Original OP by Glacius0 who gathered the info in the other thread:
As can be seen in the patch note discussion of this thread ultralisk splash damage was changed to fix a bug.
This so-called "bug-fix" isn't so much a fix as it is a huge nerf. The splash range was as blizzard intended, but the unit radius +2 from unit center rule got a bit too crazy once they allowed you to target buildings with it. Now they changed it to +2 from the front of the target which fixes the "bug" but effectively nerfs splash range against bigger sized units. Smaller units go largely unaffected. Tanks are also affected, but not as much as they are medium-sized.This last sentence is wrong. See edit on the bottom of this post.
Result?
Ultralisks are no longer a valid counter to Thors.
Here are some images to demonstrate (tested on burrowed ultras, as this was easier to test): + Show Spoiler +
Prepatch:
Post-patch:
Post-patch worst situation (easily achieved with minor micro in case of thors):
Tests in the unit tester conclude: - One thor barely beats one ultra with no micro. - Groups of more than 6-7 thors vs equal amount of ultras with no micro can win. The bigger the group the better. Focus fire significantly helps Thors as ultras are unable to do something similar. - Chances of thors winning significantly increase with chokes. Blocking a choke with thors is easy as they are big. - Worst finding: If you spread out your thors even a little bit, they will receive almost no splash. In this situation thors effectively counter ultras now. It gets worse if you also target fire.
Here's the result with proper focus fire and minor spreading (I only moved one thor forward a bit): + Show Spoiler +
Starting position:
Result:
Cool would not have won his tourney match with this patch. Not because SCVs won't die anymore when a PF gets attacked, but because Thors receive significantly less splash damage from ultras.
Fixing a bug with a nerf doesn't sound like a very good idea to me. Additional testing is recommended if anyone is up to it. I did not test much with upgrades, except for getting 6 armor on ultras and seeing how unupgraded thors still counter them if you spread micro. Also I only tested a little while on 1.1 before patching to 1.1.1.
Important edit:
Some additional research from Raketti in this post shows that it's worse than I thought. It seems splash got reduced for smaller units too.
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
While the biggest impact is on large units like thors, the nerf actually seems to affect all units.
Keep it civil, excessive whining and complaining might result in warnings or bans, you have been warned.
I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
Good post though, hopefully blizzard will rework this so Ultras are once again thor destroying machines (I mean 1 vs 1 an ultra should win, thats ridiculous...) especially after the damage nerf in 1.1, and now the splash nerf in 1.1.1
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
The building imba splash wasn't intended. Normal splash was fine, afaik. (unless I missed another blue post)
@Piski I think most people expected that only the splash on buildings was the problem (ie hitting SCV's repairing a PF). This hotfix however also influenced how Ultras deal with units. Therefor it is considered a nerf, and is upsetting people
No 1.1 dident change their splash but added it to hit buildings as well, now that was to stong so instead of just fixing it against buildings they nerfed ultras overall also against units, now they are alot worse then before 1.1. (less dmg and less splash range)
Awesome, psi storm splash nerfed, ultra splash nerfed, tank splash BUFFED! (talking about patches in the beta till now)
I hope they change this soon, this was totally unnecessary. In the start of the beta, ultras were rarely used, and then blizz buffed them until they were good. Now they've reduced their usefulness again.
Edit: Is 1.1.1 on US yet, because I'm not getting update
I really thought that having ultras rape units near PF was fine. It gave you a reason to not let the ultra get near your buildings, and it gave zergs a reason to focus fire a barracks or command center with ultras when there were still other units around. It still took like 3 ultras to kill a PF, and two of the ultras would die
Hmm, I wonder why they decided to change the whole mechanic instead of just buildings, Was it intended or did they just hastily attempt to fix it but actually screw up the mechanic? I guess we'll find out soon enough, blue posts willing.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
No, that's the point: Ultra splash on units was the same in 1.0 and 1.1.
well iam tending to no race but seeing the ultra change i feel its some way in the right way because even in the past the splash was like the bulding thing but just against units wich i cant understand why hitting units behind a unit far away if u are a melee unit. Maybe blizzard didnt realised the effect of the ultralisk because u need to really look at it to see it and just saw it obvious in the 1.1.0 patch and changed it to what it should be in there eyes. So u could say u got an unfair advantage over other ppl and if blizzard takes it away u cry and make accusations against blizzard wich is really dishonoring
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
No. Ultras had a different attack on buildings but the same splash on units as in 1.1. Now it seems their whole splash got nerfed instead of splash on buildings.
On September 28 2010 23:45 Nightcrawler wrote: So u could say u got an unfair advantage over other ppl and if blizzard takes it away u cry and make accusations against blizzard wich is really dishonoring
Yeah, it was so unfair that no one had chance against Zerg, seeing as Zerg won pretty much all the tourneys.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
That is the thing here, they didnt just revert. They made it weaker then it was pre patch 1.1, and didnt remove the damage nerf either. So basicly its a dual nerf from before patch 1.1
I like the change in general because to me it felt like game over if I let the zerg get into tier 3 without being crippled. And that's just not good. Weak early game and ridiculous lategame is not balance.
However, they should've undone the dmg nerf of 1.1, and obviously the race needs some fixing up in the early game as well.
Thanks for the clarifications ^^ That's a bummer so they slowly nerfed ultras, great. They responed in days to get rid of the building splash thing. Let us see how long it will take them to fix this
Please if you have nothing usefull to don't post or it will get this post locked once again. Don't vent, don't whine, there's the official forumsfor that.
I'd like to re-add my pokeball image again to illustrate ultralisk damage spread pre-post patch.
The red zone is obviously the zone which takes damage. Anything in that zone will take damage. The top half illustrates how attacking a small unit would create a small splash and a large unit would create a large splash. 1.1 added buildings to this and as build (especially a cc) has a very large surface, the aoe zone was huge.
1.1.1 illustrates the damage zone coming from the ultralisk.
On September 28 2010 23:52 parkin wrote: I have faith in Blizzard. They know what they are doing.
People kept saying that, and I kept agreeing. But stuff like this is honestly just scary stupid.
Either way, in the long run, I still believe it. I may not like how they go about it, or their timetable, but I am confident that around a year from now, the game will have very reasonable balance. I just don't want to wait a year = (
Phoenix are bugged as well, I think both of these are probably unintentional and will be hot fixed again as well. It just is sad that this is happening in the middle of the GSL when so much is on the line, but somethings can't be helped. Hope they get these things fixed soon though.
I agree that the change makes Ultras a lot weaker, but nonetheless the way splash is dealt now seems much more consistent to me. Could this not be easily adjusted by increasing splash range somewhat? What do you guys think!
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
That is the thing here, they didnt just revert. They made it weaker then it was pre patch 1.1, and didnt remove the damage nerf either. So basicly its a dual nerf from before patch 1.1
I'd rather have the ram attack back on buildings quite honestly. This patch seems to be more and more another way to buff terran than a way to help zerg. Ultras were probably one of the only counters to mass mech play. Mutalingbling was ok but once the terran gets past that threshold where they start killing everything as they come in a giant ball then the only thing that could stop them was ultras.
On September 28 2010 23:50 Daedie wrote: I like the change in general because to me it felt like game over if I let the zerg get into tier 3 without being crippled. And that's just not good. Weak early game and ridiculous lategame is not balance.
However, they should've undone the dmg nerf of 1.1, and obviously the race needs some fixing up in the early game as well.
Ya, I feel this too. It's like the zerg will always win if they can get to tier 3 and get ultras and broodlords. However, there are simply too many ways for the terran to kill the zerg before it gets there that they would have to want to lose to for the zerg to get there. IMO buff early game zerg, not so they can win early game, but just so they can survive early game.
I think this was right from blizz, the splash effect of the ultra was always stupid mechanic. That being said, it's a bit silly to not atleast bring the 15+25 back and take a look at how ultras do after that.
I'd assume they'd need to be slightly buffed after that still, though I'd think for the TvZ MU, nerfing the ultra and buffing zerg gameplay up to t3 would balance it(imo ultras were(are?) too strong, while the road to getting them is too steep, meaning with zerg being powerhouse lategame, terran had to be powerhouse early game, but both sides would need to be nerfed/buffed to be balanced through the MU).
On September 28 2010 23:53 Croz wrote: Please if you have nothing usefull to don't post or it will get this post locked once again. Don't vent, don't whine, there's the official forumsfor that.
I'd like to re-add my pokeball image again to illustrate ultralisk damage spread pre-post patch.
The red zone is obviously the zone which takes damage. Anything in that zone will take damage. The top half illustrates how attacking a small unit would create a small splash and a large unit would create a large splash. 1.1 added buildings to this and as build (especially a cc) has a very large surface, the aoe zone was huge.
1.1.1 illustrates the damage zone coming from the ultralisk.
Are you sure that the 1.1.1 picture is correct? I was of the impression that splash also affected units "in front" of the attacked one as long as they stand pretty close. Which would mean that an Utra is slightly more effective whenever enemy units stand in a "concave" than is suggested by the image.
On September 28 2010 23:57 Daxten wrote: This wont change Ultra vs Thor at all I think, since with ~5-6 Ultras Thors are still dead when u get a good surround
Well, if you read the post in the OP, now ultras can't splash thors which are spaced out and since thors beat ultras 1v1, now you need more ultras than thors to win.
What I don't get is, marauder costs more than stalker and beats stalker 1v1, reason: stalker is more versatile and can shoot air. Thors beat ultras 1v1 at the same cost and thors are more versatile, can shoot air, and are tier 2.5.
On September 28 2010 23:57 Daxten wrote: This wont change Ultra vs Thor at all I think, since with ~5-6 Ultras Thors are still dead when u get a good surround
Key phrase is "when you get a good surround." Before ultras already required more micro then thors and how they require even more because they can't engage one on one any more. The thors will just a move into the ultralisks and kill them. Now imagine if you have scvs there repairing. That would be just awful.
On September 28 2010 23:57 Daxten wrote: This wont change Ultra vs Thor at all I think, since with ~5-6 Ultras Thors are still dead when u get a good surround
You do know ultras and thors cost the same... if you did read the first post you would se thors win by alot now its not even close.
Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
No, in patch 1.0 the ultralisk splash radius was increased by the unit size, but against buildings it used the ram attack. In 1.1 it used the same attack on units and buildings, but due to the big size of buildings, their splash in that setting became quite ridiculous. So now, in 1.1.1, the splash radius is no more increased by the target's radius.
Some numbers on the effect:
pre-1.1.1 -> 1.1.1
Against Marines: splash range: 2.375 -> 2 area covered: 17.3 -> 12.1 ( -30% )
Against Marauders: splash range: 2.5625 -> 2 area covered: 19.6 -> 11.6 ( -41% )
Against Thors: splash range: 2.8125 -> 2 area covered: 22.7 -> 10.5 ( -54% )
Against Siege Tanks: splash range: 2.875 -> 2 area covered: 23.6 -> 10.2 ( -57% )
Note how although the splash radius is now constant, the area of splash decreases for bigger units as the primary target blocks more area.
I am pretty sure that a unit is affected by splash if its center is in the splash area. As a consequence, if two Thors are spaced in such a way that a marine fits in between, the second Thor will receive no splash damage. Therefore the the -xx% numbers are to be taken with caution, as the number of units inside the splash range is important. However in randomly arranged units, thats the average reduction of the splash.
All in all this is a rather big nerf of the ultralisks splash damage, especially for a bug fix which should only remove unintended behaviour and not affect regular play. Especially as there is an easy fix for this problem by giving the ultralisk two attacks, one against units and one against buildings, which are identical except that for attacks against buildings the splash area is not increased.
i´m no zerg, but a protoss, so i dont really care about ultras killing thors. but what i find pretty not consequent, is that before this fix, it finally made sense to attack the pf with its ridicolous priority. but now, the ultra is nerfed, but the pf is still high priority. so they are op again, this is what i dont understand. when some terrans get owned because the damage model of a unit doesnt work the way it is supposed to be, it will get hotfixed. but the pf problem is exisiting since early stages of the beta. this is what i really dont get.
On September 28 2010 23:52 parkin wrote: I have faith in Blizzard. They know what they are doing.
People kept saying that, and I kept agreeing. But stuff like this is honestly just scary stupid.
Either way, in the long run, I still believe it. I may not like how they go about it, or their timetable, but I am confident that around a year from now, the game will have very reasonable balance. I just don't want to wait a year = (
I was trying to be sarcastic.
I dont think think Blizzard are very competent (dont ban me plz). They were testing the patch for over a month and didnt discover this.
If they keep doing things like this zerg will simply be a joke race that you choose out if you want to humiliate your opponent with because its such a huge handicap to play them.
On September 28 2010 23:53 Croz wrote: Please if you have nothing usefull to don't post or it will get this post locked once again. Don't vent, don't whine, there's the official forumsfor that.
I'd like to re-add my pokeball image again to illustrate ultralisk damage spread pre-post patch.
The red zone is obviously the zone which takes damage. Anything in that zone will take damage. The top half illustrates how attacking a small unit would create a small splash and a large unit would create a large splash. 1.1 added buildings to this and as build (especially a cc) has a very large surface, the aoe zone was huge.
1.1.1 illustrates the damage zone coming from the ultralisk.
Are you sure that the 1.1.1 picture is correct? I was of the impression that splash also affected units "in front" of the attacked one as long as they stand pretty close. Which would mean that an Utra is slightly more effective whenever enemy units stand in a "concave" than is suggested by the image.
I'm not sure... I did update my picture based on a screenshot delivered by someone in the other post. + Show Spoiler +
I'm not quite sure what you mean btw. Mind painting it yourself?
It seems the splash before was rather illogical. Why on earth would it originate from the unit itself. Now the splash is far more intuitive 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.
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 don't have very much faith in blizzard to fix these things. They take their sweet time before doing so when they talk about buffing zerg.
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
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.
This, unless they plan on rather than buffing ultras, buffing early/mid game for zerg, which I think would bring us a lot closer to balance, since you can't really balance the early/mid game and then ultras just spasm slaughter everything late game anyway.
But about SCV's since someone mentioned that above me, it's really a shame that blizz didn't take this chance to hotfix scvs too, so the repair mechanic makes their targeting prio equal(or equal+1) to what they are repairing(and if a melee unit can't path to his target, that after x sec of trying he starts attacking the thing blocking him).
I'd rather have the game balanced than logical because there is so much others illogical Stracraft. The way splash was pre-patch actually made ultras splash enough to make them cost-effective once you get the flank. Now, despite a very good flank, a ball of units will easily decimate ultras.
And tweaking other methods to bring the game to equilibrium can be more troublesome.
On September 28 2010 23:50 Daedie wrote: I like the change in general because to me it felt like game over if I let the zerg get into tier 3 without being crippled. And that's just not good. Weak early game and ridiculous lategame is not balance.
I agree but I mean... it has swung too far in the other direction. Imagine a late game scenario where the terran has mostly thors with a few vikings sprinkled in. With ultras doing damage like this to a group of thors what can zerg even do.
While obviously this isn't the best time for Ultras to receive a nerf, really Ultras were fairly "off" with their splash for a long time. It's just that it wasn't as obvious before because Zergs often lost early, and when they won late it seemed they were way ahead anyway.
For instance, immortals are supposed to be the no brainer counter to ultras in a perfect vacuum right? Well guess what, if your immortals clumped (easy to do with range 5) vs ultras, the ultras would often win pre-patch 1.1.1 because 2 or 3 rows of immortals would get hit by splash... which is essentially giving Ultras the same range as immortals, plush splash! Design-wise, that wasn't right.
When it comes to Terran, Thors are a little different since they are good against air and ground... and hellions destroy zerglings so insanely easily. Siegetanks being what they are. And Planetary Fortresses are fairly ridiculous because of the repair rate. So I definitely understand Zergs up in arms over the nerf of the Ultra. But wouldn't everyone rather a balanced game such that Zerg have a chance of winning even if they weren't way ahead?
Seriously though, I think Blizzard needs to get Zerg right without having to give them a broken tier 3 unit. The balance needs to be more throughout the game, IMO. So again, this is a fairly terrible time for a nerf, but I think it was coming sooner or later anyway. Now we just need to see some more adjustments that balance the game in a smoother way.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
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 fully agree.
It is a good step to make the game more logical, and it was necessary to fix Ultras vs buildings.
But if you consider that Zergs have a rough time now, that Ultras were not OP before vs units(they have a very limited purpose, so of course they were good at it and 5 dmg vs light is not really strong anyway) and that there is nothing to compensate, this feels really wrong for Zerg players. They didn't even revert the damage-nerf...
It would be nice to see some comment by Blizzard on that issue.
On September 29 2010 00:16 JustPlay wrote: Except now thors muder ultralisks with even the slightest bit of micro and zerg has no answer to thors on the ground or in the air.
if thors are spread just surround with zergling if they are in a attack with ultras? ultra-ling is still an amazing unit mix.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Stimmed mauraders? They can kite ultras pretty easily.
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
I'm confused why this is also a nerf vs smaller units like marines and zerglings. I would have thought that since the units' radii are so small, the new constant splash size would end up being larger vs them. Was there a minimum size on the old splash radius?
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Marauders? lol
Zerglings are cost effective when you're not sending half your scv-line to repair. Each melee unit requires a certain space to attack, which gets nullified by each consecutive SCV. Oh and zergling mass vs. Thor mass the win will go to the Thor (how shocking...)
On September 29 2010 00:16 frucisky wrote: I'd rather have the game balanced than logical because there is so much others illogical Stracraft. The way splash was pre-patch actually made ultras splash enough to make them cost-effective once you get the flank. Now, despite a very good flank, a ball of units will easily decimate ultras.
And tweaking other methods to bring the game to equilibrium can be more troublesome.
It's poor design to rely on one unit to solve problems. I'd rather have nerfed T3 and fix other issues than have what people argue to be extremely effective T3. Blizzard's goal shouldn't be just to have a game that resembles balanced because there's 50% win ratios. It's a game that is balanced through player skill at every instance in the game.
Plus things happen way to fast in SC2. They need to bring this pace down.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Stimmed marauders rape ultras
And you cant counter thors with zerglings since terran can always add some hellions
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Thor has range 7 for ground attack and a ridiculous air range... the fact that an Ultra is a ground only melee unit is the reason for it to be able to counter Thor.
Also, any time you engage an enemy attack which has an AoE attack, you are supposed to have your units spread out to minimise the damage. If you don't then it's your fault is it not?
In any case, Terran does have counters to Ultralisks... tanks and stimmed marauders work pretty well. Not to mention, ghosts with snipe are also very potent since they are not affected by armour. If you want to be pedantic you could include banshees/battlecruisers as a counter to Ultras.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Except now thors muder ultralisks with even the slightest bit of micro and zerg has no answer to thors on the ground or in the air.
Post some replays maybe to support this claim? all i see is whining, and no factual evidence or actual gameplay
Try it out in unit tester and you;ll see how cost inefficient ultras are even with a perfect flank. And put that together with all the harass a zerg has to survive to get that many ultras.
On September 29 2010 00:16 frucisky wrote: I'd rather have the game balanced than logical because there is so much others illogical Stracraft. The way splash was pre-patch actually made ultras splash enough to make them cost-effective once you get the flank. Now, despite a very good flank, a ball of units will easily decimate ultras.
And tweaking other methods to bring the game to equilibrium can be more troublesome.
Agree. You can find so many illlogical things in Starcraft so I see no point of talking about what is logical and what is not as long as it works well and is not OP.
Ultras were fine before patch (I am not talking about PF bug), they were useful but nothing super strong. They died so fast vs. pretty much everything. I think now they may be underpowered, but we gonna see how it plays out.
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
I'm confused why this is also a nerf vs smaller units like marines and zerglings. I would have thought that since the units' radii are so small, the new constant splash size would end up being larger vs them. Was there a minimum size on the old splash radius?
It's because the splash originated from the unit. This means it's within the blob already. So it hits more units. Now the splash is from the ultra so there is all that area around the first unit/ultra that it doesn't hit. If the ultra could hit the unit within the blob instead of the side than it would most likely be the same/better.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
You can quote yourself 10 times, it would still be false. Thor AoE has a radius of 0.5 and you can negate even that by simply letting your units spread by themselves.
On September 29 2010 00:20 SwampZero wrote: and its not even t3 or t3.5, its just t2.5.
basically thor has literally everything. It's the sc2 shaman.
I just want to add, by making just one ball of a single unit, the thor, terran can counter almost every possible food combination for the zerg. Mass mutas would get rocked, hydras, roaches, zerglings, infestors, they all lose. Ultras along with broodlords used to be the only units that could beat massed thors. If ultras can no longer perform this role (which I don't know I haven't been able to test it yet) I honestly just don't get what they are thinking.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
And it has anti air aswell. 12ultra's can get killed by 1banshee lol (no, i am not saying it WILL happen, i am saying it CAN happen)
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
I'm confused why this is also a nerf vs smaller units like marines and zerglings. I would have thought that since the units' radii are so small, the new constant splash size would end up being larger vs them. Was there a minimum size on the old splash radius?
It's because the splash originated from the unit. This means it's within the blob already. So it hits more units. Now the splash is from the ultra so there is all that area around the first unit/ultra that it doesn't hit. If the ultra could hit the unit within the blob instead of the side than it would most likely be the same/better.
Ah yeah. That actually makes perfect sense, thanks.
To turn this discussion into something usefull, I suggest everyone who thinks the issue is real to post it on the Blizzard Technical Support forums. For eu the link is http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/11815/. Let's make it count !
Update : there was a repsonse from Krinskal (blue poster) on the forum about the new ultralisk issue :
As long as no official statement is published by us, I can only say that we should refer to the Ultralisk behaviour as game mechanics, not as a bug.
