio much stronger and makes tank builds less viable.
huh yeah and bio is easy to deal with as Protoss, so what's wrong sir?
|
if there arent more changes than in the SR1, i'll gonna nerdrage hard on my keayboard i guess
|
ye damn easy, almost as easy as stim a-moving with impressive stop and go micro
|
yeah marines and marauders are sooo good vs colossus and templars
|
OMFG patch tomorrow!! so sick
|
On September 21 2010 03:21 Jenslyn87 wrote:
Looking at it as objectively as possible, how do you guys think the changes that we know of right now will affect PvT balance? Imo, slightly positive for P.
Longer zealot build / warp-in time is a pretty big minus... that's basically all that changed here
For Terran:
Battlecruiser dmg significantly lowered. Pretty big minus, but only very late game, but still significant
Tank dmg reduced vs. light units. Pretty significant, mostly because chargelots will be a lot stronger vs. tanks now. Also, a bit of missmicro with templars wont get them one-shotted anymore.
Bunker and reaper build time are miniscule changes but will help in that reaper rush will lose effectiveness a bit and early bunker pushes will be easier to spot and stop. Pretty minor, but still...
So all in all I would say P comes out of this patch on top, which I think is fair. Do you guys agree with my assessment? The reason I'm asking is that I played this whiny terran yesterday who, after losing, argued that it would be a lot easier playing against protoss in general now...
Anyone else? Do you really think this is bad for toss like in the big picture? I don't think so...
|
No its not as bad as toss players make it out to be (now i'll get 6 pooled and lose more lol ok whatever).
Can't wait for tomorrow :D
|
tanks are not retarded anymore. thank god
|
so excited for patch tomorrow
|
Pardon my french, but anybody that says the ultra nerf is actually a buff is a damn idiot.
There's a flat-out decrease in damage to armor and a change to the building attack.
I assume I don't have to spell it out for the tards how the damage decrease to armor is a nerf, so let's take a closer look at the second change.
Basically, the ultra's special attack (headbutt) which did more damage to buildings than it's regular attack, is being removed and replaced with the ultra's regular attack, which does splash damage. Blizzard pointed out that this was being done because the DPS of ultras when they were targeting "small, tightly packed buildings" was actually lower than it could have been if the ultras had been doing their regular attack (which would deal splash damage to buildings).
The problem with this logic is that "small, tightly packed buildings" are NOT what zerg players are concerned about. They're worried about that barracks the Terrans built to block up a chokepoint, or that planetary fortress they need to take down. If a zerg player is wailing away on a bunch of tightly packed supply depots with ultras, I think it's safe to say that 99/100 times the zerg player has either won or lost the game already. Attacking planetary fortresses, on the other hand, is a HUGE deal. AND BLIZZARD'S CHANGE REDUCES THE DAMAGE THAT ULTRAS WILL DO TO PLANETARY FORTRESSES AND BARRACKS! I just don't see how this could be construed as anything other than a nerf. And as far as protoss is concerned, it's pretty much the same deal.
Unless it's Blizzard's intention to encourage the use of, idk, ultra-drops to snipe terran supply depots there is simply no way these changes are a buff at all.
|
On September 21 2010 04:37 Fayth wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 03:31 Renaissance wrote:
Positive for P? You're kidding me. The whole patch pretty much make bio much stronger and makes tank builds less viable. huh yeah and bio is easy to deal with as Protoss, so what's wrong sir?
HEY HEY HEY!!! Having to use FF's while you tech to storm and colossi and actually be intelligent when you play is hard work come on dude!
|
On September 21 2010 06:17 MforWW wrote:
Pardon my french, but anybody that says the ultra nerf is actually a buff is a damn idiot.
There's a flat-out decrease in damage to armor and a change to the building attack.
I assume I don't have to spell it out for the tards how the damage decrease to armor is a nerf, so let's take a closer look at the second change.
Basically, the ultra's special attack (headbutt) which did more damage to buildings than it's regular attack, is being removed and replaced with the ultra's regular attack, which does splash damage. Blizzard pointed out that this was being done because the DPS of ultras when they were targeting "small, tightly packed buildings" was actually lower than it could have been if the ultras had been doing their regular attack (which would deal splash damage to buildings).
The problem with this logic is that "small, tightly packed buildings" are NOT what zerg players are concerned about. They're worried about that barracks the Terrans built to block up a chokepoint, or that planetary fortress they need to take down. If a zerg player is wailing away on a bunch of tightly packed supply depots with ultras, I think it's safe to say that 99/100 times the zerg player has either won or lost the game already. Attacking planetary fortresses, on the other hand, is a HUGE deal. AND BLIZZARD'S CHANGE REDUCES THE DAMAGE THAT ULTRAS WILL DO TO PLANETARY FORTRESSES AND BARRACKS! I just don't see how this could be construed as anything other than a nerf. And as far as protoss is concerned, it's pretty much the same deal.
Unless it's Blizzard's intention to encourage the use of, idk, ultra-drops to snipe terran supply depots there is simply no way these changes are a buff at all.
Um can you say kills the scv's trying to repair buildings...aka PF
|
On September 21 2010 01:12 bodycount wrote:Show nested quote +On September 21 2010 01:02 T0fuuu wrote:
please please please give me a ladder reset ! And the point of ladder reset is? You think you will suck less when you start from scratch with 0 losses?  Just play the game, no one cares about your win/lose ratio.
point of a ladder reset is cos the game got a big patch and all the blizzcon regional qualifiers have been selected already. the ladder has already done its job of finding the best players to play for blizzard. There wouldnt be a better time to reset the ladder until the next huge patch.
I dont care abt my win loss ratio cos i am already getting a shiny new US ACCOUNT added to my bnet profile cos i am from sea but i am, and im sure other ppl are very curious to see what these changes actually do to the game and to do so would need statistics from the patch onwards. a ladder reset would help alot cos everything would start from zero again. counting matchup win percents and etc would be alot easier with that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
