|
On September 29 2010 13:43 SichuanPanda wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 13:02 TyrantPotato wrote:On September 29 2010 12:53 NeWnAr wrote:
Sigh. I told my friend that this wasnt' a bug and that Blizzard already fixed the splash to be on top of model size during the beta-patches. Apparently they are out to get ultras. Even when Zerg hasn't got much else to depend on. your forgeting nydus wurms. blizzard will soon post a message saying they will not be buffing zerg until zerg players relise the potential of nydus wurms /sarcasim. but honestly nerfing ultras is nerfing zergs late game. which is the only thing zerg players can say is their one advantage of playing zerg. They will probably say they are 'buffing Zerg' and simply make Nydus worms cost less money, but that still won't be a big buff because Nyduses are so easy to take down. I also cannot comprehend how Blizzard has done it again with one of their patches in doing what I call 'over-fixing' a bug. Seems that more and more often when Blizzard fixes a bug, they go one step past removing the unintended OP of the bug, and actually make said mechanic weaker than before the bug came up. Could just be me being pessimistic but I still can't help but think that they could have avoided both the mishaps with the Ultra in 1.1 and 1.1.1 by simply being a little more careful about it.
Actually that is a pretty nice buff lol.
If Nydus worms were cheaper you could
a) use them just for faster reinforcements,
b) use them more often to prevent cliff harass or cliff harass yourself,
c) use them to retreat after a normal style push to save money
d) keep your opponent in their base by pressuring with nydus worms more frequently
e) make more attempts to nydus during battle or when you think your opponent is distracted so that he has to make a choice of micro the battle or draw away attention to the worm.
Really the gas cost is one of the biggest drawbacks to the nydus worm imo. 300 gas +100/additional worm is a LOT of gas, especially mid game when you first get access to the worm. Then late game you are either pumping high gas units (broodlords/ultras) or you have pretty good map presence anyways.
|
On September 29 2010 00:11 Numy wrote:
It seems the splash before was rather illogical. Why on earth would it originate from the unit itself. Now the splash is far more initiative than it was before which most likely is a step in the right direction. The real issue here is that ultras ARE weaker thus there needs to be compensation so the equilibrium doesn't shift.
I know this comes from earlier in the thread, but to this and the general point of "Isn't it just weird looking that ultras kill SCVs on the other end of the PF? Balance aside, it throws me for a loop, because it's so strange looking!"
This is how I feel about many behaviors in SC2. If you put a bunker behind a wall-off of Barracks, it can 'shoot through' the barracks to hit enemies. Marines can only 'see' overlords floating above when their shadow is flying over low ground, not 3 feet to the right, where the shadow hits a cliff.
My favorite is MM ball. How funny would it be if they focused fired a roach, and everyone but the back row got shot by the person behind them (only the front row hits the roach)? Bullets/grenades just magically pass through allies regardless of what's in their way!
Say what you will about the balance or power of the 1.1 ultra splash, but please don't talk about how 'correct' it looked, at least until MM ball becomes 'MM carefully managed line.'
Edit: Also, just to be clear, this weirdness is present in all races, and makes me giggle regardless of who's shooting the projectile ^_^
|
Okay...roach is 2 supply vs. 4 thor supply. Somebody PLEASE tell me how that's even remotely balanced. 3 roaches vs. a thor is like Marth vs. Bowser and DK....it just isn't happening.
|
That's just silly. There are aspects of the game that don't make sense, sure, but that doesn't mean we should throw logic out the window in all cases. It is okay to try to fix some things without fixing absolutely everything.
Edit: And for the post directly above mine...
Units are balanced in many ways. Supply cost is merely one of them. Thors are efficient for their supply, and roaches are inefficient for theirs. Roaches have plenty of other strengths to offset this weakness: they are cheaper, easier to mass, available earlier, faster, able to move while burrowed, etc.
Thors may still be better units overall, but just comparing one aspect of anything is never going to give you a complete picture.
|
On September 29 2010 16:23 mierin wrote:
Okay...roach is 2 supply vs. 4 thor supply. Somebody PLEASE tell me how that's even remotely balanced. 3 roaches vs. a thor is like Marth vs. Bowser and DK....it just isn't happening.