On September 29 2010 00:16 frucisky wrote: I'd rather have the game balanced than logical because there is so much others illogical Stracraft. The way splash was pre-patch actually made ultras splash enough to make them cost-effective once you get the flank. Now, despite a very good flank, a ball of units will easily decimate ultras.
And tweaking other methods to bring the game to equilibrium can be more troublesome.
It's poor design to rely on one unit to solve problems. I'd rather have nerfed T3 and fix other issues than have what people argue to be extremely effective T3. Blizzard's goal shouldn't be just to have a game that resembles balanced because there's 50% win ratios. It's a game that is balanced through player skill at every instance in the game.
Plus things happen way to fast in SC2. They need to bring this pace down.
With the proviso that T2 and T3 don't take an eternity to tech to for Zerg.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
12ultra's can get killed by 1banshee lol (no, i am not saying it WILL happen, i am saying it CAN happen)
No it can't happen.
I don't see how Ultralisk splash damage is now logical and intuitive is a bug/issue.
Yeah, this is a HUGE nerf, and the fact that it gets sold as a bug fix is rather sad. Seriously, this is not at all what Zerg (or any other race for that matter) needs at the moment.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
12ultra's can get killed by 1banshee lol (no, i am not saying it WILL happen, i am saying it CAN happen)
No it can't happen.
I don't see how Ultralisk splash damage is now logical and intuitive is a bug/issue.
Let's not argue semantics whether its a bug. But its a major issue because it made the ultra too cost inefficient to be used against terran.
But haven't played enough so maybe all the claims here may be a bit exaggerated. The point though is that its no time to nerf Zerg.
On September 29 2010 00:27 xs101 wrote: To turn this discussion into something usefull, I suggest everyone who thinks the issue is real to post it on the Blizzard Technical Support forums. For eu the link is http://eu.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/11815/. Let's make it count !
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
I'm confused why this is also a nerf vs smaller units like marines and zerglings. I would have thought that since the units' radii are so small, the new constant splash size would end up being larger vs them. Was there a minimum size on the old splash radius?
All units have a unit radius > 0. Therefore when you add 2 to that non zero value, the radius is larger than just flat out radius 2.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
You are way off.
Top had 15 2-2 thors bunched up into a ball
Cool decides to distract the ball with a lot of lings, banelings, and roaches, THEN throws 10 ultras (1-4) at the Thors. Top completely ignores the ultras until his thors are at pretty much half life, when all the ling, banelings, and roaches are dead. The 14 or so remaining thors (1 died to baneling and lings i believe) proceed to wtfpwn 3 ultras in an instant. However because they were so low on life already, the remaining 7 ultras kill them, losing one more ultra in the process.
On September 29 2010 00:04 SwampZero wrote: Fun fact, the thor has a larger normalized [Surface X Damage] AOE than the Ultralisk right now.
Ultra is radius 2 at 180* for a total surface area of ~25 with 33% damage, so that ends up being 8.25.
Thor is radius 1 at 360* for a total of ~12 with 100% damage, so that ends up being 12. Plus it's AA so the damage ceiling is infinite. plus its ranged.
TL;DR Thor has a more potent AOE attack than the Ultralisk
Quoting again so it sinks in.
Thor has a better AOE attack than the Ultralisk.
It also has a better everything than the Ultralisk....
12ultra's can get killed by 1banshee lol (no, i am not saying it WILL happen, i am saying it CAN happen)
No it can't happen.
I don't see how Ultralisk splash damage is now logical and intuitive is a bug/issue.
Just to make sure, you are talking about logic in a game where there a gigantic spacebugs, aliens that look like robots and humans soar through the universe? Its not about logic here, its about the fact that they were like this from the beta, why change it now when zerg already is in a dire state? I am all for balance but can they fix problems first before making new ones.
That's very very very sad news - I noticed in my games against T today that the Ultras seemed to be significantly weaker against Thors, but I said to myself it was because of my semi-optimal positioning.
That's a real bummer - pre-patch getting Ultras out was the only possible way to fight Mass Thors at all since all others Units just evaporate or are easily countered by other very cheap Terran Units (Lings -> Hellions, Broodlords -> Vikings). The Splash against buildings was ridicoulus and needed to be fixed, but that's an extremly high cost we pay... I don't see any Z unit combination that's able to counter Mass Thor / Hellion any longer if they keep the changes to the AoE against units.
Thanks to the efforts of Carnac and Raketti, we got pretty much of an picture, of what happened to Ultralisks in the 2 last patches. It's beyond doubt, that the so called "bug", of attacking a building with an Ultralisk and seeing 20 SCVs in the whole perimeter of the building dying, should be addressed in some way. It's now claimed, that Ultralisks are rended useless, and somehow I remember those claims were also there directly after the patch 1.1. based on the reduced damage. OK, it's obvious from the pictures taken by Raketti that with the 1.1.1 the splash got reduced also in it's radius. Opposite to Thors Ultras are really fast moving units. They also do splash. Maybe after the change in the way the splash is geting applied, there should be an increase to damage done (to prepatch-1.1-level) or the radius should be slightly increased (by .5 or 1, maybe wiht an lower damage coefficient, so Ultras will have, like siege tanks, 3 coefficients). Those are ideas, those are things one can talk about...
...but. Despite the warning of the OP, the fellow posters continue to QQ instead of contributing. Really folks, I don't get it! Is it so difficult to you to be productive? I mean, look at the Koreans. The moment I write these lines, there are 6 Zerg in the TOP 10 of the Korean ladder. If one looks at the US and EU ladders... Zero... (Zerg=Zero-"o"+"g" ). /irony One can ask himself: can it be, that Zerg is simply to complicated for people living in cultures, that consider fast food being appropriate nutrition? /irony. Please, use your heads. Bring your skill in playing your beloved race to the maximum, spot the weknesses, call them by their name, contribute to the forums, be creative with your ideas, but always respecting the players of the other races, and maybe then we could look forward to a better game. It's a pitty, you have to do partialy the job of the game designers, but hey, we are a community and they are also just human...
Ultralisks needed to be nerfed eventually but I don't see how nerfing them and then buffing nothing is anything other than an attack on the remaining zerg players. I quit zerg a while ago beacuse the race is complete garbage in SC2. They are the race I will play eventually, but I don't see how anyone can play them right now when T and P are so much more fun.
On September 29 2010 00:27 Zerksys wrote: What counters thor hellion now other than brood lords which get 1 shot by 5 vikings.
Mutalisks until he makes 5 vikings or remembers what marines/turrets are.
On September 29 2010 00:27 frucisky wrote: Has anyone tested this btw... If you A move a bunch of ultras into a repaired PF, do the ultras manage to attack the PF over the line of SCVs?
So, um... how do you deal with Thors as Zerg now? Massed Magic Box Mutas? Those will lose cost for cost. Zerglings? Blue Flame Hellions deal with that. Hydras? Same thing, plus tanks. Roaches? They would work, you just need a lot of them. Brood Lords seem like the only real solution, and as we all know, they get trashed by Vikings, which can go Ovie hunting after. Is the only answer to just have such a huge army that there's no way Terran can win? Is there something I'm missing?
EDIT: Ultras should be much weaker against Stalkers+Colossi as well, because their splash radius got nerfed. That's all there is to it. Don't know if it's broken, though, and not going to make the judgment.
Glad to see my thread back. It was the first thread I ever made (been mostly lurking since start of sc2 beta though) so it has sentimental value (ok maybe not ).
I've been thinking why the splash change affects small units so much. 1. The radius of the circle is no longer extended by the size of the unit (obvious) 2. The circle starts from the front of the ultralisk, which in turn a. puts the ultralisk deeper inside his own splash circle, leaving less surface area b. puts the splash circle more around the ultralisk, instead of in front, where your enemy usually is.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Equal resources of Marauders slaughter Ultras.
This appears to be a triple nerf of Ultras. Blizzard nerfed damage in 1.1. The splash in 1.1 was 2 + r but I believe it extended from the edge of the target so it was in effect 2 + r + r. They nerfed both the range and where the attack originates.
On September 29 2010 00:36 Glacius0 wrote: Glad to see my thread back. It was the first thread I ever made (been mostly lurking since start of sc2 beta though) so it has sentimental value (ok maybe not ).
I've been thinking why the splash change affects small units so much. 1. The radius of the circle is no longer extended by the size of the unit (obvious) 2. The circle starts from the front of the ultralisk, which in turn a. puts the ultralisk deeper inside his own splash circle, leaving less surface area b. puts the splash circle more around the ultralisk, instead of in front, where your enemy usually is.
So #2 means - great! Ultras are awesome against zerglings and zealots!
OMG, making ultras not OP, what is Blizz thinking?! Obviously they should do splash damage to every enemy unit on the map, I mean it's only fair because zerg can make a ton of drones whenever they want and thinking about that makes my brain hurt.
My own short test concludes that I am able to hit a few more marines than on his picture (but still less than 1.1 I think) but it does indeed seem that siege tanks are affected similarly to thors. Siege tanks only seem smaller but the selection circle size is actually the same.
I'm confused why this is also a nerf vs smaller units like marines and zerglings. I would have thought that since the units' radii are so small, the new constant splash size would end up being larger vs them. Was there a minimum size on the old splash radius?
All units have a unit radius > 0. Therefore when you add 2 to that non zero value, the radius is larger than just flat out radius 2.
Oh wait, is that how it worked? I guess I thought it was a multiple of the targeted unit radius, not just an addition. So it used to be the targeted unit radius +2 extra radius, and now it's just a flat 2 radius regardless? That would explain it, thanks.
On September 29 2010 00:39 NATO wrote: OMG, making ultras not OP, what is Blizz thinking?! Obviously they should do splash damage to every enemy unit on the map, I mean it's only fair because zerg can make a ton of drones whenever they want and thinking about that makes my brain hurt.
What the hell are you smoking? You should be warned for such trash talking.
On September 29 2010 00:39 NATO wrote: OMG, making ultras not OP, what is Blizz thinking?! Obviously they should do splash damage to every enemy unit on the map, I mean it's only fair because zerg can make a ton of drones whenever they want and thinking about that makes my brain hurt.
If you're going to ignore the obvious intent and flaws of this nerf, and proceed to be snarky about it without contributing anything intelligent, then I don't see how you are helping the discussion.
On September 29 2010 00:39 NATO wrote: OMG, making ultras not OP, what is Blizz thinking?! Obviously they should do splash damage to every enemy unit on the map, I mean it's only fair because zerg can make a ton of drones whenever they want and thinking about that makes my brain hurt.
On September 29 2010 00:32 Damaskinos wrote: Thanks to the efforts of Carnac and Raketti, we got pretty much of an picture, of what happened to Ultralisks in the 2 last patches. It's beyond doubt, that the so called "bug", of attacking a building with an Ultralisk and seeing 20 SCVs in the whole perimeter of the building dying, should be addressed in some way. It's now claimed, that Ultralisks are rended useless, and somehow I remember those claims were also there directly after the patch 1.1. based on the reduced damage. OK, it's obvious from the pictures taken by Raketti that with the 1.1.1 the splash got reduced also in it's radius. Opposite to Thors Ultras are really fast moving units. They also do splash. Maybe after the change in the way the splash is geting applied, there should be an increase to damage done (to prepatch-1.1-level) or the radius should be slightly increased (by .5 or 1, maybe wiht an lower damage coefficient, so Ultras will have, like siege tanks, 3 coefficients). Those are ideas, those are things one can talk about...
...but. Despite the warning of the OP, the fellow posters continue to QQ instead of contributing. Really folks, I don't get it! Is it so difficult to you to be productive? I mean, look at the Koreans. The moment I write these lines, there are 6 Zerg in the TOP 10 of the Korean ladder. If one looks at the US and EU ladders... Zero... (Zerg=Zero-"o"+"g" ). /irony One can ask himself: can it be, that Zerg is simply to complicated for people living in cultures, that consider fast food being appropriate nutrition? /irony. Please, use your heads. Bring your skill in playing your beloved race to the maximum, spot the weknesses, call them by their name, contribute to the forums, be creative with your ideas, but always respecting the players of the other races, and maybe then we could look forward to a better game. It's a pitty, you have to do partialy the job of the game designers, but hey, we are a community and they are also just human...
Have fun discussing
Which totally explains why there is only 1 zerg left in the gsl. Stats are going to vary region by region but the gsl is international. What you said can also apply to terrans. The instant the planetary fortress repair was nerfed terrans began complaining. Within days it was fixed. Understand that this is very frustrating for zerg players who have been commenting for weeks about how underpowered their early to mid game is.
On September 29 2010 00:07 ensis wrote: i´m no zerg, but a protoss, so i dont really care about ultras killing thors. but what i find pretty not consequent, is that before this fix, it finally made sense to attack the pf with its ridicolous priority. but now, the ultra is nerfed, but the pf is still high priority. so they are op again, this is what i dont understand. when some terrans get owned because the damage model of a unit doesnt work the way it is supposed to be, it will get hotfixed. but the pf problem is exisiting since early stages of the beta. this is what i really dont get.
Some people have Planetary Fortresses, some people have Spin Crawlers and other ones have Photon Canons. Just in case nobody noticed, that terran is the only race, without stationary ground defence (the have only anti-air, missile turrets). And dont forget: PF = no MULES, no Scan. Thanks for your attention Please excuse for being out of the Posts-Theme
On September 29 2010 00:07 ensis wrote: i´m no zerg, but a protoss, so i dont really care about ultras killing thors. but what i find pretty not consequent, is that before this fix, it finally made sense to attack the pf with its ridicolous priority. but now, the ultra is nerfed, but the pf is still high priority. so they are op again, this is what i dont understand. when some terrans get owned because the damage model of a unit doesnt work the way it is supposed to be, it will get hotfixed. but the pf problem is exisiting since early stages of the beta. this is what i really dont get.
Some people have Planetary Fortresses, some people have Spin Crawlers and other ones have Photon Canons. Just in case nobody noticed, that terran is the only race, without stationary ground defence (the have only anti-air, missile turrets). And dont forget: PF = no MULES, no Scan. Thanks for your attention Please excuse for being out of the Posts-Theme
This is overshadowed by the fact that bunkers are nearly free
On September 29 2010 00:42 xs101 wrote: Okay I made a thread about the ultralisk bug splash damage, anyone who can explain the issue better than myself is more than welcome.
On September 29 2010 00:07 ensis wrote: i´m no zerg, but a protoss, so i dont really care about ultras killing thors. but what i find pretty not consequent, is that before this fix, it finally made sense to attack the pf with its ridicolous priority. but now, the ultra is nerfed, but the pf is still high priority. so they are op again, this is what i dont understand. when some terrans get owned because the damage model of a unit doesnt work the way it is supposed to be, it will get hotfixed. but the pf problem is exisiting since early stages of the beta. this is what i really dont get.
Some people have Planetary Fortresses, some people have Spin Crawlers and other ones have Photon Canons. Just in case nobody noticed, that terran is the only race, without stationary ground defence (the have only anti-air, missile turrets). And dont forget: PF = no MULES, no Scan. Thanks for your attention Please excuse for being out of the Posts-Theme
I don't mind if Terran has a planetary fortress to take the place of static ground defense. I do have a problem if I send an entire army at it, and it does nothing to it due to the repair ability. This is relatively true for bunkers as well.
It's not that protoss or zerg doesn't have an auto-repair ability. It is that the auto-repair ability is too strong when used in conjunction with PFs or bunkers.
If I have to actually add storm or ultras JUST to take out your planetary fortress BY itself with SCVs so I don't lose my entire army, then that is imbalanced.
Mutas are never cost effective against thors, try it in the unit tester. 20 mutas barely take down 5 thors, with magic box, so thats 2000 2000 versus 1500 1000
On September 29 2010 00:43 Zerksys wrote: Which totally explains why there is only 1 zerg left in the gsl.
There is one zerg left because he has been the only zerg good enough to win in his match on the day. It REALLY bugs me when people belittle player skill by talking about imbalance. I'm not denying a possibility of imbalance but you can't just take a "stat" and make a conclusion without looking at each individual game. That's just terrible logic.
This topic is about Ultras splash. Let's keep it there.
I use ultras a lot, and I'm going to reserve judgement until I can actually try them out. But from what I see it isn't going to change very much.
No offense to people here but there are not many occasions where my ultras are literally hitting a big tight ball of thors or marines, and having splash damage that deep is not usually an issue really. Most of the time infantry is in the process of kiting, and tends to flatten out. The image comparing thor damage in that image it is barely even changed. The damage against buildings is still better than it was pre 1.1. So why complain?
Zerg's problems go much deeper into the early game and some minor splash radius on a super late game unit is the least of zerg's problems. Seriously, there are too many people here getting enraged about things they barely know anything about.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
Terran players not complaining about the tank damage nerf? Which forum are you in?
Terran players not complaining about magic box mutas because 400/400 worth of mutas barely killing 300/200 worth of thor is not the definition of cost effectiveness.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: 1.tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
2.Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
3.I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
1.Yea, its not like tanks can siege or anything and got the biggest range in the game so they kill before banelings even come close 2.wow marauders lose to 3units (2that cost a lot of gass) how dare they! 3.Where have you been since that magic box thing was found? go to the battlenet forums there is a lot of whining about magic box.
On September 28 2010 23:52 SwampZero wrote: Sure, it's a nerf, but now all AOE units in the game function in the same way instead of ultras being the odd one now.
Game's more consistent now, and you always gotta be consistent before you start balancing, or else shit like this exact situation happen.
I actually agree with this sentiment. However, they did it in the middle of the GSL. The semi-finals are tomorrow, and if Cool loses this game by making Ultras and then they don't perform the way he thought they would because Blizzard didn't SAY ANYTHING ABOUT IT, then I imagine the rage will just be crazy uncontrollable. You'd have to basically lock down the forums.
Edit: PLEASE keep the discussion centered on this change and not the developers, their mothers, or Korean vs US zerg or you're going to get this thread locked again and do a disservice to players everywhere.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
1) Tanks are not rendered useless against baneling. Hell, tanks are one of the best units against banelings. Right up there with marauder.
2) You need 19 banelings to kill a command center, assuming you didn't get an attack upgrade. That is 19 zerglings (25*19 = 475) plus the cost of turning into banelings (25*19 for mins and gas) for a total of 950mins/475gas. And the planetary fortress can kill banelings.
3) Ultras were counterable before. If it takes ultras AND infestors to take on a proper MM army, then you have some balance issues there, buddy.
4) Mutas do not work against thors in equal cost, magic box or not. I don't know where you are getting this info.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Stimmed marauders rape ultras
And you cant counter thors with zerglings since terran can always add some hellions
This type of logic is flawed. If he has mostly thors and no hellions. You DO want to use zerglings, as zerglings destroy thors hard. If and when he starts adding hellions is when you start considering less zerglings, pre emptively avoiding unit "A" when unit "A" would be effective because unit "B" may be there is a bad idea.
eg: "I can't use banshees against zerg because he might have some hydralisks". I'm sure you would agree that this kind of logic is flawed.
I figured the ultra splash on buildings was a bug. In my mind, ultras are the counter to tanks, not really thors. If the opponent starts using ultras en masse, I get thors with 250mm cannon, if I'm a mech focused player.
Also, some players have been saying broodlords + corrupters are the superior zerg endgame vs mech, they are close. Its broodlords + mutalisks. Mutalisks are very effective vs vikings, more so than corrupters. Hydralisks are good to have too.
Mutas do not work against thors in equal cost, magic box or not. I don't know where you are getting this info.
In equal cost perhaps not, but a thor without marine support dies very quickly to mutalisks. Massing mutalisks and then getting like 10 banelings for when he pushes out is hyper effective.
On September 29 2010 00:54 HiHiByeBye wrote: please remember that zerg can expand easier b4 terran hit critical mass of thors.... and you should compare build times too....
Not only is this off topic. It's also total nonsense.
On September 29 2010 00:43 Zerksys wrote: Which totally explains why there is only 1 zerg left in the gsl.
There is one zerg left because he has been the only zerg good enough to win in his match on the day. It REALLY bugs me when people belittle player skill by talking about imbalance. I'm not denying a possibility of imbalance but you can't just take a "stat" and make a conclusion without looking at each individual game. That's just terrible logic.
This topic is about Ultras splash. Let's keep it there.
Fair enough but lots of 'stats' add up. Top 200 lists for all 3 regions? TL Open #1, 2 TvT semifinals? Those were just the top of my head. The General forum is basically a list of 'stats' which goes on and on.
You can cover your ears and shake your head about conclusions drawn from one 'stat' but the weight of evidence is against you.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
No they arnt whining about those because they arnt issues.
Im sorry to blow your balloon, but terran did complain a lot when zerg discovered just last patch that ultras could wipe out an entire PF repairing platoon of scv...
The patch fixing it came one week later... giving a huge (unintended?) blow to the ultralisk splash dmg to other units.
Mind you how the priority system bugs out the attacking melee units AI so much that it takes a huge zerg army/ ridiculous apm(manualy target every single scv) simply to take on said PF ? Something buggish for which zergs lobbyed for a while w/o even an aknowledgement of the issue as of now.
Can't we zerg now try to bring the new ultralisk issue to the devs. ?
PS: Im sorry but if I can toss banelings into your command centers unpunished, you deserve to loose imo.
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
Oh and just FYI, zerglings do not rape thors. Yeah, if you let them surround one, but if they get the mass of thors in a ball, zerglings do jack shit to them. Especially if there's an scv or ten in there on autorepair. Thors shoot pretty fast, and one-hit zerglings.
I just tested ultras in the unit tester several times, and it actually seems extremely similar to how it was pre-1.1 vs thors. Im thinking we may be overreacting a bit.
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
I agree - they probably looked at it as the easiest way to fix the bug. Instead of having two different splash effects on one unit attack, replace the "broken" one with the fixed one.
