EPTUltras vs Repaired PF - Page 21
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Grebliv
Iceland800 Posts
| ||
|
PhatCop
Australia70 Posts
1) The discrepancy between the attack animation and actual attack damage range 2) Balance of the change I think most people can agree that point 1 is a legitimate issue. Point 2 is up for interpretation. Interestingly, the post from Blizzard doesn't say which issue they are addressing. Perhaps the resulting balance change is aligned with their design intent, and they will give ultras bigger tusks that shoots lasers when splashing to reflect the larger area of effect! | ||
|
Fries
United States124 Posts
Anyway, my main point is I think the benefit is intended, they just didn't apparently realize just how good the splash would be on the planetary fortress. Just from the eyeball test, to me it seems like the splash hitting the half of the fortress the ultra is on seems about right. | ||
|
Ketara
United States15065 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:06 Genome852 wrote: It's already been confirmed as one. http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980105 Noooooooooooooooooooooooo  | ||
|
Kal_rA
United States2925 Posts
gonna miss that | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:33 Nilrem wrote: Alroght, I thought I would show you all this. I wanted to test the splash, so I measured it in terms of workers. From what I saw, the splash damage is between 3 to 4w (the "w" symbolizing worker). This is not quite astounding to see such range. So it is 3-4w from the PF itself. I wanted to test it this way since we have all seen the videos of large numbers and surround. I wanted to show with a linear line, just how many lines of workers are killed. It's a radius of 2 + the radius of the targeted unit and scvs have a diamater of 0.75, so the splash radius is enough for an outwards line of 3 back to back scvs to get hit by the splash. It hit 4 in one direction, because they weren't in a straight outward line(and a discrepancy of 0.25 is enough to hit 4, which is pretty small). | ||
|
.Soul
Canada81 Posts
| ||
|
omnigol
United States166 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:27 VanGarde wrote: Semantics, the MULE is a worker. SCV's, probles and drones do not "give" you minerals either. As I said before you don't "lose" minerals by having all your workers killed by a hellion drop either. But you loose income over time. Having a planetary fortress is financially as if you had and oc but never called down MULE's. Seriously is this concept really so hard for people to grasp? You're just using growth over time numbers to justify the ridiculousness of PF with repairing SCVs. Use common sense. PFs can replace entire ground armies in certain defensive situations, yes they're still a viable choice, even when jackasses like you play with income-over-time numbers. | ||
|
Nilrem
United States3684 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:48 lololol wrote: It's a radius of 2 + the radius of the targeted unit and scvs have a diamater of 0.75, so the splash radius is enough for an outwards line of 3 back to back scvs to get hit by the splash. It hit 4 in one direction, because they weren't in a straight outward line(and a discrepancy of 0.25 is enough to hit 4, which is pretty small). True true, but alas. I was merely showing the radius and potentially just how many can get killed. Sadly, this is a bug, which will be fixed in a future patch. | ||
|
Devlin
Sweden91 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:27 VanGarde wrote: Semantics, the MULE is a worker. SCV's, probles and drones do not "give" you minerals either. As I said before you don't "lose" minerals by having all your workers killed by a hellion drop either. But you loose income over time. Having a planetary fortress is financially as if you had and oc but never called down MULE's. Seriously is this concept really so hard for people to grasp? So having to rebuild something does not result in a loss of minerals? OK. Without that PF you most likely wouldn't have that expansion up in the first place, let alone for 12 minutes like in your little math genius calculations there. There is a reason why people get PF over OC on their less secure expansions, and to great effect. Since you apparently didn't intend on reading my entire post, how about this comparison instead: as Zerg, I have to constantly choose between drones and army. Thank you. Stop acting like a victim, the PF is a great option for you, given the right circumstances. I doubt you'll hear people say otherwise. And also, stop trying to sound so smug. Makes you look like an ass. | ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
| ||
|
VanGarde
Sweden755 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:55 omnigol wrote: You're just using growth over time numbers to justify the ridiculousness of PF with repairing SCVs. Use common sense. PFs can replace entire ground armies in certain defensive situations, yes they're still a viable choice, even when jackasses like you play with income-over-time numbers. Growth over time is the entire foundation of Starcraft 2. It is the backbone of the game. Also I am not justifying anything I started off by calmly pointing out to people why the PF does in fact cost you more resources than just what it takes to build it on the spot, and thus further explained why it need to be repairable. I did not say how repairable or anything regarding balance, just that it has to actually be possible to repair it in combat or else it stops being worth the cost. Ofcourse oneeyed people who rage their way into these threads with red eyes seeing only talk of nerfs and balance will read what they want into posts. All I have said is that getting a PF has a larger impact than just being a one time cost and apparently it has been useful because half the people in here don't even understand how starcraft economy works. | ||
|
VanGarde
Sweden755 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:57 Devlin wrote: So having to rebuild something does not result in a loss of minerals? OK. Without that PF you most likely wouldn't have that expansion up in the first place, let alone for 12 minutes like in your little math genius calculations there. There is a reason why people get PF over OC on their less secure expansions, and to great effect. Since you apparently didn't intend on reading my entire post, how about this comparison instead: as Zerg, I have to constantly choose between drones and army. Thank you. Stop acting like a victim, the PF is a great option for you, given the right circumstances. I doubt you'll hear people say otherwise. And also, stop trying to sound so smug. Makes you look like an ass. I am coming across as smug because I am just objectively explaining very obvious and basic mechanics without defending or taking any kind of stance on balance yet you and a lot of other people are apparently a bit too eager to make everything into a nerfbat debate that you just assume that I am trying to justify some generic random "omg this is imba HURR" argument that litters these forums. I don't do that, I am explaining how the PF works. Stop reading between the lines and you will see that I have said nothing about the balance of the PF or any situational stuff. Just stating the fact that it does not cost 550/150 and because of its cost over time it has to be repairable. | ||
|
jamesr12
United States1549 Posts
| ||
|
Moonling
United States987 Posts
| ||
|
Uhh Negative
United States1090 Posts
| ||
|
xiyuema
87 Posts
| ||
|
kawazu
United States111 Posts
They are most definately going to patch this. It's like the ultras attack became psionic storm or something. After they patch this scvs will only die if they are near where the ultra is attacking. | ||
|
Deathstar
9150 Posts
On September 22 2010 10:33 Nilrem wrote: Alroght, I thought I would show you all this. I wanted to test the splash, so I measured it in terms of workers. From what I saw, the splash damage is between 3 to 4w (the "w" symbolizing worker). This is not quite astounding to see such range. So it is 3-4w from the PF itself. I wanted to test it this way since we have all seen the videos of large numbers and surround. I wanted to show with a linear line, just how many lines of workers are killed. The ultralisks are killing scvs with an invisible force. There needs to be a hotfix fast, not promises of a patch in the distant future. | ||
|
MrCon
France29748 Posts
On September 22 2010 11:10 Uhh Negative wrote: So this is a bug, but some SCVs should still die while repairing once they patch this, right? Just less range? yeah, and perhaps not scv in the other side of the building and not another building that don't even touch the attacked one =) I guess the splash should come from the front of the ultra and not the center of the building. | ||
| ||
