EPTUltras vs Repaired PF - Page 52
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
| ||
|
Jaeger
United States1150 Posts
You sure about that? Just loaded up the MockBattle map put 2 ultras in the middle of ~70 probes and had the probes hold position and ultras attack each other and there were a lot of probes dying very quickly. | ||
|
arnold(soTa)
Sweden352 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
| ||
|
me_viet
Australia1350 Posts
In an average game, P and T have alot more buildings than Z. With this, Z can destroy clumps of buildings faster than T or P players can raze a whole base. But yes, this is quite broken. | ||
|
Gnial
Canada907 Posts
| ||
|
SrJoSeZ
Peru121 Posts
the ultra now have a nuclear launch ability? | ||
|
Seraph.yongweihua
Canada224 Posts
| ||
|
GIGAR
Denmark88 Posts
"Zerg tears - GTFO L2P NOOB" But apparently, all the Terran tears about Ultras being a viable T3 unit against PF's makes Ttears completely acceptable. Also, pulling your workers away from combat? Don't you pull your workers away from Collosi attacks as well? :/ | ||
|
Klamity
United States994 Posts
Regardless, it's probably TOO strong. | ||
|
ShadowBumble
Netherlands87 Posts
On September 23 2010 16:18 Klamity wrote: What, Terrans are angry they can't auto repair ftw anymore? A T-3 unit shouldn't have trouble against static defense. :/ In all fairness i am a Terran player and i think the Ultra's should indeed have a splash radius the problem i have is that the splash range is based on the attacked target and not the distance from the Ultra's Claws. Basically meaning the splash damage range is variable if you attack a sup depot the splash damage range is a lot less then for example when attacking a CC. But like i tested last night also Ultra's Attacking rocks makes units die on the whole other side of the rocks and even on higher ground ( Blistering sands MAP backdoor entrance ), and this is the main problem. ( Fixed Tech game me playing against a friend to test it out ) So to sum it up i don't mind that Ultra's have a Splash radius hell they even deserve it but attacking rocks and the units on the other side die due to splash damage on even higher ground is just plain wrong, but then again i kinda figure to get the same response from most Zerg players, "blabla terran tears". | ||
|
dcemuser
United States3248 Posts
On September 23 2010 16:30 ShadowBumble wrote: But like i tested last night also Ultra's Attacking rocks makes units die on the whole other side of the rocks and even on higher ground ( Blistering sands MAP backdoor entrance ), and this is the main problem. ( Fixed Tech game me playing against a friend to test it out ) Okay, that's actually pretty hilarious. I still want to see if that bug with Contaminate increasing the size of a building command center will work with the ultra splash - it was posted earlier in this thread that it might work. I'm going to give it a shot in a few. | ||
|
iCanada
Canada10660 Posts
On September 23 2010 16:30 ShadowBumble wrote: But like i tested last night also Ultra's Attacking rocks makes units die on the whole other side of the rocks and even on higher ground ( Blistering sands MAP backdoor entrance ), and this is the main problem. ( Fixed Tech game me playing against a friend to test it out ) As a random player, i actually think that this isn't really that ridiculous. First of all, have you ever played a Zerg on blistering sands where their first attack wasn't through the rocks? Second of all... you can just make a Missle Turret on the other side if you see an ultralisk cavern and instantly know that you need units there ASAP. I don't really even mind the range all that much, if anything, what makes it overpowered is that splash damage works of the base damage of the unit hit rather than just having its own base and armour type bonuses. If there is going to be a nerf to this, just make it when ultras attack CC//Nexus/Hatch size buildings their splash only goes one hex instead of two. | ||
|
netherDrake
Singapore1831 Posts
| ||
|
Zog
57 Posts
| ||
|
SovSov
United States755 Posts
Blizzard announces about 6 or so changes, most of which are slight number tweaks.. This was the most significant mechanic change They had a month to test it, since they literally didn't change ANYTHING else besides what they announced Yet they still fuck it up?? | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
If you build PF's at all your expansions you don't have many mules to drop. Please, please stop saying this. If you want mules, just build an OC as well, somewhere else. You get supply from them (saving on depots) and the first MULE pretty much pays for the OC. | ||
|
VashTS
United States1675 Posts
On September 23 2010 11:34 jSIX wrote: Does it make sense that when an ultralisk attacks a building it damages units in a +2 range around it even when the ultralisk "Attack" isnt "attacking" anything except the building? Use your brain Damn shame a T3 unit can kill a PF, huh? It is what it is though: Splash on TARGET +2, not splash from SOURCE +2. Deal with it until it's changed. Stop crying. If you can't accept changes, then stop playing until they, too, are changed. Or, a nice kiddie quote I heard, "abuse it until they realize it needs a nerf." | ||
|
lololol
5198 Posts
On September 23 2010 07:03 ltortoise wrote: blizzard doesn't use the word bug. see previous posts. and yes i am literate with computers. seeing how they don't ever use that word, you can't really confirm or deny whether it is a bug. You can very easily deny, because you can look at the xml files and see that ultras always had this type of attack and that it's a specific flag, which can be easily added or removed and works exactly as advertised. You can even see that in the editor. It's something extremely obvious, it's like arguing whether green grass is green or not. Blizzard doesn't use green grass, so you can't really confirm or deny whether it's green or not! Seriously, I feel for Fa1nT repeatedly trying to explain the obvious to people and not flaming them to hell and back for their ignorance. What's next, making him explain what issue means and that a bug is also obviously an issue, but an issue obviously may not be a bug. | ||
|
Dionyseus
United States2068 Posts
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/627980105#2 | ||
| ||