I actually like the patch. I'm not talking about balance issues tho. Maybe ultras need more dmg or smth so they are usefull and used again. To be honest I don't know how strong ultras were and how bad they are now, so I won't give any opinions about that, BUT I do like the patch because of aesthetic reasons. It just looked ridicolous stupid units dying from ultras who weren't even close by. That was the case when the fought of thors and even more against buildings. They actually should have a splash based on the claws and the this comes pretty close.
So yea, the patch was needed so it doesn't look awful, it may need another patch to balance it out.
On September 28 2010 23:54 rastaban wrote: Phoenix are bugged as well, I think both of these are probably unintentional and will be hot fixed again as well. It just is sad that this is happening in the middle of the GSL when so much is on the line, but somethings can't be helped. Hope they get these things fixed soon though.
A patch is not a hot fix. Things in SC cannot be hot fixed, they must be patched. A hot fix is a change which is enacted without a server shutdown and without people having to change client side game data. All game data in SC2 is client side.
On September 29 2010 00:32 Damaskinos wrote: Thanks to the efforts of Carnac and Raketti, we got pretty much of an picture, of what happened to Ultralisks in the 2 last patches. It's beyond doubt, that the so called "bug", of attacking a building with an Ultralisk and seeing 20 SCVs in the whole perimeter of the building dying, should be addressed in some way. It's now claimed, that Ultralisks are rended useless, and somehow I remember those claims were also there directly after the patch 1.1. based on the reduced damage. OK, it's obvious from the pictures taken by Raketti that with the 1.1.1 the splash got reduced also in it's radius. Opposite to Thors Ultras are really fast moving units. They also do splash. Maybe after the change in the way the splash is geting applied, there should be an increase to damage done (to prepatch-1.1-level) or the radius should be slightly increased (by .5 or 1, maybe wiht an lower damage coefficient, so Ultras will have, like siege tanks, 3 coefficients). Those are ideas, those are things one can talk about...
...but. Despite the warning of the OP, the fellow posters continue to QQ instead of contributing. Really folks, I don't get it! Is it so difficult to you to be productive? I mean, look at the Koreans. The moment I write these lines, there are 6 Zerg in the TOP 10 of the Korean ladder. If one looks at the US and EU ladders... Zero... (Zerg=Zero-"o"+"g" ). /irony One can ask himself: can it be, that Zerg is simply to complicated for people living in cultures, that consider fast food being appropriate nutrition? /irony. Please, use your heads. Bring your skill in playing your beloved race to the maximum, spot the weknesses, call them by their name, contribute to the forums, be creative with your ideas, but always respecting the players of the other races, and maybe then we could look forward to a better game. It's a pitty, you have to do partialy the job of the game designers, but hey, we are a community and they are also just human...
Have fun discussing
Which totally explains why there is only 1 zerg left in the gsl. Stats are going to vary region by region but the gsl is international. What you said can also apply to terrans. The instant the planetary fortress repair was nerfed terrans began complaining. Within days it was fixed. Understand that this is very frustrating for zerg players who have been commenting for weeks about how underpowered their early to mid game is.
I undestand easily what happened. As I am sure you understand, that what was happening to SCV, was simply ridiculous. Maybe Blizzard considered the second to be a broken mechanic, while the first being a more complicated matter. And yes, there is only 1 Zerg left in the 4. And 0 Protoss. Still I think Protoss wont feel underpowered (even though I think Blizzard hited Zelots to strong, or maybe their charge should be a faster available tech now). I also think something must be done with terrans. Maybe reduce Medivac-Healing by 20% AND reduce the attack speed buff provided by Stim to 25%. This is an balance issue. The Ultralisk-Issue now might be also a balance issue. What happened with buildings wasnt one, it was broken (and yes, shame on Blizzard, the didnt seen that forehand). Regarding the Zergs on the GSL: IdrA not being able to scout an expansion, or Check making some really bad decisions in the round of 16 is not Blizzards fault... and so on... but all this goes beyond the scope of the thread. In my first post I gave some Ideas, what can be done, to buff Ultras. I am not sure, if it's necessary, I also thought giving the example with the Korean ladder would be also food for thought. Considering my position I would like to say, that I dont have much more to contribute, and so I will stfu and dont post anymore in this thread.
Thanks for reading, hail you Zerg players, may the balance be restored!
On September 29 2010 01:02 Gamidragon wrote: I read somewhere that this could possibly effect Siege Tank splash. Confirm/Deny?
Nope. Siege Tank splash has never been extended by unit radius.
Archons used to work like Ultras, but it was removed in beta patch 16. In fact the patch notes state they removed it from Ultralisks, but they actually never did.
As of Patch 1.1, Ultralisks were the only unit whose splash increased by unit size.
its unbelievable a multi million dollar company as blizzard does not do some balance testing before patching. Quite amateur .. they should hire at least part time some pro players to do smoe analysis before patching, they should be able to afford. While 1.1 had side effects buffing ultras a bit too strong (community took < 5 hours to figure that out), now they completely screwed ultras (community took < 5 hours to figure that out). Seems like Blizzard puts most of its money into hype and marketing .. Don't think ultras are worth the money with this nerf ..
took away my ram. took away my splash. can't take my freedom.
I'd rather have ram back. splash is useless vs buildings anyway.
If they are going to bring the splash to pre-patching( In beta) locations ( front of target) then they need to bring it back to pre patching damage % (its 33% now, it was 100% in beta when splash was reduced like this)
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
So you're saying that the bug testing team at Blizzard was so incompetent that they
1) Did not notice that the bugfix significantly changed Ultralisk behaviour relative to the original 1.0/1.1 versions. Something which forumers picked up on immediately.
or
2) Did not realize that such a change had balance implications.
These make me even sadder than the conspiracy theory.
On September 29 2010 01:06 theSAiNT wrote:So you're saying that the bug testing team at Blizzard was so incompetent that they
1) Did not notice that the bugfix significantly changed Ultralisk behaviour relative to the original 1.0/1.1 versions. Something which forumers picked up on immediately.
They also apparently never tested the Splash radius on buildings (or they would have caught the SCV thing instantly), which was the entire point of the removal of Ram in 1.1.
They also never tested the Phoenix after the hotfix, because it's still bugged in a completely obvious way that happens every cast.
I think it's likely they just didn't know and hopefully we will get a resolution to the issue soon.
Just played a zvt on steppes where I had more resources and terran didn't harass me at all. I was 3 base to 2 base and he came and a-moved me on creep and I attacked about when his tanks were starting to siege. I had about 8 ultras and 6 roaches against about 7 tanks, 4 thors, and 4-5 marauders and I got absolutely raped. I think he still had 4 tanks and 3 thors leftover. I guess it's back to going muta ling? Zerg seems impossible against terran atm I can't wait to see what cool does in the gsl.
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
So you're saying that the bug testing team at Blizzard was so incompetent that they
1) Did not notice that the bugfix significantly changed Ultralisk behaviour relative to the original 1.0/1.1 versions. Something which forumers picked up on immediately.
or
2) Did not realize that such a change had balance implications.
These make me even sadder than the conspiracy theory.
No. What I'm saying is they probably did know it would change Ultralisk behaviour and that it would have balance implications (because they're not that stupid), but only that since this wasn't a balance patch they didn't consider it too heavily. They will likely consider the implications of the new Ultralisk splash mechanics when they have their balance meetings, but for now they just needed a quick hotfix for the ridiculously large splash radius vs large buildings. If they had to first spend days discussing what the new radius should be and do all the playtesting required to come to a meaningful decision, then the bugfix patch would have been significantly delayed.
EDIT: Although that being said, during the balance patch they were incompetent in that they didn't even realise the effect that removing the ram attack would have vs large buildings. I read a post a whole month BEFORE the patch came out that described how the ultra splash mechanics worked and what effect the change would have vs planetary fortresses. Someone was arguing that the ultra cleave attack wouldn't hit repairing SCVs at all, because the size of the building was so big that it would entirely surround the splash radius of the attack. But someone else correctly responded to this by saying the splash radius grows with the size of the targeted unit from its centre, and so any repairing SVCs at any angle will be damaged by it. But the fact that Blizz apparently missed this when it was so obvious from the mechanics I would say is incompetence.
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
No that's because banelings hardcounter MMM. Try going mech for once instead of spamming barracks and a-moving
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote:Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
If the zerg player is ahead at that point of the game it doesn't matter if he kills your expos or not he's gonna win anyway. Are you seriously complaining that a roughly 1000/500 army kills a command center and then kills it self as a consequence?
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote:Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
God forbid that a Tier 3 unit + a T2 unit kills T1.5 units brought in to play 4 mins in to the game.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote:I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
Thors ALWAYS win cost for cost with magic box. Try it in a unit tester.
I knew something was wrong! I've played a few ZvT using Ultralisks against Bioballs and they seemed to take alot less damage for some reason. They just tore my Ultralisks apart without taking much damage. Thanks for the confirmation.
But about SCV's since someone mentioned that above me, it's really a shame that blizz didn't take this chance to hotfix scvs too, so the repair mechanic makes their targeting prio equal(or equal+1) to what they are repairing(and if a melee unit can't path to his target, that after x sec of trying he starts attacking the thing blocking him).
Again with a gross confusion of "hotfix" and "patch".
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
Wrong on all counts. There never was a bug. Blizzard removed the Ram attack which gave Ultralisks a large splash radius vs very large units. They didn't patch a bug they changed the formula in 2 ways, both nerfs not bug fixes. In addition to the 1.1 damage nerf that makes 3 nerfs to the Ultra and 0 bug fixes.
Zerg took a big hit with this one , tho i'm pretty sure it wasn't intended by blizzard , and they would fix it (hopefully quite soon). At this moment in time , zerg isn't underpowered , just extremely hard to play , even harder to master , and outright not very fun to play. But one thing I'm quite sure is when they launch HoTS the entire team will be focused to make zerg a better and more fun race to play (they MUST actually). So hopefully Zerg gets helped by that. But at this moment I really hope they fix the bugs for real and don't bring in new bugs >,<".
Wow, thats pretty fail by blizzard. I really hope they reverse it to 1.0 for units and just have a 'hidden' attack for structures the way it is right now. This is a huuge nerf (single target dps of the ultra is really bad for its tech/cost/build time)
On September 29 2010 01:06 PrinceXizor wrote: took away my ram. took away my splash. can't take my freedom.
I'd rather have ram back. splash is useless vs buildings anyway.
If they are going to bring the splash to pre-patching( In beta) locations ( front of target) then they need to bring it back to pre patching damage % (its 33% now, it was 100% in beta when splash was reduced like this)
Will they be making any more sequels? I feel deprived of a life cut so short.
I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
They should just make ultras do a Cleave type attack in a arc in front of them; which is what you expect it should be but clearly isn't.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Blizzard simply changed the splash radius formula from: 1.1.0) Radius = 2 + (enemy unit radius) to: 1.1.1) Radius = 2
This means that the Ultra splash radius is significantly smaller regardless of what unit they are hitting. It's simply a more dramatic nerf for very large units like Thors or other ultras.
The logical hotfix would be to change it to Radius 2.5 or something.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
On September 29 2010 02:00 Adeeler wrote: I don't know how to show the pre-hotfix, pre patch, and patch differences. Ppl that know better can try in one of the unit testing maps I guess.
If you want to do it, just do exactly what you did and take a screenshot. We don't need to see the pre-hotfix - there's tons of videos on that. We don't really need to see the pre-patch either, since that was the ram attack.
In effect - if the hotfix makes it so that the PF can be repaired with negligible effect to the scvs despite the ultras attacking, then that makes it worse than pre-patch.
On September 29 2010 01:57 Treemonkeys wrote: How bad is it in practice now?? Is it even worth it to try using ultras vs. thors now? Is it worth it to build ultras at all?
I'd mess around in unit tester to make sure but I've already seen enough to not use ultras against terran until it's fixed. It feels like I'm playing with handicap health on.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Maybe they didn't want to include a nerf to the weakest race so they snuck it in as a 'bugfix'.
There's no conspiracy here. This was a bugfix patch and not a balance patch, and they did fix the bug as was their intention to do so. The fact that the bug also had some balance implications is not something they are going to consider too heavily during the bugfix patch, but they are probably going to examine it in more detail for future balance patches and possibly adjust the new radius accordingly. This sort of bureaucracy is not necessarily brilliant for us, but I don't imagine it was indented as a sneaky malicious way to nerf the zerg.
Wrong on all counts. There never was a bug. Blizzard removed the Ram attack which gave Ultralisks a large splash radius vs very large units. They didn't patch a bug they changed the formula in 2 ways, both nerfs not bug fixes. In addition to the 1.1 damage nerf that makes 3 nerfs to the Ultra and 0 bug fixes.
Semantics. It's considered a bug because the formula had an unintended & absurd side effect vs very large units and buildings. Changing the formula is the way they implemented the bugfix, and this was an intended change. But a bugfix and a nerf are not mutually exclusive things, as a bugfix can obviously have a nerfing effect. Consider if marine's bunny hopping was bugfixed in natural selection, or muta stacking was bugfixed in broodwar. So this is both a nerf and a bugfix. My only point is that it was neither incompetence nor malicious, but just a somewhat arbitrary guesstimate at balance using a new formula, and this allowed them to get the bugfix patch out today instead of next week or next month. The balance will probably be looked at more thoughtfully during balance patches, but this was not one of them.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
Blizzard needs need better QA for sure, or better yet, some kind of explanation to these sort of things so we don't have the community putting on tinfoil hats over mysterious conspiracies or needing us to draw pokeballs and unit testers to figure this stuff out. Transparency is needed badly.
The real issue the patch caused was with planetary fortresses, to nerf ultra cleave this much I think is not what they intended and hopefully they will fix it.
If they don't, this really scares me for late game.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
I might be the only one here but just looking at these screenshots, the pre-patch behavior seems completely unreasonable.
An unintroduced player would never expect that by looking at the units involved and concerning Thors, micro would do very little here considering how easily they get in the way of each other.
If Ultras are not good enough due to this change then they need to be fixed in a different way because the pre-patch behavior is ridiculous and unpredictable, in other words, not good game design.
It makes sense for Ultras to use different splash semantics than, say, tanks. One is hitting from the front with a melee attack. The other is hitting smack in the middle from above with a big explosion.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
We're back to square one, ultras are ineffective against PF/SCV
On September 29 2010 02:09 eloist wrote: I might be the only one here but just looking at these screenshots, the pre-patch behavior seems completely unreasonable.
An unintroduced player would never expect that by looking at the units involved and concerning Thors, micro would do very little here considering how easily they get in the way of each other.
If Ultras are not good enough due to this change then they need to be fixed in a different way because the pre-patch behavior is ridiculous and unpredictable, in other words, not good game design.
It makes sense for Ultras to use different splash semantics than, say, tanks. One is hitting from the front with a melee attack. The other is hitting smack in the middle from above with a big explosion.
But nerfing them for months before you actually fix them is not the way to go about fixing a problem.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
We're back to square one, ultras are ineffective against PF/SCV
On September 29 2010 02:09 eloist wrote: I might be the only one here but just looking at these screenshots, the pre-patch behavior seems completely unreasonable.
An unintroduced player would never expect that by looking at the units involved and concerning Thors, micro would do very little here considering how easily they get in the way of each other.
If Ultras are not good enough due to this change then they need to be fixed in a different way because the pre-patch behavior is ridiculous and unpredictable, in other words, not good game design.
It makes sense for Ultras to use different splash semantics than, say, tanks. One is hitting from the front with a melee attack. The other is hitting smack in the middle from above with a big explosion.
Why is it only players with SCVs saying stuff like this?
Sure, I don't disagree in principle, but Blizzard having the audacity to nerf Zerg at the moment is ridiculous. Give it a different building attack that does normal AoE, or make this change as part of a rebalance of Zerg that buffs other things in compensation.
Nerfing the weakest race is silly. Only Death Knights-- excuse me-- Terran, will have much reason to see it differently.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
No, in patch 1.0 the ultralisk splash radius was increased by the unit size, but against buildings it used the ram attack. In 1.1 it used the same attack on units and buildings, but due to the big size of buildings, their splash in that setting became quite ridiculous. So now, in 1.1.1, the splash radius is no more increased by the target's radius.
Some numbers on the effect:
pre-1.1.1 -> 1.1.1
Against Marines: splash range: 2.375 -> 2 area covered: 17.3 -> 12.1 ( -30% )
Against Marauders: splash range: 2.5625 -> 2 area covered: 19.6 -> 11.6 ( -41% )
Against Thors: splash range: 2.8125 -> 2 area covered: 22.7 -> 10.5 ( -54% )
Against Siege Tanks: splash range: 2.875 -> 2 area covered: 23.6 -> 10.2 ( -57% )
Note how although the splash radius is now constant, the area of splash decreases for bigger units as the primary target blocks more area.
I am pretty sure that a unit is affected by splash if its center is in the splash area. As a consequence, if two Thors are spaced in such a way that a marine fits in between, the second Thor will receive no splash damage. Therefore the the -xx% numbers are to be taken with caution, as the number of units inside the splash range is important. However in randomly arranged units, thats the average reduction of the splash.
All in all this is a rather big nerf of the ultralisks splash damage, especially for a bug fix which should only remove unintended behaviour and not affect regular play. Especially as there is an easy fix for this problem by giving the ultralisk two attacks, one against units and one against buildings, which are identical except that for attacks against buildings the splash area is not increased.
Sirion, do your figures account for the attack originating from the external surface of the attacked unit, in effect making the formula 2 + r +r ?
On September 29 2010 02:13 Ndugu wrote: Why is it only players with SCVs saying stuff like this?
Sure, I don't disagree in principle, but Blizzard having the audacity to nerf Zerg at the moment is ridiculous. Give it a different building attack that does normal AoE, or make this change as part of a rebalance of Zerg that buffs other things in compensation.
Nerfing the weakest race is silly. Only Death Knights-- excuse me-- Terran, will have much reason to see it differently.
I would consider the previous behavior game breaking if it gets to the point where Ultras are out though. Disregarding whether or not the race is strong or weak as a whole. I think tanks were game breaking in a similar way and they got fixed and it was good. Not gonna lie though, I am happy because I suck at tank vs. tank.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
If you watch one of afruitdealer's games, the 3rd game against terran where he wins with ultras, I'm pretty sure the missile turrets behind the PF get taken out by cleave.
Hmm , Ultras are nerfed , Broodlords are easily countered ... So i guess playing for a late game macro style isn't the best choice now ... So ... How do I play zerg now?
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
If you watch one of afruitdealer's games, the 3rd game against terran where he wins with ultras, I'm pretty sure the missile turrets behind the PF get taken out by cleave.
I'm not talking about pre-hotfix. We have a ton of videos on that.
On September 29 2010 02:20 john0507 wrote: Hmm , Ultras are nerfed , Broodlords are easily countered ... So i guess playing for a late game macro style isn't the best choice now ... So ... How do I play zerg now?
I had to push ling bling muta to be my mid & all my late game v T. Maybe things like this will push more ppl to infestors before they are skrewed over
Yes, ultras are weaker this patch but does that make them completely useless? Some may argue that their initial splash mechanic was too powerful and this patch coincidentally balanced everything out. You're supposed to flank with ultras anyway so battling head on is going to be unfavorable, regardless of which patch version you're using.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
No, in patch 1.0 the ultralisk splash radius was increased by the unit size, but against buildings it used the ram attack. In 1.1 it used the same attack on units and buildings, but due to the big size of buildings, their splash in that setting became quite ridiculous. So now, in 1.1.1, the splash radius is no more increased by the target's radius.
Some numbers on the effect:
pre-1.1.1 -> 1.1.1
Against Marines: splash range: 2.375 -> 2 area covered: 17.3 -> 12.1 ( -30% )
Against Marauders: splash range: 2.5625 -> 2 area covered: 19.6 -> 11.6 ( -41% )
Against Thors: splash range: 2.8125 -> 2 area covered: 22.7 -> 10.5 ( -54% )
Against Siege Tanks: splash range: 2.875 -> 2 area covered: 23.6 -> 10.2 ( -57% )
Note how although the splash radius is now constant, the area of splash decreases for bigger units as the primary target blocks more area.
I am pretty sure that a unit is affected by splash if its center is in the splash area. As a consequence, if two Thors are spaced in such a way that a marine fits in between, the second Thor will receive no splash damage. Therefore the the -xx% numbers are to be taken with caution, as the number of units inside the splash range is important. However in randomly arranged units, thats the average reduction of the splash.
All in all this is a rather big nerf of the ultralisks splash damage, especially for a bug fix which should only remove unintended behaviour and not affect regular play. Especially as there is an easy fix for this problem by giving the ultralisk two attacks, one against units and one against buildings, which are identical except that for attacks against buildings the splash area is not increased.
Sirion, do your figures account for the attack originating from the external surface of the attacked unit, in effect making the formula 2 + r +r ?
That's incorrect. The splash originates from the center of the unit, that's why for example units under a colossus would take splash damage. The formula was 2+target radius. Now it's just 2.
On September 29 2010 02:09 eloist wrote: It makes sense for Ultras to use different splash semantics than, say, tanks. One is hitting from the front with a melee attack. The other is hitting smack in the middle from above with a big explosion.
Dear everybody,
Can we please stop bringing realism arguments into balance discussions. It is really, really annoying and an absurd red herring that really is not helpful in any manner.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
If you watch one of afruitdealer's games, the 3rd game against terran where he wins with ultras, I'm pretty sure the missile turrets behind the PF get taken out by cleave.
Which is exactly what it was supposed to do.
Remember when Blizzard nerfed Ultra building damage, but then they tell us all that it isn't really a nerf since now it does splash against buildings and so you can damage more buildings at a time with ultras than before. Why say that and then take it away again?