A zealot is 2 supply. 2 Zealots vs a Thor doesn't exactly pan out either. In the same vain, Colossus is 8 supply and a Colossus vs 2 Thors is just as bad as 2 zealots vs a Thor.
|
Actually Thor is 6 supply.
|
On September 29 2010 10:31 Eschaton wrote:
I understand why Blizzard would patch this, even 'nerf' it. Even if the splash from Ultras was the only way we Zergs could win games, it's not an intended mechanic. Leaving it in would mask imbalance from other intended mechanics. So, taking it out will hopefully make it easier to balance the elements of the game that are actually supposed to be there.
I for one will miss it, though.
Personally, I hope the AoE nerf makes it easier to see the places where the Zerg really need the shoring up.
I absolutely do not want Zerg success/failure to be defined by whether or not a Zerg player can survive to get to Ultralisks. If weaker Ultralisks make it easier to see where the real problems with Zerg are, then this is better.
|
Thread is tl;dr but obviously the pre-1.1 behavior was buggy as hell and should not be kept. Having the ultra magically hit everything around the targeted thor is definitely wrong, for example it kills all the repairing scv's even if they are on the other side and visually quite far from the ultra. This situation is almost the same as the extreme examples with planetary fortress in 1.1 that we've all seen and laughed at. You can't seriously be suggesting that it be left so bugged.
|
Also, how could this be so desperately important to fix, that they released a hotfix?
That's really wierd to me. People at blizzard often say they rely on their internal testers. They must have very good, or actually awesomely perfect, zerg players. And even tough they are so flawless, they won't properly report a bug such as;
I can not build a hatch where there was a hatch 1 second ago, because of eggs blocking me.
A bug that should be reported by the zerg players. Instead it actually really seems like they repeadetly report to their superiors how they totally destroy other races with every unit in the arsenal, working through roaches, neural parasite, ultralisk and on and on, with terran testers eyes full of tears agrees and sometimes interject how important it is to hotfix this now.
I am joking, we can only speculate on how they do things of course but we can all agree it's apparently not very effective. At all. How can they even produce a single replay where a zerg uses this to his advantage without creating 10 where he looses. Truly this can only mean they have godlike zerg testers  Maybe those testers know some tricks we don't? Maybe their metagame is in a completely different place?
|
On September 29 2010 17:09 osten wrote:Also, how could this be so desperately important to fix, that they released a hotfix? That's really wierd to me. People at blizzard often say they rely on their internal testers. They must have very good, or actually awesomely perfect, zerg players. And even tough they are so flawless, they won't properly report a bug such as; I can not build a hatch where there was a hatch 1 second ago, because of eggs blocking me. A bug that should be reported by the zerg players. Instead it actually really seems like they repeadetly report to their superiors how they totally destroy other races with every unit in the arsenal, working through roaches, neural parasite, ultralisk and on and on, with terran testers eyes full of tears agrees and sometimes interject how important it is to hotfix this now. I am joking, we can only speculate on how they do things of course but we can all agree it's apparently not very effective. At all. How can they even produce a single replay where a zerg uses this to his advantage without creating 10 where he looses. Truly this can only mean they have godlike zerg testers Maybe those testers know some tricks we don't? Maybe their metagame is in a completely different place?
yeah.. Those fucking scvs still can't be killed while building a fucking bunker some of the time right?, and even when they don't meld into the bunker theyre still sometimes almost impossible to select. Where's the hotfix for that? and when they do fix it, i assume since theyre being fair they will fix it by giving bunkers 1 hp while theyre being built. Just the same retarded way they fixed ultras.
|
How can you say this is NOT super important to fix? The moment one ultra happened to kill 20 scvs all around a PF with 1 strike in a pro game, it was obvious that a hotfix for it was incoming.
|
On September 29 2010 17:52 georgir wrote:
How can you say this is NOT super important to fix? The moment one ultra happened to kill 20 scvs all around a PF with 1 strike in a pro game, it was obvious that a hotfix for it was incoming.
this isn't a hotfix to fix that planetary fortress, and they didn't even take enouh time to PROPERLY TEST to see how much they BROKE ultralisks with this splash mechanics change.