There are no zero radius units in the game, hence no matter how you look at it, this is a direct nerf. It does less damage against every unit since even if you attacked an SCV pre patch 1.1.1 the radius of splash would still be larger than 2.
On September 29 2010 01:16 Knutzi wrote: terran dominating since release : take 2-3 months too make slight nerf
zerg get a solution too PF spamming terrans, hot fix day1
A patch is not a hot fix. Things in SC cannot be hot fixed, they must be patched. A hot fix is a change which is enacted without a server shutdown and without people having to change client side game data. All game data in SC2 is client side.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
We're back to square one, ultras are ineffective against PF/SCV
That's wrong. Ultras damage all SCVs which are in front of Ultra if there are any, and like ~2 SCV on the side of Ultra. Not much, but at least realistically.
Also Ultras only do 15 dmg to the targetted SCV and then 5 in splash to surrounding scvs. So an Ultra needs 3 shots to kill an scv.
Also scvs can heal each other and buildings as they are mechanical and they can be healed by medivacs as they are biological also and as they are likely to be put on auto repair that will skew things completely when they are healing each other and a fortress into immortal fortress & scvs scenarios.
On September 29 2010 02:24 Raikynn wrote: what about 1.1.1 compared to 1.0?
1.0 Ultra's had more bonus damage vs. Armored. So instead of 40 damage in 1.0, it changed to 35 in 1.1, and now the splash area has been nerfed by a minimum of 30% according to Sirion's post.
On September 29 2010 02:13 Ndugu wrote: Why is it only players with SCVs saying stuff like this?
Sure, I don't disagree in principle, but Blizzard having the audacity to nerf Zerg at the moment is ridiculous. Give it a different building attack that does normal AoE, or make this change as part of a rebalance of Zerg that buffs other things in compensation.
Nerfing the weakest race is silly. Only Death Knights-- excuse me-- Terran, will have much reason to see it differently.
I would consider the previous behavior game breaking if it gets to the point where Ultras are out though. Disregarding whether or not the race is strong or weak as a whole. I think tanks were game breaking in a similar way and they got fixed and it was good. Not gonna lie though, I am happy because I suck at tank vs. tank.
A Protoss army with HTs would do basically the same against a PF and the sourrounding workers. It's not gamebreaking so far.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
If you watch one of afruitdealer's games, the 3rd game against terran where he wins with ultras, I'm pretty sure the missile turrets behind the PF get taken out by cleave.
I'm not talking about pre-hotfix. We have a ton of videos on that.
A patch is not a hot fix. Things in SC cannot be hot fixed, they must be patched. A hot fix is a change which is enacted without a server shutdown and without people having to change client side game data. All game data in SC2 is client side.
This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
On September 29 2010 01:49 Adeeler wrote: I attacked a PF today and purposely positioned my ultras on his scvs that were repairing thinking that the scvs would die from the ultras nerfed splash i.e. my microing to keep my ultra next to the scvs would kill them while attack the PF and the scvs took next to no dmg regardless of being next to/touching my ultra's.
Ultra splash seems worse then before the splash bugs splash.
Can you make a video? Or screenshots? That'd be great.
Reposting this image because it is incredibly well done and mostly accurate.
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
Like this? It's in the OP.
On September 29 2010 02:04 Numy wrote:
On September 29 2010 01:58 JinDesu wrote:
Well yes - the pokeballs were lovely, but I was hoping he'd do the screenshots of the actual game so people who are more likely to nitpick will not do so. If no one does it, then I will do it when I get home from work.
I'm slightly confused. There are screenshots of various units in the OP.
On. The. PF. When. SCVs. Repair. It.
The splash effect on a line of units in front of the ultra is evident in those screenshots yes. And the pokeball picture tells me the splash will work best only on units that are meleeing the ultra.
How does the splash effect the scvs that are in a circular formation around the planetary fortress? Do the ultras kill the scvs next to it? In front only? How many ultras does it take to take a PF down now?
No, I don't expect people to do this for me - I'm only putting the question out now while I'm at work. If I don't see it mocked up, then I'll just do it when I get home and post it up here.
If you watch one of afruitdealer's games, the 3rd game against terran where he wins with ultras, I'm pretty sure the missile turrets behind the PF get taken out by cleave.
I'm not talking about pre-hotfix. We have a ton of videos on that.
A patch is not a hot fix. Things in SC cannot be hot fixed, they must be patched. A hot fix is a change which is enacted without a server shutdown and without people having to change client side game data. All game data in SC2 is client side.
Holy shit man, are you really going to keep posting that every time someone mentions the word hot-fix or patch? Chillax on your semantics bro.
On September 29 2010 01:16 guitarizt wrote: Just played a zvt on steppes where I had more resources and terran didn't harass me at all. I was 3 base to 2 base and he came and a-moved me on creep and I attacked about when his tanks were starting to siege. I had about 8 ultras and 6 roaches against about 7 tanks, 4 thors, and 4-5 marauders and I got absolutely raped. I think he still had 4 tanks and 3 thors leftover. I guess it's back to going muta ling? Zerg seems impossible against terran atm I can't wait to see what cool does in the gsl.
On September 29 2010 02:40 NrG.NeverExpo wrote: This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
Just like how a PF can be repaired by 10 SCVs without being taken down while being attacked by a 100 food army, right? Looks realistic and practical. No?
On September 29 2010 02:40 NrG.NeverExpo wrote: This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
On September 29 2010 02:40 NrG.NeverExpo wrote: This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
Again, you are talking about realism in a game with gigantic spacebug that conquer the galaxy, aliens that look like robots and humans who sit in transformers. Do you realy wanna throw in the realism card?
On September 29 2010 02:40 NrG.NeverExpo wrote: This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
Again, you are talking about realism in a game with gigantic spacebug that conquer the galaxy, aliens that look like robots and humans who sit in transformers. Do you realy wanna throw in the realism card?
Also, realism != balance, this severely affects balance ( I agree the PF was a bug, but that affected balance much less than this). If they want to change the way ultra splash works, but the ultra needs a buff in some other way to compensate for it.
Apparently the whole Thor vs Ultralisk was relying on unintentional bug all the way since some beta versions. Did it take the PF splash area to notice the bug or why are they removing the bug now that the whole Thor vs Ultra and Ultras in general are balanced around it? Not very professional looking approach by Blizz if you ask me.
Basically I'm fine with the splash size getting standardized, it seems reasonable. Having huge units around is supposed to help you minimize the splash damage, not amplify it further. However, now they've build the whole balance on the bad ground and only now they start thinking about changing the foundations.
On September 29 2010 01:16 guitarizt wrote: Just played a zvt on steppes where I had more resources and terran didn't harass me at all. I was 3 base to 2 base and he came and a-moved me on creep and I attacked about when his tanks were starting to siege. I had about 8 ultras and 6 roaches against about 7 tanks, 4 thors, and 4-5 marauders and I got absolutely raped. I think he still had 4 tanks and 3 thors leftover. I guess it's back to going muta ling? Zerg seems impossible against terran atm I can't wait to see what cool does in the gsl.
well he will lose twice and get place 4
If he loses people will say it's normal because it's unbalanced. If he wins people will say he's the best player in the world. That's the world of Zerg right now.
On September 29 2010 02:40 NrG.NeverExpo wrote: This looks more realistic anyways and is probably more practical. You want your ultralisks hitting things that are like 2 full ultralisk lengths away from the unit? It doesnt make sense. Sure it's a nerf but this seems a lot closer to what shud actually be happening with the unit. U shudnt be able to hit 6 thors with ur tusks anyways, but when fighting marines u shud be able to hit 9-10.
We are ok with that being "realistically" but then configure Ultra so its damage output is same as it was.
With splash range being like 2 full Ultras (as you say) they were kind of balanced, right? So now, if you nerf their range, then buff their damage or something.
ZvT winrates spiraled out of control to above 10%, luckily this "bug fix" is here to restore order in the world of Terrancraft.
Do people honestly not understand why Zs might be pissed off? our race has had fundamental problems since beta, goes through countless nerfs, and anytime something pops up, it gets nerfed into oblivion and them some, while the moment a T complains about something, a patch comes out the next day -.-
How about the premise that (1) innumerable hordes of vicious space aliens sharing a common directive and (2) technologically advanced and psychically skilled aliens capable of manipulating the fabric of spacetime...
...get absolutely roflstomped by a bunch of humans on drugs?
As an aside, I'm kind of surprised by Blizzard generally reducing ultralisk splash vs. everything when it was pretty clear that the so called "bug" had to do with building size.
As an irrational QQing Z player, I feel like nerfing Z a few days after a patch supposed to help balance out parts of the game is sort of a slap in the face. Yes, ultralisks probably needed a tweak, but so do a bunch of T/P mechanics. The fact that apparently ultralisk splash vs. UNITS needed an immediate change but things like, you know, stimmed marauders, thors, auto-repair, [insert OP whining here] didn't is pretty absurd IMO.
are you sure that this is correct i mean looking at your images it seems that the splash damage is infact working correctly... the top one shows an ultra thats like 1 and 1/2 ultras in length away from the attacking ultra taking splash damage... question mark?? how is that intended? lol the one post patch looks a LOT more reasonable and if you micro thors out of splash damage i'd be fine with that.... i mean zerg can magic box, "micro mutas" to avoid thor splash damage... seems fair to me
well so much for occasionally being able to beat terran. <3 u blizzard.
i could see them patching this patch though. really, the building thing wasn't that big a deal. it just meant that planetary fortresses could actually die which, in the eyes of anyone but whoever at blizzard who released this patch, would seem reasonable.
On September 29 2010 02:55 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: ZvT winrates spiraled out of control to above 10%, luckily this "bug fix" is here to restore order in the world of Terrancraft.
Do people honestly not understand why Zs might be pissed off? our race has had fundamental problems since beta, goes through countless nerfs, and anytime something pops up, it gets nerfed into oblivion and them some, while the moment a T complains about something, a patch comes out the next day -.-
I was gonna stay out of this one, but I have to give this post props hahaha.
On September 29 2010 02:55 Carnivorous Sheep wrote: ZvT winrates spiraled out of control to above 10%, luckily this "bug fix" is here to restore order in the world of Terrancraft.
Do people honestly not understand why Zs might be pissed off? our race has had fundamental problems since beta, goes through countless nerfs, and anytime something pops up, it gets nerfed into oblivion and them some, while the moment a T complains about something, a patch comes out the next day -.-
it IS a slap in the face.. afk pirating civ, i wish i had done the same with sc2 but when you've been waiting since 13 you feel generous..
I dont believe its anything blizzard has out for Zerg or what not, they naturally would like that all the races be balanced, I dont see a reason for thinking otherwise.
However, they are either to big a company for information to effectively pass quickly or are simply not interested in asking more from their balance team. This nerf is not a product of anti-zerg sentiment, but of poor poor quality of work... It is just embarrassing that they would overlook this. If they intended to reduce the ultras splash radius against all units it would have appeared in 1.1, however it did not so this is clearly the result of just plain lazyness. Will we get a 1.1.1.1... who knows.
Blizzard needs to pull a couple of their people off WoW and take a better loook at their balance team for SC2. They are not unable to judge the team by its performance like every other job that exists.
Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
I simply fear that this nerf, right during the GSL might drive even more pro Zergs away. Poor, poor Cool :-( Idra might get a cardiac arrest of the rage from that.
But seriously, even if it WAS unintended and now they "fixed" it, it's a very serious nerf to a unit that was considered fine beforehand. To a race already struggling.
Might try Toss until they fix that, what am I supposed to get now with Ultra splash dps down by at least 30%??
On September 29 2010 03:11 konicki wrote: Blizzard needs to pull a couple of their people off WoW and take a better loook at their balance team for SC2. They are not unable to judge the team by its performance like every other job that exists.
Unfortunately for us, SC2 is not a source of recurring revenue for Blizzard, while WoW most certainly is. Blizzard will not be sacing their WoW team for the benefit of SC2. This is why part of me wants them to introduce micro-transaction into SC2. Given Acti-Blizz Corporation's size and business model, I'm starting to think a recurring revenue stream from SC2 would prompt them to care more about the game's success.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
No, Broodlords are easily shut down by just a handful of vikings - the endgame answer to mech was ultras.
Ultras being able to go toe to toe vs Thor was always Zerg's saving grace in T3, but now, not as such.
Did u know, that this is just another buff to terran who could deal with Ultras very well (in a balanced state)... why would u buff sth, that is balanced. One of the only things, that were balanced was the Ultra vs Thor dynamic. Even if I think, that Thors with 250 mm Cannons and proper micro beat them always.
Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras?
Doesnt work really, because the terran will just make a Viking swap and will kill Broodlords pretty easy, because they have such a ridicoulos range, that its nearly impossible to defend against them, no matter what micro u have.
Sigh poor Zergs. Having to deal with shoddy attempts at fixing ultralisk splash. I feel for you Zergs Hopefully they re-patch it so it works properly. (That or a damage buff at least)
Sorry if I missed anything because I didn't ready all the pages here but in the italian forum a blue post stated that this is intended because:
"The splash damage was propagating not the exact way. Now it works correctly. The damage is the same except against very large units. The chances that this will change the course of a battle are very slim, to be honest."
I think I translated it correctly, sorry for my bad english but since I didn't see any blue post about this in the EU forum (not sure about America) I wanted to share it with u.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Let me get this straight first. After a critical mass of say, 6 thors. Zerg has basically nothing that can combat it effectively on the ground OR air. Thors are great against mutalisks, banelings, hydra's, infestors. Even the roach cant stand up to them once they get repaired backup or some more thor buddies.
Basically zerg has to wait until Tier 3, and have PLENTY of upgrades to their ultralisk defense before they can even imagine killing a good thor blob. Now with thors being just about cost effective against ultralisks, the only counter is broodlords. What does this mean?
Terran goes mass thor, can expect broodlords, adds vikings to the mix.
Now what choices does zerg have left?
Edit- I don't want to seem like a whiny zerg player. But Ultras way back in beta are actually better than they are now. And back then, without ultra speed, they were pretty bad too.
I just want a neural parasite fix that will make it viable again, then zerg can start stopping big midgame pushes in the midgame rather than in the late-late game.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Let me get this straight first. After a critical mass of say, 6 thors. Zerg has basically nothing that can combat it effectively on the ground OR air. Thors are great against mutalisks, banelings, hydra's, infestors. Even the roach cant stand up to them once they get repaired backup or some more thor buddies.
Basically zerg has to wait until Tier 3, and have PLENTY of upgrades to their ultralisk defense before they can even imagine killing a good thor blob. Now with thors being just about cost effective against ultralisks, the only counter is broodlords. What does this mean?
Terran goes mass thor, can expect broodlords, adds vikings to the mix.
Now what choices does zerg have left?
I've found hydralisks to be pretty effective v thors.. Problem is, you have to make hydralisks for this to work
Idra just said in "The Official State of the Game Podcast" that he is thinking about what race to play next GSL, I bet this aint going to help him pick zerg.
Changing the attack origination point seems like a bigger issue than removing +r from the splash formula. Changing the splash radius from 2 + r to 2 is a rather large flat out nerf. However changing the origination has some nasty consequences, large targets will occupy most or even all of the splash radius.
Now the only counter to thors are broodlords and those are iffy at best. Good job blizzard, way to continue to fuck everything up by being lazy and bad at balancing. I'm pretty convinced at this point I could do a better job than them. Same with any of a hundred other people.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Let me get this straight first. After a critical mass of say, 6 thors. Zerg has basically nothing that can combat it effectively on the ground OR air. Thors are great against mutalisks, banelings, hydra's, infestors. Even the roach cant stand up to them once they get repaired backup or some more thor buddies.
Basically zerg has to wait until Tier 3, and have PLENTY of upgrades to their ultralisk defense before they can even imagine killing a good thor blob. Now with thors being just about cost effective against ultralisks, the only counter is broodlords. What does this mean?
Terran goes mass thor, can expect broodlords, adds vikings to the mix.
Now what choices does zerg have left?
I've found hydralisks to be pretty effective v thors.. Problem is, you have to make hydralisks for this to work
Hydralisks stink in ZvT for a very simple reason. Marines are costeffective against them, Tanks are cost effective against them, Hellions are cost effective against them. I don't make hydralisks most of the time ZvT unless they decide to go heavy heavy viking or banshee. They are just easily countered by just about any composition.
Hydra's being effective against just thors is all fine and dandy. The only problem is that thors never come alone.
Yes, Ultralisks in vast numbers were really good against mech. And the planetary fortress bug was a slight issue disallowing terran players to repair it. But they had no reason to kill the entire balance surrounding the ultralisk attacking units. They could have easily just used a different formula when attacking buildings. They had done it before with the head butt attack. It wouldn't be that hard to use that code and modify it.
Alright, as a zerg that started playing in 1999, I'll throw in my old-timer thoughts. Also, before I begin, I would take it as a kindness if you did not immediately dismiss the content simply because SC2 is a "different game."
In SC, as well as Broodwar, there was a very specific reason the Ultralisk was a solid and viable unit against both T and P. It was not definitely not splash damage, as the Ultra would only ever hit a single target. The reason the Ultralisk was good was that it had survivability. With the Ultralisk in SC2 able to evaporate in 2 seconds to nearly every unit composition, it is almost detrimental to tech to them, much less produce them. Splash damage is not the answer here. Making the Ultralisk a unit that can take the hits from the front line, and let the lings and everything else get in close unharmed, would not only make it a worthwhile unit, but would help bring that "swarmy" feeling back to the zerg.
I realize there are a hundred other factors that play into this, (i.e., map size, unit size, chokes, ability to surround etc...) but I'm trying to be concise.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Let me get this straight first. After a critical mass of say, 6 thors. Zerg has basically nothing that can combat it effectively on the ground OR air. Thors are great against mutalisks, banelings, hydra's, infestors. Even the roach cant stand up to them once they get repaired backup or some more thor buddies.
Basically zerg has to wait until Tier 3, and have PLENTY of upgrades to their ultralisk defense before they can even imagine killing a good thor blob. Now with thors being just about cost effective against ultralisks, the only counter is broodlords. What does this mean?
Terran goes mass thor, can expect broodlords, adds vikings to the mix.
Now what choices does zerg have left?
I've found hydralisks to be pretty effective v thors.. Problem is, you have to make hydralisks for this to work
Hydra's being effective against just thors is all fine and dandy. The only problem is that thors never come alone.
Except hydras are fucking awful vs thors. 4 hydras won't even make a dent in one, and that's already 100 minerals more.
On September 29 2010 03:22 Goliathsorrow wrote: Sorry if I missed anything because I didn't ready all the pages here but in the italian forum a blue post stated that this is intended because:
"The splash damage was propagating not the exact way. Now it works correctly. The damage is the same except against very large units. The chances that this will change the course of a battle are very slim, to be honest."
I think I translated it correctly, sorry for my bad english but since I didn't see any blue post about this in the EU forum (not sure about America) I wanted to share it with u.
On September 29 2010 03:22 Goliathsorrow wrote: Sorry if I missed anything because I didn't ready all the pages here but in the italian forum a blue post stated that this is intended because:
"The splash damage was propagating not the exact way. Now it works correctly. The damage is the same except against very large units. The chances that this will change the course of a battle are very slim, to be honest."
I think I translated it correctly, sorry for my bad english but since I didn't see any blue post about this in the EU forum (not sure about America) I wanted to share it with u.
Just another reason not to get ultras. Seeing them do their ridiculous ultra dance and not even reaching their target, makes me swear in 5 languages. You can ask yourself this:
If you had the option to build one of the following two units instead of ultras:
A) Thorlisk: Stats like a thor, can not attack air. B)Collossolisk Stats like a collossus, can not cliffwalk
plating upgrade has been replaced with 250mm cannon / collossus range.
Would you do it? I would take these crippled terran/protoss units without hesitation. Of course the units are also balanced with the macro mechanics of their respective race and there is the gras-is-greener-on-the-other-side-syndrome, but I am quite frustrated with ultras and everytime I use them I have the feeling that cost/efficiency-wise, I would have had much much better success with any other zerg unit.
On September 29 2010 03:22 Goliathsorrow wrote: Sorry if I missed anything because I didn't ready all the pages here but in the italian forum a blue post stated that this is intended because:
"The splash damage was propagating not the exact way. Now it works correctly. The damage is the same except against very large units. The chances that this will change the course of a battle are very slim, to be honest."
I think I translated it correctly, sorry for my bad english but since I didn't see any blue post about this in the EU forum (not sure about America) I wanted to share it with u.
And note that here the thors are toe to toe, even the slightest space completely negates the splash. And marines... yeah, wtf.
Blizzard has to see this. Its such a a huge game breaking difference.. I m disgusted that yet another buff ends up being a sick disadvantage for the zergs. I mean there is no effective counter to hellion/thor anymore. And that is a very very very strong build we saw a lot of good players already doing prepatch.. Sjow for example plays this build 100% of the time i see him playing vs zerg. I literally didnt see him loose 1 game with that build prepatch. I cant imagine how strong it is now.
ultra splash is really retarded, if they let it like it is now, then they should buff its% from 33% in all areas to something more realistic... Also how come users are able to test their patch in a matter of hours while blizz isn't? FU blizz!
On September 29 2010 04:03 Atticus.axl wrote: Alright, as a zerg that started playing in 1999, I'll throw in my old-timer thoughts. Also, before I begin, I would take it as a kindness if you did not immediately dismiss the content simply because SC2 is a "different game."
In SC, as well as Broodwar, there was a very specific reason the Ultralisk was a solid and viable unit against both T and P. It was not definitely not splash damage, as the Ultra would only ever hit a single target. The reason the Ultralisk was good was that it had survivability. With the Ultralisk in SC2 able to evaporate in 2 seconds to nearly every unit composition, it is almost detrimental to tech to them, much less produce them. Splash damage is not the answer here. Making the Ultralisk a unit that can take the hits from the front line, and let the lings and everything else get in close unharmed, would not only make it a worthwhile unit, but would help bring that "swarmy" feeling back to the zerg.
I realize there are a hundred other factors that play into this, (i.e., map size, unit size, chokes, ability to surround etc...) but I'm trying to be concise.
Edit: added an "and"
The SC2 ultralisk has 100 more hitpoints than the SC:BW unit, and does 15 (+5 damage to armored), while the SC:BW unit did 20. Although the SC:BW ultralisk built 15 seconds faster and was 100 minerals cheaper; though the SC2 ultralisk has a cleave attack and costs 2 more supply than the BW version. Of course this comparison is moot, considering both are different games within their own respect.
If anything, Blizzard may have to look at the survivability of the ultra, and a slight upgrade to their HP could bring the unit in line more with SC2; remember though, in SC:BW Terran had science vessels with irradiate that would bring an ultra's HP down to low levels (and also spread around if not handled properly).
SC2 Ultra: Cleave damage and +15 base damage (20 to armored) -100 less HP +15 seconds increased build time +100 more minerals to train +2 more supply
SC:BW Ultra No cleave damage 20 base damage +100 more HP -15 seconds decreased build time -100 fewer minerals to train -2 supply
What made the BW ultralisk appealing was its cost:survivability ratio, and that is what SC2 essentially lacks at the moment. Perhaps adjust the HP, supply, build time or cost accordingly (I would go with build time, decrease it to allow for a few more ultras, which equals a better cost:survivability ratio, but maintains the same macro mechanics in SC2).
you have got to be kidding. my only counter to thors was max out ultras no other units and I could barely still win.... now wtf!!!! sigh the only chance Z had to win late game is gone =\.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Wait so the Thor that COST the same as the ultra should be able to own it, and attack air at 10 range with AoE, while being repaired lol.... Are you kidding me? tell me please what Z is supposed to do now? I would love to hear this coming from a Terran or Protoss player I need the laughs now since Z is still getting nerfed and it's the worse race in the game.
edit: I still find it amazing that no one thinks the Thor should cost more considering its the equivalent of the collsi and the ultra but is obv much better all around...
this whole ultra situation is sickening, makes me feel ill and lose a lot of confidence in blizz.
as a side note, if being realistic is worth anything in this game then it would make sense that the splash would deal 100% damage to all units because i mean, the tusk either hits you or it doesn't all or nothing, whereas the farther from an explosion you are the less powerful cause its the shockwave that gets you. I would accept this nerf if splash damage changed to be 100%
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Wait so the Thor that COST the same as the ultra should be able to own it, and attack air at 10 range with AoE, while being repaired lol.... Are you kidding me? tell me please what Z is supposed to do now? I would love to hear this coming from a Terran or Protoss player I need the laughs now since Z is still getting nerfed and it's the worse race in the game.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Wait so the Thor that COST the same as the ultra should be able to own it, and attack air at 10 range with AoE, while being repaired lol.... Are you kidding me? tell me please what Z is supposed to do now? I would love to hear this coming from a Terran or Protoss player I need the laughs now since Z is still getting nerfed and it's the worse race in the game.
Don't forget it comes out like, way faster.
lol yeah there has been so many games ive lost waiting on the 70sec build time to complete... Everything about Z is just sad.
I love topics like this, no matter what people say you are 100% right or ban. It was just a bug, live with it or quit SC2.
FFS.
The reason Z players are up in arms is that the "bug" fix also nerfed ultra splash against massive units to well below what it used to be. Now ultralisks are SIGNIFICANTLY LESS EFFECTIVE AGAINST UNITS LIKE THORS than they used to be. This isn't just about the bloody PF.
To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something) What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote:What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
Quoted for truth. This lackadaisical approach to "fixing" bugs is indeed very disturbing.
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something) What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
Ultra with the "bug" is about as balanced as the mule is right now. So I would love to see the Mule "fixed" too.
On September 29 2010 04:29 ffdestiny wrote: SC2 Ultra: Cleave damage and +15 base damage (20 to armored) -100 less HP +15 seconds increased build time +100 more minerals to train +2 more supply
It does +20 damage to armored, so its 35 and it has 100 more hp (well, you had that right in the beginning) and only takes 10 seconds longer to build (70 to 60 seconds).
units with large collision size was meant to counter splash damage - the same way ultra counters tank splash. although whether the ultra splash range should be set higher is another debate.
On September 29 2010 03:13 Jaeger wrote: Doesn't it make sense for thors to beat ultras? Thors do high damage vs single targets which makes them ideally suited for taking on high health high armor targets (i.e. ultralisks). Cost is the same and it takes a very long time to mass thors as they have to be built is series where as ultras can be built in parallel. If you scout mass thor, or mech as a whole isn't the natural end game tech broodlords?
Wait so the Thor that COST the same as the ultra should be able to own it, and attack air at 10 range with AoE, while being repaired lol.... Are you kidding me? tell me please what Z is supposed to do now? I would love to hear this coming from a Terran or Protoss player I need the laughs now since Z is still getting nerfed and it's the worse race in the game.
Don't forget it comes out like, way faster.
lol yeah there has been so many games ive lost waiting on the 70sec build time to complete... Everything about Z is just sad.
Not just the unit build time - the tech tree. Unfortunately, that's just a case of circumstance. Terran needs Thor early on to deal with mutas. Zerg cannot get Ultras earlier because that is broken.
On September 29 2010 04:03 Atticus.axl wrote: Alright, as a zerg that started playing in 1999, I'll throw in my old-timer thoughts. Also, before I begin, I would take it as a kindness if you did not immediately dismiss the content simply because SC2 is a "different game."
In SC, as well as Broodwar, there was a very specific reason the Ultralisk was a solid and viable unit against both T and P. It was not definitely not splash damage, as the Ultra would only ever hit a single target. The reason the Ultralisk was good was that it had survivability. With the Ultralisk in SC2 able to evaporate in 2 seconds to nearly every unit composition, it is almost detrimental to tech to them, much less produce them. Splash damage is not the answer here. Making the Ultralisk a unit that can take the hits from the front line, and let the lings and everything else get in close unharmed, would not only make it a worthwhile unit, but would help bring that "swarmy" feeling back to the zerg.
I realize there are a hundred other factors that play into this, (i.e., map size, unit size, chokes, ability to surround etc...) but I'm trying to be concise.
Edit: added an "and"
i kept trying to convince myself of a way to play the ultralisk like its been designed from BW as well, an HP tank in its purest form, and still to this day, I too cannot find its place in SC2 as an HP tank or as an offensive unit either. At high level play they are so cost ineffective, they just don't belong in the tech tree. They melt so quickly to competent players who know the counters and how to abuse them.
It seems we've once again come full circle, as in the beta with Blizzard desperately trying to figure out the Zerg race. Its come to the point where I find it insulting that people will continue to praise the development who obviously have no idea what they're doing. The previous posts in this thread asking why these "bugs" were even allowed into the patch, and then completely changing the mechanic itself in the subsequent "fix", is just another nail in the coffin from the clusterfuck that has been zerg "balancing" throughout the entirety of SC2's development.
Please just revert to former splash dmg and reimplement Ram headbutt attack. I'm fine with PF's being retardedly hard to kill with SCVs repairing as long as I can still stop a Terran army with a superior army myself.
In BW, ultra + ling works (1) because of dark swarm and (2) because ultralisks tanked a lot of damage while your cracklings did the damage.
In SC2, ultra + ling works because your lings tank damage/act as cannon fodder/do a little extra DPS while your ultras absolutely annihilate everything on the ground. And you can freeze units in place with FG.
An ultralisk splash nerf really, really hurts a unit whose role is to do damage (and not necessarily tank it).
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something)
You're missing the part where terran has 5 pre-igniter hellions behind his thors.
On September 29 2010 04:17 Winter_mute wrote: Just another reason not to get ultras. Seeing them do their ridiculous ultra dance and not even reaching their target, makes me swear in 5 languages.
As an avid ultra user (every matchup about 80% of games), ultras don't "dance" in groups of 3. send them three at a time from each angle. (this means no more than 12 ultras attacking a group until its large enough to have 24 attacking)
Wow I can't believe that... So they nerfed the Ultra's splash vs Units too? Why? It had nothing to do with that when an Ultra attacks a buildinga ll the scv's die wtf. Sigh now Thors rape Ultra means I have to stop making Ultra (well zvt anyway hopefully they still work zvp)
On September 29 2010 05:03 Heavy Note wrote: why should ultralisks hard counter thors? they are even in food, mineral and gas count, doesn't make sense.
Your right. Zerg should not have a counter to the Thor, apparently Blizz agrees. Congrats.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
On September 29 2010 00:14 HiHiByeBye wrote: hmmm if you watch GSL game 3 cool vs top
Top had about 10-11 thors? and it died to about 7 ultras and cool only lost maybe 1 ultra?
and that is balanced? terran had no counter to ultras from the ground. Now they are more on even grounds.
Zerglings are so cost effective vs thors. Now zerg is forced to have a unit mix instead of just winning by massing ultras and zergs are crying about this?
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
Ultralisks do not get destroyed by marauder/marine ball as long as you fungal it so they can't kite your ultras. Mix in banelings to slaughter marines and some zerglings to be fodder, hydra to take out medivacs and you can win.
On September 29 2010 05:03 Heavy Note wrote: why should ultralisks hard counter thors? they are even in food, mineral and gas count, doesn't make sense.
Kind of funny that thors, who is mainly used as anti air, is better at ground then zergs highest tech unit that only has melee ground to ground attack and costs the same
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
I Disagree.
Well get on your stream so you can tell me why you disagree
Ultralisk are still the strongest unit in the game regardless. (Melee wise) They still do plenty of splash damage and a ultra and bling mix will still rape any composition a terran can put together (Expect for air)
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something) What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
Ultra with the "bug" is about as balanced as the mule is right now. So I would love to see the Mule "fixed" too.
Thank you for your in depth analysis, we need more posters like you here.
First they came for the infestors, and I didn't speak up because my micro is terrible. Then they came for the roaches, and I didn't speak up because I quick lair to mutas. Then they came for the ultralisks, and I didn't speak up because I lose every game before I can even tech to ultras. Then they told me that they didn't play zerg because it was too complicated and not fun, and there was no one left to speak up because everyone switched to terran.
On September 29 2010 04:59 blade55555 wrote: Wow I can't believe that... So they nerfed the Ultra's splash vs Units too? Why? It had nothing to do with that when an Ultra attacks a buildinga ll the scv's die wtf. Sigh now Thors rape Ultra means I have to stop making Ultra (well zvt anyway hopefully they still work zvp)
Probably they recoded the splash (someone else said it earlier.)
Ultra is the zerg's most powerful weapon. It's already pretty weak in comparison. If they decided for smaller radius, buff their damage at least. If a T pulls out 10 BC's or a P comes up with a grand carrier fleet, it looks ridiculously powerful. 10 Ultras are significantly less intimidating not to mention they can't fly nor shoot yamatos.
Blizzard never understood balancing. I honestly thought they learned from wc3. I hope GSL starts making their own maps so zerg can expand before pool, and have some open areas so that melees have some chance. Also I don't understand why taking a main has no advantage over taking an expo.
I'm not gonna wait a decade for a game to balance out.
Ultralisks do not get destroyed by marauder/marine ball as long as you fungal it so they can't kite your ultras. Mix in banelings to slaughter marines and some zerglings to be fodder, hydra to take out medivacs and you can win.
Sounds good, and of how many bases are u mining ure gas? 8-9 should be enough to found all of that, but thanks for the advice
On September 29 2010 05:15 Justifer wrote: Ultralisk are still the strongest unit in the game regardless. (Melee wise) They still do plenty of splash damage and a ultra and bling mix will still rape any composition a terran can put together (Expect for air)
Strongest melee unit in the game ? No seriously, how many melee units is there ? 3, not couting workers ?
The part about ultra/bling unit mix raping any T come up with is also ridiculous.
Kind of funny that thors, who is mainly used as anti air, is better at ground then zergs highest tech unit that only has melee ground to ground attack and costs the same
dont you think?
Just because a Thor beats an Ultralisk 1v1 does not mean that they are better at ground to ground. You are not taking into consideration the facts that Ultralisks do splash damage and Thors vastly overkill (wasted damage) units like zerglings, marines, and workers.
Yes this is true. Ultras are better against smaller units than thors are. My main gripe is that Ultras were the best way to take on a PF without losing half your army thanks to splash and the nigh invulnerability of repair, but now they can't and they lose dps to ground units in the process.
On September 29 2010 05:15 Justifer wrote: Ultralisk are still the strongest unit in the game regardless. (Melee wise) They still do plenty of splash damage and a ultra and bling mix will still rape any composition a terran can put together (Expect for air)
Well.. yeah... just like thor is the strongest unit in the game with two cannons on each arm. That's a sort of silly thing to say.
Now regarding ultra+bling. If a thor beats an ultra 1 on 1, and masses of thors now can beat masses of ultras pretty easily, why would a baneling help in this matter? Heck, thor + scvs on the inside where they can't be hit with either the ultra splash or baneling splash would completely dominate. I would have said ultra + hydra would be a potent combo.
First they came for the infestors, and I didn't speak up because my micro is terrible. Then they came for the roaches, and I didn't speak up because I quick lair to mutas. Then they came for the ultralisks, and I didn't speak up because I lose every game before I can even tech to ultras. Then they told me that they didn't play zerg because it was too complicated and not fun, and there was no one left to speak up because everyone switched to terran.
Best first post award
Hahaha Rofl The best "First they came" statement I have seen, ever!!
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
I Disagree.
(I'm a 1600 point diamond zerg and this is what I thought about the following post) I also disagree. Infestors are not a necessity to win games and to claim terran requires no micro is simply stupid. Your examples are also stupid. To say you end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit early game does not matter. You shouldn't be opening early game with Infestors.
Ultras were not designed to hard counter heavy mech and just because there splash damage was reduced does not mean they are still not a hard counter to mech. Ultralisk were designed just like in Starcraft BW to soak up damage. Thats why they have 500 hp and 5 armor. A unit like the ultralisk that has 500 hp splash damage and can hit 15 every second or so is never useless. The point of ultralisk countering thors is you can mass produce them so much quicker. To claim that an Ultralisk which is made out of one production building and can be made out more than one at a time can't be a single unit spawning one at a time is stupid. So don't go around spouting out bs when your clueless about what your talking about. I'm tired of people who are in bronze trying to claim imbalances when they don't even know how to play the game well.
On September 29 2010 04:36 Moonling wrote: Have any blue posts responded to this information does anybody know?
Quoting my post in here:
Sorry if I missed anything because I didn't ready all the pages here but in the italian forum a blue post stated that this is intended because:
"The splash damage was propagating not the exact way. Now it works correctly. The damage is the same except against very large units. The chances that this will change the course of a battle are very slim, to be honest."
I think I translated it correctly, sorry for my bad english but since I didn't see any blue post about this in the EU forum (not sure about America) I wanted to share it with u.
So yes, here's the anwser and it's not a good one.
Typical blizzard tbh. Everyone is telling them that zerg is UP, so they take out the nerf bat and swing right at... the only zerg unit that still does damage.
not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something) What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
Ultra with the "bug" is about as balanced as the mule is right now. So I would love to see the Mule "fixed" too.
Thank you for your in depth analysis, you need more posters like you here.
since in 10x the player you are or will ever be thanks bro
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something) What I find disturbing is that blizz just throws up a significant nerf just like that. I really though that the ultrabug was ridiculous and couldn't understand how some people could deny it. Same thing here, how can they nerf that in a bug fix patch ? Don't they test anything ? Zerg needs some buffs, a new unit or a major new thing imo already, and they put a nerf ? I'm really stunned. I hope they'll aknowledge it's a bug and rerefix it.
Ultra with the "bug" is about as balanced as the mule is right now. So I would love to see the Mule "fixed" too.
Thank you for your in depth analysis, you need more posters like you here.
since in 10x the player you are or will ever be thanks bro
The mule is perfectly balanced. On blistering Sands the Ultralisk bug would literally allow you to attack the rocks and kill turrets and supply depos that were watching them. Thats fucking stupid and it needed to be patched.
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something)
You're missing the part where terran has 5 pre-igniter hellions behind his thors.
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
AFAIK side splash doesn't really help a MELEE unit.
maybe if they had 7 range like other massive ground units... *cough*
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
AFAIK side splash doesn't really help a MELEE unit.
your right. unless its wading through a field of zealots or something, but should a melee unit have depth splash? does that even make sense. they did not decrease the radius right? how can you argue that attacking the front of a pf or destructable rocks should damage things behind it. yah obviously it was better but it purely didnt make any sense.
On September 29 2010 05:32 ThirdStorm wrote: Are Utralisks suppose to counter Thors? Or are Thors suppose to counter Utralisks?
Ultralisks had their damage type changed specifically to give them the role of countering armored units. Thors are also lower tech, ranged, and can hit air units. If ultralisks don't counter thors heavily, something is dreadfully wrong.
On September 29 2010 05:32 ThirdStorm wrote: Are Utralisks suppose to counter Thors? Or are Thors suppose to counter Utralisks?
In theory, ultralisks should be a soft counter to thors, in the same way vultures were a soft counter to dragoons in SC1 (they got demolished in a head-to-head fight, but spider mines put the battle in their favour). Food for food, resources for resources, ultralisks and thors are even. However, thors have a long range ground attack and an even longer range air attack, and have a long-range, long-duration stun upgrade. So, in theory, because ultralisks are only ground attack, they should be the victor.
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
Two problems here. First, it's possible you just don't understand what splash means but when the splash range is the same but it starts at a location further away from where you want it to be then it's absolutely a nerf in damage dealt. Second, you seem to be under the impression that units in starcraft work logically in some way. Is there a logical reason every siege tank operator is psychically linked to every other so they never shoot at the same target unless they need to? Is there a logical reason brood lords can fling an endless supply of broodings at things and never get smaller? It just doesn't make sense to analyze balance that way.
Blizzard stated Ultralisks are not counter for Thor yet I agree with them being at least a soft counter where they even added them the anti-stun buff to make sure they don't get countered hard by Thors with ability cannon.
Are Utralisks suppose to counter Thors? Or are Thors suppose to counter Utralisks?
Making up some "supposed to do X" is not good.
They WERE pretty balanced in their dynamic between each other. Now the Ultras arent that good anymore.
And btw I like it how some Terran player just say its reasonable...
if by pretty balanced you mean 6 ultra pwn 11 thors like in cool's game, yes they were balanced. (just nitpicking here, I agree with what you said)
For the love of god, it wasn't 6 ultras wtfpwning 11 thors.
15 thors 2-2 vs 10 1-4 ultras, a bunch of zerglings, banelings, and roaches that softened up the top 4 thors and absorbed their attacks until the ultras got the thors down to half life. THEN 14 thors wtfpwned 3 ultras in one instant.
If it was a good spread of thors vs the ultras only, even before this patch, Cool would have lost that battle.
On September 29 2010 04:42 MrCon wrote: To be honest zerglings are destroying thors already, so the problem isn't really that (unless I'm missing something)
You're missing the part where terran has 5 pre-igniter hellions behind his thors.
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
On September 29 2010 05:24 Justifer wrote: (I'm a 1600 point diamond zerg and this is what I thought about the following post) I also disagree. Infestors are not a necessity to win games and to claim terran requires no micro is simply stupid. Your examples are also stupid. To say you end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit early game does not matter. You shouldn't be opening early game with Infestors.
Ultras were not designed to hard counter heavy mech and just because there splash damage was reduced does not mean they are still not a hard counter to mech. Ultralisk were designed just like in Starcraft BW to soak up damage. Thats why they have 500 hp and 5 armor. A unit like the ultralisk that has 500 hp splash damage and can hit 15 every second or so is never useless. The point of ultralisk countering thors is you can mass produce them so much quicker. To claim that an Ultralisk which is made out of one production building and can be made out more than one at a time can't be a single unit spawning one at a time is stupid. So don't go around spouting out bs when your clueless about what your talking about. I'm tired of people who are in bronze trying to claim imbalances when they don't even know how to play the game well.
I also disagree with this. and with my being warned for talking to a person who should know exactly why i disagree based on my stream.
but yeah opening infestors is very strong vs T and ultras role used to be tanks for damage and then they lowered their survivability in order to deal a bunch of damage to fortified fronts (tanks thors collosus ect). so its probably the idea of ultralisks to be a armored buster.
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
Two problems here. First, it's possible you just don't understand what splash means but when the splash range is the same but it starts at a location further away from where you want it to be then it's absolutely a nerf in damage dealt. Second, you seem to be under the impression that units in starcraft work logically in some way. Is there a logical reason every siege tank operator is psychically linked to every other so they never shoot at the same target unless they need to? Is there a logical reason brood lords can fling broodings and things and never get smaller? It just doesn't make sense to analyze balance that way.
yes it makes zerg worse when zerg should be getting better. yes it does less effective desirable damage. yes if your zerg you can qq if you want. yes it makes more sense this way. no im not an idiot. i just find nerf a hard word to throw around.
and i will always believe the blizzard world is perfectly logical the siege tanks have auto targeting systems that are networked together and calculate the available targets and tanks in range several times a second. the operator just watches the lights flash. the metabolic rate of a broodlord astoundingly creates fetuses and matures them to broodlords in seconds using nothing but the nutrients in the air.
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
[quote=justifer]I'm a 1600 point diamond Zerg player and i say its reasonable.[/quote] Boy I dont get you. So u think Ultralisk were too strong in 1.0 because of their wide cleave range?