they are idiots, and they have, instead of rethinking their building splash, nerfed ultralisks all together.
|
I told myself I would never switch race from zerg.
oh all zerg players, give me strength, I feel my mind is wavering dangerously close to break that promise.
|
On September 29 2010 16:43 Dommk wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 16:23 mierin wrote:
Okay...roach is 2 supply vs. 4 thor supply. Somebody PLEASE tell me how that's even remotely balanced. 3 roaches vs. a thor is like Marth vs. Bowser and DK....it just isn't happening. A zealot is 2 supply. 2 Zealots vs a Thor doesn't exactly pan out either. In the same vain, Colossus is 8 supply and a Colossus vs 2 Thors is just as bad as 2 zealots vs a Thor.
you guys should actually play the game before making these posts. a Thor is 6 supply
but yes, it beats most protoss units except for the voidray and immortals
|
2629 Posts
On September 29 2010 19:22 Pulimuli wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 16:43 Dommk wrote:On September 29 2010 16:23 mierin wrote:
Okay...roach is 2 supply vs. 4 thor supply. Somebody PLEASE tell me how that's even remotely balanced. 3 roaches vs. a thor is like Marth vs. Bowser and DK....it just isn't happening. A zealot is 2 supply. 2 Zealots vs a Thor doesn't exactly pan out either. In the same vain, Colossus is 8 supply and a Colossus vs 2 Thors is just as bad as 2 zealots vs a Thor. you guys should actually play the game before making these posts. a Thor is 6 supply but yes, it beats most protoss units except for the voidray and immortals
On another note of "playing the game", 1 Thor > 1 Immortal. Test it out yourself.
|
250mm vs. Immortal = epic win.
|
* Ram given back to Ultralisk;
* Ram damage and attack speed changed to match Cleave;
* Ram now does splash centered on front of target. (or whatever a sensible splash configuration is so that it gets a bonus vs tightly clustered buildings, which was their excuse for removing Ram in the first place)
That would have been the sensible hotfix. It would have taken just as much time to do that as it did to change Cleave's splash.
|
On September 29 2010 17:52 georgir wrote:
How can you say this is NOT super important to fix? The moment one ultra happened to kill 20 scvs all around a PF with 1 strike in a pro game, it was obvious that a hotfix for it was incoming.
Zerg has been broken since beta, and yet we get nothing.
1 Ultra cleaves a few SCVs in a YouTube video and it's fixed in 3 days along with a massive nerf to the unit as a whole.
Makes Zerg players feel real good that Blizzard is paying attention to the important stuff aka keeping Zerg down.
|
On September 29 2010 17:52 georgir wrote:
How can you say this is NOT super important to fix? The moment one ultra happened to kill 20 scvs all around a PF with 1 strike in a pro game, it was obvious that a hotfix for it was incoming.
No, well, you see I put myself in the position as lead-balance-design-master or whatever, and I set up a priority list, that I am amazed is different than both yours and Blizzard's own; first actually use the perfect statistics you have on win / representation rates to balance matchups.
Yes, I feel that's more important.
Edit; somehow some stuff dissapeared
|
On September 29 2010 19:25 Lovedrop wrote:Show nested quote +On September 29 2010 19:22 Pulimuli wrote:On September 29 2010 16:43 Dommk wrote:On September 29 2010 16:23 mierin wrote:
Okay...roach is 2 supply vs. 4 thor supply. Somebody PLEASE tell me how that's even remotely balanced. 3 roaches vs. a thor is like Marth vs. Bowser and DK....it just isn't happening. A zealot is 2 supply. 2 Zealots vs a Thor doesn't exactly pan out either. In the same vain, Colossus is 8 supply and a Colossus vs 2 Thors is just as bad as 2 zealots vs a Thor. you guys should actually play the game before making these posts. a Thor is 6 supply but yes, it beats most protoss units except for the voidray and immortals On another note of "playing the game", 1 Thor > 1 Immortal. Test it out yourself.
Yes, you should play game, instead of acting like immortals cost the same as thors.
You could also point out that 1 immortal > 1 marine... like it means something.
Edit: The colossus is also 6 supply, not 8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