While cleave is like that, since the first beta build... NOW after it got nerfed u think it is right and make it public...?
The problem with broodlords is they get countered quite well by marines, vikings, and even repaired thors.
At one point I thought getting brood lords would work well vs thor terrans, but then I noticed that when the thors are being repaired, and there's a few vikings around not being suicidal, there's nothing zerg can do about it with brood lords. My queens eventually ran out of energy healing the broodlords, and didn't deal enough damage to the vikings, not to mention that vikings weren't dealing most of the damage in the first place.
Ultralisks need a serious buff now that they have had an unprecedented nerf. Give them an ability, more AoE, more damage, more health, doesn't matter a whole lot, they just need something to do decent.
Ultralisks had a hard enough time as it is vs marauders, which countered ultralisks quite well, making thor-marauder core compositions very strong - now it's even worse.
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
You are not a 1600 Zerg player.
Wanna bet? Just.599. God i love when idiots make themselves look stupid
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
Two problems here. First, it's possible you just don't understand what splash means but when the splash range is the same but it starts at a location further away from where you want it to be then it's absolutely a nerf in damage dealt. Second, you seem to be under the impression that units in starcraft work logically in some way. Is there a logical reason every siege tank operator is psychically linked to every other so they never shoot at the same target unless they need to? Is there a logical reason brood lords can fling broodings and things and never get smaller? It just doesn't make sense to analyze balance that way.
yes it makes zerg worse when zerg should be getting better. yes it does less effective desirable damage. yes if your zerg you can qq if you want. yes it makes more sense this way. no im not an idiot. i just find nerf a hard word to throw around.
and i will always believe the blizzard world is perfectly logical the siege tanks have auto targeting systems that are networked together and calculate the available targets and tanks in range several times a second. the operator just watches the lights flash. the metabolic rate of a broodlord astoundingly creates fetuses and matures them to broodlords in seconds using nothing but the nutrients in the air.
Then a few questions for u!
How can marines shoot from behind a 3 barrack wall blocking the ramp.
How can infestors create infested terrans ? I can believe they copied the human DNA etc but copying the weapons ?
How can Hydras take down armored things when they can't even penetrate a marine armor (check campaign cutscenes).
Whahuh? Ultras get DESTROYED by marauder/marine mix with medivac support. And a few infernal preigniter hellions can exterminate any number of zerglings. It's absolute RAPE it's so one-sided. It's like playing Jenga where your opponent can choose his own blocks as well as the ones you have to remove. Completely unfair.
Now ultras aren't even effective. Thor/Hellion becomes just another unit composition that requires infestors and tons of micro to scout, position, and cast at the right times so you can overcome your opponent.
Meanwhile terran just has to move out with his hellions, thors, and a handful of scvs on autorepair. What micro is needed for that? You don't even have to lift and replace add-ons in that build. It's a joke.
And that's assuming you scout correctly. What if you go down a completely incorrect tech path, end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit, or an infestation pit and ultra den but no infestors or pathogen glands? It's easy enough to do, terran has so many options with so few buildings that a rax 2fact and a starport could mean anything from hellion/tank drops to marine tank viking to marauder hellion preigniter to all-out mech play.
Bottom line is ultras were designed to hard counter heavy mech units, and that's what they did, but now they are useless at even doing that. And you think that's a good thing? So tell me, would you consider it good if ghost EMP was removed so they couldn't counter infestor/HT anymore? Or if the immortal was changed to only do 20 damage to armored targets? Or if tank splash was changed to hit completely random spots in the target area and possibly missing entirely (cause it's unrealistic that tanks hit their target every time)?
No, that would be stupid, because it interferes with the basic design of each race that gives the game balance. Zerglings can't kill a critical mass of hellions because hellions were designed to hard counter zerglings, just like mass thors used to not be able to kill ultras because ultras were designed to counter heavy mech. Zerglings should not be able to destroy hellions easily, just like thors should not be able to destroy ultras. Yet now that is exactly the situation that has evolved.
I Disagree.
(I'm a 1600 point diamond zerg and this is what I thought about the following post) I also disagree. Infestors are not a necessity to win games and to claim terran requires no micro is simply stupid. Your examples are also stupid. To say you end up with a spire instead of an infestation pit early game does not matter. You shouldn't be opening early game with Infestors.
Ultras were not designed to hard counter heavy mech and just because there splash damage was reduced does not mean they are still not a hard counter to mech. Ultralisk were designed just like in Starcraft BW to soak up damage. Thats why they have 500 hp and 5 armor. A unit like the ultralisk that has 500 hp splash damage and can hit 15 every second or so is never useless. The point of ultralisk countering thors is you can mass produce them so much quicker. To claim that an Ultralisk which is made out of one production building and can be made out more than one at a time can't be a single unit spawning one at a time is stupid. So don't go around spouting out bs when your clueless about what your talking about. I'm tired of people who are in bronze trying to claim imbalances when they don't even know how to play the game well.
Thanks for the response, and to clarify, I didn't say terran requires no micro, I said that specific build requires little/no micro compared to how much the zerg response requires. I don't know if I agree with you regarding mass production of ultras... you can mass produce them one time when the ultra den finishes assuming you have not had to invest into keeping yourself safe and defended every harass perfectly. After that you can make maybe 2-3 at once, which is easily done by a terran with 2 bases and 2-3 factories as well in regard to thors.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
As soon as Zerg has just one thing that's too strong, it gets changed in a matter of days. Well, fuck you too Blizzard. This is just insulting to anyone who plays the race.
On September 29 2010 05:27 ComaDose wrote: not a nerf. splash range is same just from different location. will affect more units to the side. its a meele unit. why should it reach over/through thors? its a meele unit why should the splash be from the center of the target?
Two problems here. First, it's possible you just don't understand what splash means but when the splash range is the same but it starts at a location further away from where you want it to be then it's absolutely a nerf in damage dealt. Second, you seem to be under the impression that units in starcraft work logically in some way. Is there a logical reason every siege tank operator is psychically linked to every other so they never shoot at the same target unless they need to? Is there a logical reason brood lords can fling broodings and things and never get smaller? It just doesn't make sense to analyze balance that way.
yes it makes zerg worse when zerg should be getting better. yes it does less effective desirable damage. yes if your zerg you can qq if you want. yes it makes more sense this way. no im not an idiot. i just find nerf a hard word to throw around.
and i will always believe the blizzard world is perfectly logical the siege tanks have auto targeting systems that are networked together and calculate the available targets and tanks in range several times a second. the operator just watches the lights flash. the metabolic rate of a broodlord astoundingly creates fetuses and matures them to broodlords in seconds using nothing but the nutrients in the air.
I'm sorry but any changes where a unit's effectiveness is reduced, even in this small case is indeed considered a nerf.
A nerf doesn't have to be a drastic negative change, a nerfs a nerf.
I actually like the fix. It just makes more logical sense. Put up a bunch of stuff in your room and slash at it with a big sword. The size of the object doesn't affect how much you hit.
Of course, from a gameplay perspective, this hurts. This is a nerf to the race which needs it the least, so that's not good. But it's not as if broken cleave was the end-all fix to the current situation; if it was that easy, we could break a whole bunch of other things and there'd still be no balance. To me, broken cleave was akin to "GIVE DRONES MORE RETURN" or "BUFF X'S DAMAGE."
I'd say, oh, they need to give Ultras their damage back, but honestly I think Zerg's hurting due to a concept issue, and no amount of changing numbers is going to do much in terms of balance.
The reason why Ultras were given this different type of splash damage in the first place was because they were designed specifically to counter massed Mech and massed armored units; units which are generally large and tough enough to deal with anti-light (i.e. normal) splash damage easily. This is thus an intentional feature, and NOT a bug.
Without it, Ultras are MUCH less powerful against mass armored units, the very thing they are designed to counter. This change is thus a bug, and should be treated as such.
So instead of fixing the splash and making it look decent by either adding two different cleave attacks one for massive and large buildings and the other overall, you took out the splash almost completely so that units like the Thor that do insane DPS, take up so much room in your especially cramped 'staple' maps that they will always create a concave against the Ultras, when the Ultras move clumsily about with zerglings, AND during a time when Zerg needs a buff overall against the other races?
Honest to god, just have tournament winners and really high up guys and clans advice you. No offense but their 10+ hours per day regiment fine tuning and exploring build teaches them more about the game than aggregate data prone to errors, dependencies and statistical misinterpretations ('statistics is the science and art of interpreting figures') ever will. Blizzard, you seem to be moving in the dark ESPECIALLY if you unintentionally caused this.
On September 29 2010 05:49 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:46 Justifer wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
You are not a 1600 Zerg player.
Wanna bet? Just.599. God i love when idiots make themselves look stupid
Show me some flying Ultralisks hanging a battle replays lol.
Honestly, I doubt this patch ever went past the designers and balance people. QA saw some bugs, got okay from higher ups to fix them, and then patched.
I guess I'd have to see a video of ultralisk before 1.1 to be sure of this. I specifically remember testing all Zerg units after release to try to find good ways to deal with Thors and Ultralisk losing that test. The first thing I did when I saw the PF videos from 1.1 is go test Thor vs Ultra and the Ultras were winning and I was happy.
I just went back and watched some old videos before patch 1.1 and it really does seem the splash worked differently then. As far as I can tell the splash originates at the ultralisk and in patch 1.1 it was originating at the unit being attacked so even though the range might not have changed the number of units hit against large targets really did look bigger.
On September 29 2010 05:49 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:46 Justifer wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
You are not a 1600 Zerg player.
Wanna bet? Just.599. God i love when idiots make themselves look stupid
I really wanna know how the MMR thing works. You didn't even make the top 200, while I've been placed as high as like 120 when I stopped playing aroudn 1500 points a bit ago, I was being matched against people a lot higher htan me. I've played maybe 6 ladder games in the past 2 weeks and I still made it on, and my last game was a ZvZ against Strelok :o. He had only like 750 points but was favored against me and I got 17 friggin' points for winning. Crazy.
On September 28 2010 23:36 Piski wrote: I'm really that stupid that I don't get it :o I mean they said it wasn't intentional what ultra splash did in 1.1 so why are so freakin' surprised that it's now nerfed?
Didn't they just pretty much reverted it back as it was in 1.0?
Ultras used to use the ram attack on buildings; they never changed / buffed Ultra splash damage on other units, but since the splash dmg attack on buildings was imba they made it... bad...
I think I'm going to stop playing zerg. The ultralisk is my tier 3 bread and butter unit, and I utilize it a lot. After this nerf, they're a lot less effective than they ever were before. So overall patch 1.1 gave them a +5 damage nerf, and a splash nerf--who cares if I can splash repairing SCVs off the back of a supply depot now--if I wanted to bust a door I'd use banelings.
I'm disappointed, and moreso than I ever have been about Starcraft in the past. I may just do the "real life random" coin flip for Terran/Protoss in my laddering, because the skill differentially between the three (more so with Terran than Protoss) is so vast that I feel like I have to work twice as hard when I want to play my little slimy swarm.
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
I think that's what everyone is upset about. The nerf came immediately, but the buff "is only a matter of time". It really feels like a slap in the face to zerg players that blizzard fixes this within a week while zerg has had problems at highly competitive levels for months.
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
Absolutely! It's "only a matter of time" before Zerg gets fixed, but when Terrans can't just a-move their entire force into a Zerg base and let their PFs get repaired with no effort, they get a hotfix instantaneously.
On September 29 2010 06:21 Zips wrote: You would think the world ended, according to some of these posts..
I think its because Zerg was so underpowered and people have been saying they need a buff for many many months and then blizzard nerfs them instead.
Blizzard obviously have something up their sleeve, its basically like they are making fun of all the starcraft players by purposely imbalancing their game. Honestly, I wouldn't have believed it before, but I think we need some conspiracy theories or something because there is logically no way whatsoever that Blizzard can be making these changes and not be consciously or unconsciously favoring Terran.
Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
I don't get it...wouldn't they test this kind of thing before releasing the patch? I mean, if you're changing ONE major thing in a patch, wouldn't you see how it affected its cleave in general? That seems like common sense to me...
Then again, I thought the same exact thing when I heard about the ultra cleave on the PF. That would be one of the first things to test out the building cleave on. I'm extremely disappointed with Blizzard (not just because of this). It kind of shows that they really don't test anything before they release a patch, but who knows. Ugh.
Yeah, it's so annoying, sometimes it really looks like Blizzard hates Zerg or likes to troll Zerg players. All advantages for Zerg are getting nerfed in a ridiculous short time compared to nerfes for the other races. Ultra splash, Queen larvae injection smart casting, Roach supply...what the hell man. It's not like Ultras were terribly imbalanced with the building splash and nonetheless they go for the nerf like some frantic maniacs lol. Sorry for the rant, but this action was over the top from Blizzard, they should apologize for this - no joke.
Blizzard obviously have something up their sleeve, its basically like they are making fun of all the starcraft players by purposely imbalancing their game. Honestly, I wouldn't have believed it before, but I think we need some conspiracy theories or something because there is logically no way whatsoever that Blizzard can be making these changes and not be consciously or unconsciously favoring Terran.
Honestly your underestimating human stupidity and lazyness.
Some random associate developer messes around with data editor fields and puts it to localization and QA for a quick release.
...
/rage.
And by QA I don't mean "thorough testing" I mean "Did the game explode?"
I'm a little bit concerned with Blizzard's testing methods, this isnt the first time this kind of thing has happened. how is it their testers arent catching these things? i mean it's not like some weird side effect occurred as a result, it's the exact thing they were 'fixing' that broke. how is it that they dont think "well gee lets see the difference between pre change, and post change"
how is it their testers arent catching these things? i mean it's not like some weird side effect occurred as a result, it's the exact thing they were 'fixing' that broke. how is it that they dont think "well gee lets see the difference between pre change, and post change"
They just don't.
Really it isn't that hard to imagine. Think about how you do your job. Now think about if people actually cared about how you did it/effected things on a larger scale.
Yeah.
And if your extremely professional and working in a groundbreaking and important position, I apologize, just think about your lazy underachieving co-workers/employees/interns/undergrads.
On September 29 2010 06:31 Zelniq wrote: I'm a little bit concerned with Blizzard's testing methods, this isnt the first time this kind of thing has happened. how is it their testers arent catching these things? i mean it's not like some weird side effect occurred as a result, it's the exact thing they were 'fixing' that broke. how is it that they dont think "well gee lets see the difference between pre change, and post change"
The testers probably don't play with HP bars on.
But seriously, my thoughts exactly...I just don't understand.
Absolutely! It's "only a matter of time" before Zerg gets fixed, but when Terrans can't just a-move their entire force into a Zerg base and let their PFs get repaired with no effort, they get a hotfix instantaneously.
More like even when a terran lets his PF die, all the scvs mining will still die to the imba splash. You cant fix a game by breaking it more. Its not just PF it was with any building as well.
On September 29 2010 05:49 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:46 Justifer wrote:
On September 29 2010 05:43 Fa1nT wrote: Ultra are supposed to counter all armored ground units
Ultra are supposed to tank and survive to deal damage
Thors are not supposed to out-DPS them even without a damage type bonus.. And they can hit air, and fly on medivacs >_>
Ultralisks can fly in overlords? They still tank and deal damage like there suppose to and now and they still counter armored heavily. Just because they don't have massive splash doesn't mean they dont do any of the things you mentioned
You are not a 1600 Zerg player.
Wanna bet? Just.599. God i love when idiots make themselves look stupid
I really wanna know how the MMR thing works. You didn't even make the top 200, while I've been placed as high as like 120 when I stopped playing aroudn 1500 points a bit ago, I was being matched against people a lot higher htan me. I've played maybe 6 ladder games in the past 2 weeks and I still made it on, and my last game was a ZvZ against Strelok :o. He had only like 750 points but was favored against me and I got 17 friggin' points for winning. Crazy.
Points between divisions, even in the same league, are not comparable. Only points in the same division are comparable, that's why dayvie and the first few people in his division are among the top players based on points, but in the Blizzard ranking they are always significantly lower. Here's an old Blizzard quote I dig up from another thread:
by Benzenn 18 Mar 2010, 19:43 Sorry I misunderstood what the OP was referring to. I didn't mean to imply that one division is ranked better than the other, but simply explaining the basics of divisions. As far as comparison across divisions it's certainly something we've considered but there are issues, such that the rankings in one division don't directly translate to the other divisions. So you couldn't compare division 10 to division 48 and compare one player's points to another.
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
Absolutely! It's "only a matter of time" before Zerg gets fixed, but when Terrans can't just a-move their entire force into a Zerg base and let their PFs get repaired with no effort, they get a hotfix instantaneously.
What stings about it is they affected something that showed no signs of being imbalanced (Ultras vs units) and completely 'broke'/changed it just to hotfix an issue which showed no signs of being significantly imbalanced to overall 1v1 win rates.
If the hotfix was: Ultra ram attack reintroduced due to building splash bug, then there'd be no real sting to the change and it would have been really good sign of respect to the zerg players. If ultras with large splash are imba, then leave that change until the next actual fix. It's clearly not a game breaking splash radius (since it's been like that for months), so why rush out the fix?
I'm fine with rolling through all these changes and the 'dark times' of Zerg, but it really does sting when Blizzard more or less does something that's basically a slap in the face to zerg players.
I mean look at the ultra. You have this huge unit that's difficult to tech to, takes forever to build, and really needs ups to shine. Then on top of that it has to hit armored units to be effective despite the difficulty/impossible task of actually controlling such a unit. Yet even with those drawbacks it's 'the zerg unit' right now. It's the zerg champion, the zerg savior, the unit that makes you put down your foot and say, "Now I can be confident, now I can take on your army, make you fear me instead." The ultra is basically the unit that zerg WANTS to make instead of HAS to make.
Then Blizzard takes this prestigious unit of the zerg army and arbitrarily nerfs it to fix a bug even though there's been almost no time to judge the balance of the unit (especially with the recent dmg nerf).
Yet at the same time all intentional or direct game changes are slow and methodical (which is a good thing) to preserve balance and prevent balancing from swinging wildly.
From the zerg perspective what it seems is Blizzard wants to take a slow and methodical approach to balance (again this is a good thing)... unless it's something that would negatively impact zerg then they can just throw it in on a rushed hotfix without regard. It's not that having a nerf sucks, it's that Blizzard isn't showing any courtesy to the already struggling zerg community.
EDIT: I'm not really ranting against Blizzard, I still respect them a ton as a company, but really it's quite an unkind gesture to break their normal methodology to do something like this. Just for example, where was the hotfix to fix scvs repairing from inside a bunker?
On September 29 2010 06:38 Sprouter wrote: I want to see how ultra splash looked like pre-1.1.0. obviously 1.1.1 is going to look like a huge nerf compared to 1.1.0's UNINTENTIONAL BUFF/BUG.
1.1.0 wasn't a buff to splash range, splash didn't change at all in 1.1.0 EXCEPT that you could now hit a very large thing (buildings) with the pre-existing splash behavior.
Ultras have always hit Thors like they did in 1.1.0 for the entire retail game.
On September 29 2010 06:38 Sprouter wrote: I want to see how ultra splash looked like pre-1.1.0. obviously 1.1.1 is going to look like a huge nerf compared to 1.1.0's UNINTENTIONAL BUFF/BUG.
It looked the same vs units and did not work vs buildings. They also dealt more to armored.
On September 29 2010 05:52 Goliathsorrow wrote: How can marines shoot from behind a 3 barrack wall blocking the ramp. How can infestors create infested terrans ? I can believe they copied the human DNA etc but copying the weapons ? How can Hydras take down armored things when they can't even penetrate a marine armor (check campaign cutscenes). Etc etc.
ahahaha i will have to consult with my scientists. but i reversed my logic and maybe the ultras were just hitting those distructable rocks so hard that pieces were falling off and hitting the scvs
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
I think that's what everyone is upset about. The nerf came immediately, but the buff "is only a matter of time". It really feels like a slap in the face to zerg players that blizzard fixes this within a week while zerg has had problems at highly competitive levels for months.
This is standard for Blizzard. If they see a bug or unintended gameplay effect they don't like, they'll nuke it ASAP, regardless of any related factors. It doesn't help that sometimes the nuke is rather poorly aimed. But (and this goes for Zerg posters in general), please remember that they don't intentionally want Zerg to be a bad playing experience. Zerg just happened to have the bad luck to catch a bug at an inopportune time. Blizzard would have done the exact same thing if the bug had been in a Terran unit, or a Protoss one. And they're doing the right thing in fixing it, too, although the exact method they chose to do so is, as it so often is, very debatable.
On September 29 2010 06:38 Sprouter wrote: I want to see how ultra splash looked like pre-1.1.0. obviously 1.1.1 is going to look like a huge nerf compared to 1.1.0's UNINTENTIONAL BUFF/BUG.
Ultra splash looked exactly the same 1.1.0 as it did from the end of the first phase beta.
On September 29 2010 06:38 Sprouter wrote: I want to see how ultra splash looked like pre-1.1.0. obviously 1.1.1 is going to look like a huge nerf compared to 1.1.0's UNINTENTIONAL BUFF/BUG.
It looked the same vs units and did not work vs buildings. They also dealt more to armored.
I'd like to see an actual video of it though because as I said earlier while looking at old replays and from actually testing things in the unit tester this really doesn't seem true. Everyone is saying it but nobody seems to be able to back it up with any proof.
It almost looks like they changed where the splash originates from in 1.1 from watching old replays. The splash definitely looks different even against units though.
On September 29 2010 06:42 Karkadinn wrote: Zerg just happened to have the bad luck to catch a bug at an inopportune time. Blizzard would have done the exact same thing if the bug had been in a Terran unit, or a Protoss one. And they're doing the right thing in fixing it, too, although the exact method they chose to do so is, as it so often is, very debatable.
On September 29 2010 06:35 Logo wrote: Just for example, where was the hotfix to fix scvs repairing from inside a bunker?
On September 29 2010 06:38 Sprouter wrote: I want to see how ultra splash looked like pre-1.1.0. obviously 1.1.1 is going to look like a huge nerf compared to 1.1.0's UNINTENTIONAL BUFF/BUG.
It looked the same vs units and did not work vs buildings. They also dealt more to armored.
I'd like to see an actual video of it though because as I said earlier while looking at old replays and from actually testing things in the unit tester this really doesn't seem true. Everyone is saying it but nobody seems to be able to back it up with any proof.
It almost looks like they changed where the splash originates from in 1.1 from watching old replays. The splash definitely looks different even against units though.
I am looking at the EffectData.xml files and they are the same between 1.0.2 and 1.1, with the exception of the normal attack being able to target buildings, of course. I haven't tested in game, but the "Extend By Unit Radius" flag is there in both versions and matches the behavior.
During the beta cleave splash was as it is now but along with the patch that changed ultra from 600 hp 25 dmg to 400 hp 15+25 armoured dmg there was an undocumented change where ppl thought cleave splash was increased, it was not it was just the bug that got introduced that was now fixed.
This was all around the time where most splash was changed from being applied to a point on the map to being centered on targeted unit to help ranged units splash where you could miss the targeted unit when targeting fast units like mutas and ling and only hitting them with the lower dmg zones instaid of direct hits.
Anyway ppl just ate the introduction of this bug as a ninja buff for the ultras splash area and never thought to question it
This was on one of the last patches of the beta so ppl didn't play around with the ultra mutch as it allready considered useless back then, then the next patch did incease it's hp to 500 and gave it the speedupgrade as preresearched and beta ended shortly thereafter (timeline was something like this but i'm too lazy to check the beta patch compilation thread to verify, but it's this or very close to)
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
On September 29 2010 06:51 Zihn wrote: Just to clarify
During the beta cleave splash was as it is now but along with the patch that changed ultra from 600 hp 25 dmg to 400 hp 15+25 armoured dmg there was an undocumented change where ppl thought cleave splash was increased, it was not it was just the bug that got introduced that was now fixed.
This was all around the time where most splash was changed from being applied to a point on the map to being centered on targeted unit to help ranged units splash where you could miss the targeted unit when targeting fast units like mutas and ling and only hitting them with the lower dmg zones instaid of direct hits.
Anyway ppl just ate the introduction of this bug as a ninja buff for the ultras splash area and never thought to question it
This was on one of the last patches of the beta so ppl didn't play around with the ultra mutch as it allready considered useless back then, then the next patch did incease it's hp to 500 and gave it the speedupgrade as preresearched and beta ended shortly thereafter (timeline was something like this but i'm too lazy to check the beta patch compilation thread to verify, but it's this or very close to)
On September 29 2010 06:51 Zihn wrote: Just to clarify
During the beta cleave splash was as it is now but along with the patch that changed ultra from 600 hp 25 dmg to 400 hp 15+25 armoured dmg there was an undocumented change where ppl thought cleave splash was increased, it was not it was just the bug that got introduced that was now fixed.
This was all around the time where most splash was changed from being applied to a point on the map to being centered on targeted unit to help ranged units splash where you could miss the targeted unit when targeting fast units like mutas and ling and only hitting them with the lower dmg zones instaid of direct hits.
Anyway ppl just ate the introduction of this bug as a ninja buff for the ultras splash area and never thought to question it
This was on one of the last patches of the beta so ppl didn't play around with the ultra mutch as it allready considered useless back then, then the next patch did incease it's hp to 500 and gave it the speedupgrade as preresearched and beta ended shortly thereafter (timeline was something like this but i'm too lazy to check the beta patch compilation thread to verify, but it's this or very close to)
Splash starting from the center of the targeted unit or the closest point of that unit is because of a flag, named "offset by unit radius". This is the reason splash was around the target. The reason the splash became huge when attacking huge targets is the "extend by unit radius" flag and the other splash attacks don't have that. If they kept that one, the splash would still become huge, when attacking huge targets, even if it's centered on the closest point of the target, instead of it's center. That change could've been made during beta without notice, but it's not equivalent to the other splash attacks.
On September 29 2010 06:51 Zihn wrote: Just to clarify
During the beta cleave splash was as it is now but along with the patch that changed ultra from 600 hp 25 dmg to 400 hp 15+25 armoured dmg there was an undocumented change where ppl thought cleave splash was increased, it was not it was just the bug that got introduced that was now fixed.
This was all around the time where most splash was changed from being applied to a point on the map to being centered on targeted unit to help ranged units splash where you could miss the targeted unit when targeting fast units like mutas and ling and only hitting them with the lower dmg zones instaid of direct hits.
Anyway ppl just ate the introduction of this bug as a ninja buff for the ultras splash area and never thought to question it
This was on one of the last patches of the beta so ppl didn't play around with the ultra mutch as it allready considered useless back then, then the next patch did incease it's hp to 500 and gave it the speedupgrade as preresearched and beta ended shortly thereafter (timeline was something like this but i'm too lazy to check the beta patch compilation thread to verify, but it's this or very close to)
Three points I'd like to make:
1) Fair enough, but so what if it was a "bug." The fact that it was an unintended consequence doesn't, in and of itself, mean that it's imbalanced.
2) It's not like the the extra splash damage offers Zerg some kind of crazy advantage. After all, to get the full advantage of the "bug" I have to get ULTRALISKS INSIDE YOUR BASE.
3) Saying that Zergs "ate the introduction of this bug as a ninja buff for the ultras" is a distortion of facts. I've played in many many betas. Specifically in Blizzard betas, their marketing line is "Hey, it's beta. Things will change with or without notice." You can't have it both ways. Many Zergs assumed it was a just and intended buff... as they should. Let's be honest, without big ultra cleaves, Zerg ground armies are SIGNIFICANTLY weaker.
I never comented on balance, just thought ppl should know that the splash was not as per retail all of beta rather it was far from.
As for balance zerg needs a bone but it should not be a variable sized splash where the attacked units size determines the AoE... unless they make an animation where the ultra picks up said unit and starts to flail it around then i'm all for it lol. Anyhow if they have to make any changes to the splash it should be a slight general splash increase and not reintroduction of the "bug"
Did you even read what you linked to? That change was a massive nerf. Also, it didn't change from an ultra centered aoe to a unit centered cleave, it was already a unit centered cleave before that (as it stated in the thread, just the aoe was raidus + 1 unit, the change was that it was buffed to raidus + 2 units, but the cleave damage was nerfed from 100%).
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
I think that's what everyone is upset about. The nerf came immediately, but the buff "is only a matter of time". It really feels like a slap in the face to zerg players that blizzard fixes this within a week while zerg has had problems at highly competitive levels for months.
This is standard for Blizzard. If they see a bug or unintended gameplay effect they don't like, they'll nuke it ASAP, regardless of any related factors. It doesn't help that sometimes the nuke is rather poorly aimed. But (and this goes for Zerg posters in general), please remember that they don't intentionally want Zerg to be a bad playing experience. Zerg just happened to have the bad luck to catch a bug at an inopportune time. Blizzard would have done the exact same thing if the bug had been in a Terran unit, or a Protoss one. And they're doing the right thing in fixing it, too, although the exact method they chose to do so is, as it so often is, very debatable.
Yeah, I agree. Its stupid to think that it was intentionally.
But they still didn't do anything about PF/BC/Thor repair. You cannot kill these things if they are being repaired unless you attack with 50 food army. SCV priority should be higher. Or is that intented by Blizzard. It amuses me that they are so quick to fix zerg and ignore other problems for a long time.
Did you even read what you linked to? That change was a massive nerf. Also, it didn't change from an ultra centered aoe to a unit centered cleave, it was already a unit centered cleave before that (as it stated in the thread, just the aoe was raidus + 1 unit, the change was that it was buffed to raidus + 2 units, but the cleave damage was nerfed from 100%).
if you do infact read the ENTIRE thread you will find a small point where pre patch the number of lings hit by ultra would change depending on how close the ultra was to the attacked ling where as post patch it didn't matter if you attacked from the maximum range or tried to walk closer with move command
regardless it was an undocumented change that affected cleave in more ways than one, nerf or not and i do miss the pre patch ultra even if i had to reasearch the movement speed back then to not have it walk like a queen off creep
On September 29 2010 06:17 aRRR wrote: Ultra's really needed a nerf BUT; Zerg as a race overall needs a buff and its only a matter of time when that will happen.
I think that's what everyone is upset about. The nerf came immediately, but the buff "is only a matter of time". It really feels like a slap in the face to zerg players that blizzard fixes this within a week while zerg has had problems at highly competitive levels for months.
This is standard for Blizzard. If they see a bug or unintended gameplay effect they don't like, they'll nuke it ASAP, regardless of any related factors. It doesn't help that sometimes the nuke is rather poorly aimed. But (and this goes for Zerg posters in general), please remember that they don't intentionally want Zerg to be a bad playing experience. Zerg just happened to have the bad luck to catch a bug at an inopportune time. Blizzard would have done the exact same thing if the bug had been in a Terran unit, or a Protoss one. And they're doing the right thing in fixing it, too, although the exact method they chose to do so is, as it so often is, very debatable.
Yeah, I agree. Its stupid to think that it was intentionally.
But they still didn't do anything about PF/BC/Thor repair. You cannot kill these things if they are being repaired unless you attack with 50 food army. SCV priority should be higher. Or is that intented by Blizzard. It amuses me that they are so quick to fix zerg and ignore other problems for a long time.
They did something about repair on these units, they buffed it. With the release they equalized the repair time with their new buildtimes. For example PF repair time got reduced from 225(IIRC) to 150(CC + PF build time).
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
By your logic, since each tech (bio, mech) requires counter to everything by design, I'll have to assume bio can counter heavy air or heavy mech. When people mass vikings and tanks in late game TvsT, bioball should be countering it "effectively". No it's not.
You were given the best counter to armored unit, why not use it? Why whould you want a single unit to counter air and ground? Maybe rpg fits you more.
On September 29 2010 07:42 aPsychonaut wrote: I think the splash as it is now seems fair.
It was barely fair considering how bulky the Ultralisk is and how long it takes to be made. Ultras already die instantly to marauders, how is giving them less splash reasonable?
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
Not really, if you want to go biomech you can just get infantry upgrades and weapons only upgrades from the armory. That's three, the equivalent of Zerg upgrades needed (although many will skip ranged attack while still getting many roaches). By no means is that unreasonable.
PS. Hellion/Thor/Tank/Marauder/Medivac absolutely shat on mass ultralisk before the patch, we'll see about after. You're crazy to suggest people didn't transition into bio lategame, most Terrans I played would drop like 5 raxes at their natural and add tech labs on maps like Metal, or they'd tech up to banshees or battlecruisers.
On September 29 2010 07:53 artanis2 wrote: Working as intended. Damage should not be caused to all units surrounding your target, only the ones within range of the blades.
Working as intended does not always make it the best intent...
On September 29 2010 07:53 artanis2 wrote: Working as intended. Damage should not be caused to all units surrounding your target, only the ones within range of the blades.
Where were you back in Beta Patch 16?
Oh right.
And certainly, you're not suggesting it's a good idea to nerf Zerg's best unit less than one day before Cool plays in the semi-finals of the GSL?!
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Different building structures..? You mean rax/fact or engineering/armory?
Raxes aren't exactly expensive, they are 200/25 in order to get a rax with tech lab. You can easily spare money in the late late game to build multiple raxes (build 4, you have 1 already).
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
By your logic, since each tech (bio, mech) requires counter to everything by design, I'll have to assume bio can counter heavy air or heavy mech. When people mass vikings and tanks in late game TvsT, bioball should be countering it "effectively". No it's not.
TvT is not a mass Tank Viking for some time. Mass Marauder with drops and map control is better. There are a lot of tanks in the late game but there are also a lot of marauders. I'll stop replying to you for i do not need suggestions on what games to play,ok?
On September 29 2010 07:53 artanis2 wrote: Working as intended. Damage should not be caused to all units surrounding your target, only the ones within range of the blades.
Working as intended does not always make it the best intent...
Reminds me of old school everquest before they fixed regen:
There were no health potions, a few classes had healing spells, and mana/health regen was painfully slow. 4hp/5sec flat rate @ all levels. So when u were level 55 with 3000hp, you had to sit for about 40 minutes after every fight if u were soloing.
People begged for better regen, or healing potions, or healing beacons, or something and the answer always was "Working as intended."
Blizzard has their heads in the sand and arent listening to their community. They're listening to exactly 33.3333333333333333 percent of the races currently in game. -terran.
Which is why it took 1 week to fix this and zergs issues still arent fixed. I'm just assuming there's a skeleton crew on SC2 while WoW cataclysm hurries to launch. Maybe after WoW launches zerg will get some help...
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Different building structures..? You mean rax/fact or engineering/armory?
Raxes aren't exactly expensive, they are 200/25 in order to get a rax with tech lab. You can easily spare money in the late late game to build multiple raxes (build 4, you have 1 already).
Building structures, Raxes yes. Do you think is reasonable to expect a response of 5,6 buildings (raxes) to get a unit(marauder) that can keep you in the game once you see the cavern? Do you think that by the time the raxes kick in you will be left with no mech army? Is it over?
I want Ultras to be good vs mech, but not "i win" button unless you had another 4,5 production buildings...just in case lol.
I played all the races in BW and in SC2, i try not to be biased, but for people that do not understand the basics of each race i recommend playing around with them, they are fundamentally different.
I like this hotfix. It was really unrealistic for ultras to be cleaving units that were no where near them. I don't get why it is so imperative for zergs to attack PF's anyway. If you see the terran is going mech, just get broodlords. Zerg have it easy they can make so many drones so fast and I don't get why more zerg don't use all their tools like nydus worms. I saw it in the GLS a zerg did that against a FE protoss and it was awesome. Blizzard knows best here guys, just let nature take its course and you will figure out a way to win. Muta and banelings are good, try that out.
On September 29 2010 08:40 Rabbet wrote: I like this hotfix. It was really unrealistic for ultras to be cleaving units that were no where near them. I don't get why it is so imperative for zergs to attack PF's anyway. If you see the terran is going mech, just get broodlords. Zerg have it easy they can make so many drones so fast and I don't get why more zerg don't use all their tools like nydus worms. I saw it in the GLS a zerg did that against a FE protoss and it was awesome. Blizzard knows best here guys, just let nature take its course and you will figure out a way to win. Muta and banelings are good, try that out.
Oh ok, I'll make sure to try making drones faster and using nydus more. You'll see me break the top 50 next week with this profound, insightful knowledge, k?
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Different building structures..? You mean rax/fact or engineering/armory?
Raxes aren't exactly expensive, they are 200/25 in order to get a rax with tech lab. You can easily spare money in the late late game to build multiple raxes (build 4, you have 1 already).
Building structures, Raxes yes. Do you think is reasonable to expect a response of 5,6 buildings (raxes) to get a unit(marauder) that can keep you in the game once you see the cavern? Do you think that by the time the raxes kick in you will be left with no mech army? Is it over?
I want Ultras to be good vs mech, but not "i win" button unless you had another 4,5 production buildings...just in case lol.
I played all the races in BW and in SC2, i try not to be biased, but for people that do not understand the basics of each race i recommend playing around with them, they are fundamentally different.
I think this is just about the single most unintentionally condescending post I've ever seen on this site. Different races are different? Shocking.
On September 28 2010 23:50 Daedie wrote: I like the change in general because to me it felt like game over if I let the zerg get into tier 3 without being crippled. And that's just not good. Weak early game and ridiculous lategame is not balance.
However, they should've undone the dmg nerf of 1.1, and obviously the race needs some fixing up in the early game as well.
I agree with this. It might be slightly overdone against thors alone, but it feels like the problem is only against thors.
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Blizzard heard that Cool had a chance to win the GSL. So they had to instantly nerf the ultra. None of this waiting around for a month when nerfing zerg is concerned.
Wow, that really sucks. I thought Ultras seemed less effective today when I was using them in my matches.
Now why don't they just add the building attack back, but make it the same dps as their normal attack, and give it splash. I mean, if they have seperate attacks for buildings and units before, why not just go back to that, and make the building attack work correctly, and not fuck up Ultra's usefulness vs. units.
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Different building structures..? You mean rax/fact or engineering/armory?
Raxes aren't exactly expensive, they are 200/25 in order to get a rax with tech lab. You can easily spare money in the late late game to build multiple raxes (build 4, you have 1 already).
Building structures, Raxes yes. Do you think is reasonable to expect a response of 5,6 buildings (raxes) to get a unit(marauder) that can keep you in the game once you see the cavern? Do you think that by the time the raxes kick in you will be left with no mech army? Is it over?
I want Ultras to be good vs mech, but not "i win" button unless you had another 4,5 production buildings...just in case lol.
I played all the races in BW and in SC2, i try not to be biased, but for people that do not understand the basics of each race i recommend playing around with them, they are fundamentally different.
Different races are different? Shocking.
Not shocking, but some people do not understand that
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
On September 29 2010 09:03 Chizambers wrote: Wow, that really sucks. I thought Ultras seemed less effective today when I was using them in my matches.
Now why don't they just add the building attack back, but make it the same dps as their normal attack, and give it splash. I mean, if they have seperate attacks for buildings and units before, why not just go back to that, and make the building attack work correctly, and not fuck up Ultra's usefulness vs. units.
This seems like something that could solve the issue. Having two seperate attacks, like before. Then you could have different splash radii for each. Also, headbutt looks awesome.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
By your logic, since each tech (bio, mech) requires counter to everything by design, I'll have to assume bio can counter heavy air or heavy mech. When people mass vikings and tanks in late game TvsT, bioball should be countering it "effectively". No it's not.
TvT is not a mass Tank Viking for some time. Mass Marauder with drops and map control is better. There are a lot of tanks in the late game but there are also a lot of marauders. I'll stop replying to you for i do not need suggestions on what games to play,ok?
I'm not interested in how you play. Play as freely as you want.
Drops? You mean medivacs? But they don't share the same upgrade!! By your logic, Bioball, those who share the same upgrade, should fight effectively on their own by design! (other than occasional hybrids *).
However I do agree on the part you should be stop replying.
The Ultralisk nerf isn't that big of a deal by itself. It just compounds on top of the many issues we, as Zerg players, feel already exist.
I get the feeling that Blizzard overvalues the ability of Zerg to produce units in a unique manner, compared to how P and T produce units, and this is why we have weaker, more expensive, harder to tech units.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
just changing the splash radius of the ultra-centered attack to ~2.5 or 2.75 would already do wonders. At 2.75, it would be ~equal to what it was before, while retaining it's role as a tank/aoe ground unit. Zerg already doesn't have particularly strong AoE(excluding prepatch ultra) to deal will massed ground in a ball.
Broodlords are not the answer to mech, a handful of vikings on top of a mech ball will just pop every single broodlord in under 15 seconds, and while thor's don't do a whole lot to broodlords, they do outrange them, adding a small amount of anti broodlord capability.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
On September 29 2010 09:24 Buhlbaid wrote: Massing ultras should never be IWIN mode, so the "nerf" is ok.
Massing any unit should never be IWIN mode, but Toss has void rays and Terran has Thors. So even if it took ages to tech up to Ultralisks, it felt kind of nice to have something comparable.
On September 29 2010 09:15 Aex wrote: The Ultralisk nerf isn't that big of a deal by itself. It just compounds on top of the many issues we, as Zerg players, feel already exist.
I think this is right on the money. Zerg needs help, but the Ultra thing had to be fixed. Why is Blizz waiting so much to do something to help Zerg in the early/mid game nobody knows.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If only Zerg buildings could burrow XD Then the base race strategy may be more effective lol.
On September 29 2010 09:24 Buhlbaid wrote: Massing ultras should never be IWIN mode, so the "nerf" is ok.
Massing any unit should never be IWIN mode, but Toss has void rays and Terran has Thors. So even if it took ages to tech up to Ultralisks, it felt kind of nice to have something comparable.
plus you forget ultras can't even shoot air... void rays / thors can.. so ultras are not IWIN mode.. they are countered by any air unit.. plus toss also have colossus with it's ridiculous range. Massing colossus is just as effective as ultras against ground..
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:26 Sapphire.lux wrote: Late game mas ultra was impossible to stop by mech. A transition to bio is...well, not possible and the splash was just to big for thors to fight them. Ultras are to break siege tank lines and they do that i think no? If Thors do not beat Ultras then terran has nothing to fight them (mech).
Zerg needs help for sure, but this Ultra splash nerf was a must.
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote: [quote]
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote: [quote] Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
Ok, can we get our fix now ?
I hope so. I think Z v P mid game (in favor of P) also has some problems as well as T v P late game (in favor of P). I think Idra just stated this as well that if he were to change race it would be in favor of P.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 06:53 Mr Tambourine Man wrote: [quote]
Wow, this is just such an absolutely silly thing to say. It really shows the mentality some terran players seem to have. Are you seriously saying that just because you can't produce a counter against ultras from the factory, ultras are overpowered?? That is like a protoss player complaining that the robotics facility doesn't produce a unit that can counter a battlecruiser. It is an absolutely ridiculous argument.
Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
I would be immensely frustrated with you except that I can't take you seriously enough to get worked up over it. You're adorable. Zerg couldn't ask for a more picture perfect example of the stereotypical Terran as an anti-mascot.
What, exactly, do you think ultralisks are supposed to do with an anti-armor damage type, if not counter armored units that are lower in tech and more versatile than them? What would be 'imba' about ultralisks countering thors in equal cost and food ratios? Do you think that ultralisks were overpowered before this patch without the building splash abuse being used?
If you feel that Zerg should have no unit counters to take down mech in a straight up fight, why does it matter if mech is hard to rebuild, taking you at your word?
If you feel that mech versus Zerg should always come down to the Zerg cautiously avoiding mech and base racing, why does Terran have better static defenses, lift off capability, repair, and better units for taking down buildings quickly? Why do you think this makes for a more interesting game and e-sport that Blizzard designed for it deliberately, instead of encouraging army versus army conflict to take place?
ultras tier3.5 - pool->lair->infest pit->Hive->ultra den
thor tier2.5 - rax->factory+techlab->armory
seeing now ultras no longer cost efficient against thors, can anyone justify the tech tree i stated above?
dont tell me to use broodlord - you need tier4 unit to deal with them is a nonsense and thor has crazy AA dps. plus not to mention that when the time he gets 7 thors you will probably just started making your 1st broodlord.
so lets say i dont like to gamble my game by using NP, my only viable option is mass blings+lings and some mutas? and that will only work if the terran didnt get any tank/marauder/+marine? seriously, blizzard? why dont you just get rid of this race lol
Nethaera (a Blue) has responded to this on the forums:
Here's some information for you on this change:
In patch 1.1.0 we decreased the damage Ultralisks did from 15 (+25 armored) to 15 (+20 armored) and removed the Ram ability they could use against buildings, which meant they would use their normal attacks instead. When this change was implemented however, a bug was introduced that caused the splash damage of the Ultralisk being unintentionally extended by larger targets. This was corrected today in patch 1.1.1. Because of this bug, however, players did not get to experience the change that was implemented in patch 1.1.0 as it was intended, a slight reduction of damage against armored units. The current damage output for Ultralisks is what was intended in 1.1.0. As always, we will be monitoring the effect of this change and constructive feedback on it.
As always constructive feedback on your gameplay experiences are always welcome.
So, basically, Blizzard honestly believes that they didn't change anything in this patch, and that Ultra splash worked like this pre-patch 1.1.0. As far as I can tell, they're wrong about that. So if we present them with convincing evidence that they ARE wrong, they'd probably be amenable to changing it.
We need convincing evidence, and we need it now. TO THE FORUMS!
There's no possible way to justify this change in a balance context. It might have proved to be needed eventually, but they literally just nerfed Ultras 5 damage per hit the other day. There's no way Blizzard would make that damage nerf and then intentionally dramatically nerf splash against units.
Slow and steady is supposed to be their patching philosophy. That doesn't line up with nerfing ultras twice in a week. I think they're just terrible at testing their own changes and didn't notice that the behavior was different from pre-patch
And now, with the post above, we can clearly see that they don't even understand the issue at hand.
In patch 1.1.0 we decreased the damage Ultralisks did from 15 (+25 armored) to 15 (+20 armored) and removed the Ram ability they could use against buildings, which meant they would use their normal attacks instead. When this change was implemented however, a bug was introduced that caused the splash damage of the Ultralisk being unintentionally extended by larger targets. This was corrected today in patch 1.1.1. Because of this bug, however, players did not get to experience the change that was implemented in patch 1.1.0 as it was intended, a slight reduction of damage against armored units. The current damage output for Ultralisks is what was intended in 1.1.0. As always, we will be monitoring the effect of this change and constructive feedback on it.
As always constructive feedback on your gameplay experiences are always welcome.
So, basically, Blizzard honestly believes that they didn't change anything in this patch, and that Ultra splash worked like this pre-patch 1.1.0. As far as I can tell, they're wrong about that. So if we present them with convincing evidence that they ARE wrong, they'd probably be amenable to changing it.
We need convincing evidence, and we need it now. TO THE FORUMS!
where is that picture of ultra doing less splash to the mainres scvs tanks and thors. post that there and just post
I just don't get it. Why is Blizzard nerfing the already-inferior race? Moreso, (and more infuriating) why do they refuse to confront the public about it? How much has blizzard really talked about Zerg being inferior and Terran being superior? Have they said anything about it at all?
I almost feel like Blizzard knows something that we don't about the races- maybe everyone is playing Zerg wrong, or... something.
Again, based on the above blue post, Blizzard is apparently under the impression that they haven't changed anything, that Ultras were like this in patch 1.0. If we prove to them that this was not the case, then they'd probably change it. We need convincing proof to this effect.
Edit:
where is that picture of ultra doing less splash to the mainres scvs tanks and thors. post that there and just post
please explain.
Well, if I'm thinking of the right picture, that just shows that it changed from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1. We need pictures/vids of 1.0 and Beta to prove this.
On September 29 2010 10:20 Thoro wrote: I just don't get it. Why is Blizzard nerfing the already-inferior race? Moreso, (and more infuriating) why do they refuse to confront the public about it? How much has blizzard really talked about Zerg being inferior and Terran being superior? Have they said anything about it at all?
I almost feel like Blizzard knows something that we don't about the races- maybe everyone is playing Zerg wrong, or... something.
Almost.
i dont mind they fix the ultra splash range. hitting a CC and cleave damage all nearby SCV's mining is just plain silly.
although as many top tier Z players pointed out. the TvZ balance isnt a unit vs unit issue. but rather the matchup as a whole make it difficult for Z to respond properly.
On September 29 2010 10:23 Captain Peabody wrote: Again, based on the above blue post, Blizzard is apparently under the impression that they haven't changed anything, that Ultras were like this in patch 1.0. If we prove to them that this was not the case, then they'd probably change it. We need convincing proof to this effect.
where is that picture of ultra doing less splash to the mainres scvs tanks and thors. post that there and just post
please explain.
Well, if I'm thinking of the right picture, that just shows that it changed from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1. We need pictures/vids of 1.0 and Beta to prove this.
Not really. Nethaera's post says the bug was only related to large targets but the pic clearly shows that even Marines emanate less splash, so Blizzard is missing something even between 1.1.1 and 1.1.0
On September 29 2010 10:23 Captain Peabody wrote: Again, based on the above blue post, Blizzard is apparently under the impression that they haven't changed anything, that Ultras were like this in patch 1.0. If we prove to them that this was not the case, then they'd probably change it. We need convincing proof to this effect.
where is that picture of ultra doing less splash to the mainres scvs tanks and thors. post that there and just post
please explain.
Well, if I'm thinking of the right picture, that just shows that it changed from 1.1.0 to 1.1.1. We need pictures/vids of 1.0 and Beta to prove this.
i still have beta installed on my comp. could run a program to get it running and get some ultra splash demonstrations. though im pretty sure ultra splash was the same during the last patch of beta and release 1.0
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote:
On September 29 2010 07:40 Sapphire.lux wrote: [quote] Well, you do not know what you are talking about so i will be nice, i ll ignore the "terran mentality" and "silly" etc insults you are throwing.
Terran has 2 distinct ways of playing, bio and mech (there is also bio/mech but *) They both have advantages and disadvantages but both have to be "effective" . Why is this you say? The answer is in the upgrades. Unlike Protoss and Zerg, Terran has 2 completely different ground upgrade paths(bio/mech). You have to choose what path you want to go (bio/mech) so you can keep up with the upgrades in the late game.
Sure you can make a few units that are not part of the core army (make a few marines while you are going mech/ a few tanks while you are going bio) but you can not rely on this units to counter a late game army that has upgrades.
Be nice!
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
I would be immensely frustrated with you except that I can't take you seriously enough to get worked up over it. You're adorable. Zerg couldn't ask for a more picture perfect example of the stereotypical Terran as an anti-mascot.
I am forever in your debt kind sir! Your wrath and frustration would have been unbearable.
What, exactly, do you think ultralisks are supposed to do with an anti-armor damage type, if not counter armored units that are lower in tech and more versatile than them? What would be 'imba' about ultralisks countering thors in equal cost and food ratios? Do you think that ultralisks were overpowered before this patch without the building splash abuse being used?
Ultras beat tanks silly. He has a million thors and only a few tanks? Go roach mate, they beat thors cost for cost. Or are you just building a type of unit and just 1a rebuild 1a and then cry imba? There are problems with Zerg for sure, but in this case, you are just bad at analyzing the opponents army composition, or you have a verry hard time writing down your thoughts.
If you feel that Zerg should have no unit counters to take down mech in a straight up fight, why does it matter if mech is hard to rebuild, taking you at your word?
No dude, no unit should "take down" mech, thus the Ultra nerf. A combination of units on the other hand should be able to fight with mech. Things have to be changed but, ONE unit should not take down a style of play. Am i getting through?
If you feel that mech versus Zerg should always come down to the Zerg cautiously avoiding mech and base racing, why does Terran have better static defenses, lift off capability, repair, and better units for taking down buildings quickly? Why do you think this makes for a more interesting game and e-sport that Blizzard designed for it deliberately, instead of encouraging army versus army conflict to take place?
I would go through things like: Zerg does need some help, choosing the place for battle, surround etc but you'd only get frustrated
This might have seemed off topic but, a change to a unit that countered a stile is a good change, and those are the reasons that i think that.
I don't think Blizzard ever said that they WANTED Ultra AOE damage to be absolutely huge like it was in 1.1.0. Clearly, this was an unintended consequence of the patch, and they needed to drop the damage back down to a non-ridiculous level.
What's clearly happened here is that everyone has become accustomed to the 1.1.0 Ultra AOE, and thus is up in arms because 1.1.1 Ultras don't have AOE like they did in 1.1.1. Think about the 1.1.0 Ultralisk as a bug, not a standard.
And one more thing, they did not "nerf" Ultras twice in a week, they nerfed them once. They dropped the damage vs. Armored units by 5, and in that same patch, accidentally created a bug. 1.1.1 is not a nerf, its a bugfix.
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.
On September 29 2010 10:30 Boundless wrote: I don't think Blizzard ever said that they WANTED Ultra AOE damage to be absolutely huge like it was in 1.1.0. Clearly, this was an unintended consequence of the patch, and they needed to drop the damage back down to a non-ridiculous level.
What's clearly happened here is that everyone has become accustomed to the 1.1.0 Ultra AOE, and thus is up in arms because 1.1.1 Ultras don't have AOE like they did in 1.1.1. Think about the 1.1.0 Ultralisk as a bug, not a standard.
And one more thing, they did not "nerf" Ultras twice in a week, they nerfed them once. They dropped the damage vs. Armored units by 5, and in that same patch, accidentally created a bug. 1.1.1 is not a nerf, its a bugfix.
Yes it is a nerf, splash vs. units had always been like it was in 1.1.0 and now they've reduced it and don't even comprehend what they've done. Let me break it down for you:
beta splash vs. units: x splash vs. buildings: none
1.0 splash vs. units: x splash vs. buildings: none
1.1 splash vs. units: x splash vs. buildings: x+(y*size)
1.1.1 splash vs. units: x-2 splash vs. buildings: x-2
NB: these are just values i made up to make a point. I don't know what the values actually are, just that this is how they've played out
On September 29 2010 10:30 Boundless wrote: I don't think Blizzard ever said that they WANTED Ultra AOE damage to be absolutely huge like it was in 1.1.0. Clearly, this was an unintended consequence of the patch, and they needed to drop the damage back down to a non-ridiculous level.
What's clearly happened here is that everyone has become accustomed to the 1.1.0 Ultra AOE, and thus is up in arms because 1.1.1 Ultras don't have AOE like they did in 1.1.1. Think about the 1.1.0 Ultralisk as a bug, not a standard.
And one more thing, they did not "nerf" Ultras twice in a week, they nerfed them once. They dropped the damage vs. Armored units by 5, and in that same patch, accidentally created a bug. 1.1.1 is not a nerf, its a bugfix.
as a kind man i will repeat this again:
people need to realise that the 'buggy' aoe splash only applied on attacking buildings,as in patch 1.1. ultras aoe splash of attacking units is same in 1.0 and 1.1.
Now in 1.1.1 ultras have reduced aoe splash on units, which is a huge neff.
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 still have beta installed on my comp. could run a program to get it running and get some ultra splash demonstrations. though im pretty sure ultra splash was the same during the last patch of beta and release 1.0
This is exactly the point. That 1.0 splash is the same as 1.1.0 splash vs units. Please do so, and document your findings appropriately...
On September 29 2010 10:30 Boundless wrote: I don't think Blizzard ever said that they WANTED Ultra AOE damage to be absolutely huge like it was in 1.1.0. Clearly, this was an unintended consequence of the patch, and they needed to drop the damage back down to a non-ridiculous level.
What's clearly happened here is that everyone has become accustomed to the 1.1.0 Ultra AOE, and thus is up in arms because 1.1.1 Ultras don't have AOE like they did in 1.1.1. Think about the 1.1.0 Ultralisk as a bug, not a standard.
And one more thing, they did not "nerf" Ultras twice in a week, they nerfed them once. They dropped the damage vs. Armored units by 5, and in that same patch, accidentally created a bug. 1.1.1 is not a nerf, its a bugfix.
Yes it is a nerf, splash vs. units had always been like it was in 1.1.0 and now they've reduced it and don't even comprehend what they've done
Edit:
wait, fuck. I messed up my patch numbers. I was thinking that 1.0.0 was the one that had the bugged ultra, not 1.1.0
I know software engineering is complicated and all, but I don't understand how they can have a balance patch laid out for a month, then fuck it up with game-breaking bugs, and then fuck up the fix-it patch a few days later. This is getting ridiculous.
On September 29 2010 10:30 Boundless wrote: I don't think Blizzard ever said that they WANTED Ultra AOE damage to be absolutely huge like it was in 1.1.0. Clearly, this was an unintended consequence of the patch, and they needed to drop the damage back down to a non-ridiculous level.
What's clearly happened here is that everyone has become accustomed to the 1.1.0 Ultra AOE, and thus is up in arms because 1.1.1 Ultras don't have AOE like they did in 1.1.1. Think about the 1.1.0 Ultralisk as a bug, not a standard.
And one more thing, they did not "nerf" Ultras twice in a week, they nerfed them once. They dropped the damage vs. Armored units by 5, and in that same patch, accidentally created a bug. 1.1.1 is not a nerf, its a bugfix.
Yes it is a nerf, splash vs. units had always been like it was in 1.1.0 and now they've reduced it and don't even comprehend what they've done
Edit:
wait, fuck. I messed up my patch numbers. I was thinking that 1.0.0 was the one that had the bugged ultra, not 1.1.0
It worked exactly as they coded it to, how is that a bug?
Unit size +2
Remove head butt, ultra vs building = big splash because... buildings are pretty big.
On September 29 2010 10:28 Sapphire.lux wrote: Or are you just building a type of unit and just 1a rebuild 1a and then cry imba? There are problems with Zerg for sure, but in this case, you are just bad at analyzing the opponents army composition, or you have a verry hard time writing down your thoughts.
Passive aggressive much? I'm not even going to pretend to be civil with you after that kind of straw manning and condescension.
i still have beta installed on my comp. could run a program to get it running and get some ultra splash demonstrations. though im pretty sure ultra splash was the same during the last patch of beta and release 1.0
This is exactly the point. That 1.0 splash is the same as 1.1.0 splash vs units. Please do so, and document your findings appropriately...
dammit just tested my old version of sc2. refuses to work at all T.T
so annoyed because i swore it worked last time i tested something T.T
On September 29 2010 10:28 Sapphire.lux wrote: Or are you just building a type of unit and just 1a rebuild 1a and then cry imba? There are problems with Zerg for sure, but in this case, you are just bad at analyzing the opponents army composition, or you have a verry hard time writing down your thoughts.
I think one of the main issues here is that this is something blizzard stumbled on to...
They did not MEAN to nerf the ultra. If that was the intention then this change would have appeared in the original patch and would have been documented. The reason this is such a problem is because this nerf is simly an un-planned by-product of a fix to a fix....
This isnt even about balancing the ultra, this is about being accountable for the changes you make to the game. They didnt intend for this to happen, people need to get that.
Ultras op... please, simply because you need a good position to kill them. I could engage you with 20 ultras on a ramp any you would rape them. Just like Zerg needs to constantly set up flanks to succeed, please dont call a unit op because you need to fight it in a choke and not anywhere you want.
I think blizzard dont like zergs at all, even if in my opinion are the most watchable race but for ZvZ. I think that when bugged, ultralisks were just too powerful against buildings, but not because ultra splash killed scv's repairing PF( I just find amazing that anyone can cry at that, just need to watch how much stuff a zerg needs to kill a being-repared PF if you are not going banes) but because it hit thing like marines a mile away and that stuff, but now they are useless one more time, and i don't know how a zerg will deal with pre-ignater helion+thor. For my terrans friends, think that ultras are T3 that only atack ground, and are just useless in chockes, so that thors now counter ultras... Hard time for us zergies, and now even more...
I'd rather zerg not be "balanced" around ultra's AoE being rediculous, and yes I'm talking about pre 1.1. Do zerg players really want the race to be designed around being mediocre in t1/t2 and great in t3? Personally I think that is a horrible design choice.
Ultra AoE vs thors took a significant hit in patch 1.1.1, and while everyone is going to moan about it now I think in the long run they are going to be thankful. This will highlight the weaknesses of the race and help Blizzard balance it accordingly.
On September 29 2010 11:24 Kinmaul wrote: I'd rather zerg not be "balanced" around ultra's AoE being rediculous, and yes I'm talking about pre 1.1. Do zerg players really want the race to be designed around being mediocre in t1/t2 and great in t3? Personally I think that is a horrible design choice.
Ultra AoE vs thors took a significant hit in patch 1.1.1, and while everyone is going to moan about it now I think in the long run they are going to be thankful. This will highlight the weaknesses of the race and help Blizzard balance it accordingly.
in the long run it will help. but thats not the issue. they are willing to hot fix something without looking at the reprecussians when ever zerg is involoved. yet wont budge for months on a bug that involoves terran (bunker inside repair). you can call that sentance zerg QQ'ing. but that is literally the truth.
and what makes things worse. they have hyped up the GSL and towards the final's they have pulled out of thier asses this HUGE late game nerf for zerg. yes the ultra splash on BUILDINGS needed to be fixed. but blizzard decided to nerf the enitre ultra splash mechanics that now also effect UNITS! which was not a problem. had they just reduced th splash on buildings, which was the only problem, no one would be complaining.
and on top of that they refuse to admit they did something wrong. instead pulling out of their ass "its working as intended"
I think its quite amazing that after all the apparent problems with zerg, bliz have now made (with 1.1.1) 1.1 into a zerg nerf patch. That's some terrible balancing.
That was close, Blizzard almost made Zerg overpowered. Thank god they fixed it, or everyone who plays Terran would be freaking out.
LMAO @ Blizzard. Can't they just create two different attacks, one for buildings and one for units, but the one for buildings has no splash? Or something?
On September 29 2010 11:46 Antares777 wrote: That was close, Blizzard almost made Zerg overpowered. Thank god they fixed it, or everyone who plays Terran would be freaking out.
LMAO @ Blizzard. Can't they just create two different attacks, one for buildings and one for units, but the one for buildings has no splash? Or something?
hmm yeah maybe they could call that second attack only for buildings Ram or something and have it do like 70 damage or something? a great completely new idea and......
The Blizzard that I knew was slow and opaque. When did they also become incompetent? How do they mess up a change that they have been planning for at least a month this badly?
Oh blizzard, you really screwed the pooch, was it unfair to have a tier 3 unit take down a tier one tech building , now ultras are worse vs planetaries, and worse evrything else, huuuuuuuuuge nerf, thanks alot blizz :/, why can't it be like BW, where things are allowed to be OP, like defilers, and reavers, and vultures for price, but no evrything needs to be perfectly mechanicly sound, why must they patch evry bug that comes up, evry time something interesting is found they have to fix it, cuz burrowed neural was so OP even though it last 12 seconds , was fazing so terrible, there cool things that require intensive mico to make the difference from great pro gamers, to good ladder players, because of blizzard, tournies are filled with awful players that can just use the same mechanics as pros with 100 less apm, if you can burrow cast NP with all your infestors in a big fight, you need 400 APM for that instance pretty much, PLEASE blizzard stop nerfing the cool tricks were finding :
I mean if we want to talk about unintuitive AoE, how about tank smartfire? Are all the tanks doing some sort of mindmeld that allows them to coordinate exactly who and what they are attacking? Intuitive has nothing to do with game balance.
Yay for zerg nerfs. Having the ability to mass units that take a very long time to get out that do the same job as tier 1.5 units was clearly imbalanced. I mean there was the potential for zerg to win something and we couldn't have that.
Anyway, sarcasm aside, I am sure that this was an accidental change. What blizzard probably did was revert Ultra splash to eminate from the corner of the unit rather than the centre (not that I've tested yet). That would have the effect of nerfing the splash against buildings/large units and simultaneously making the Ultra splash appear more realistic.
On September 29 2010 08:43 Mr Tambourine Man wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:17 Sapphire.lux wrote:
On September 29 2010 08:04 Winter_mute wrote: [quote]
So bio and mech each have to be "effective" against all possible units a zerg or protoss can throw at them. And you should maybe factor in, that zerg have melee, ranged and carapace upgrades while protoss have upgrades for shields, weapons, armor. Terran have 2 upgrades each for mech and bio.
Let's reverse your argument:
I want zerg ranged units to be able to be "effective" against every terran unit combination, because I want to focus on their ranged upgrades.
You are forgeting the completely different buildings that make bio/mech. I want ranged zerg units to be effective vs every terran unit composition to. 2 upgrades and different building structures is a bit more then an extra upgrade (shield, range/melee) don t you think? The idea is to have a counter, a way to stay in the game, and not to build 15 barracks if you see a ultra cavern.
Look, clearly put what you are saying is: "I think that with my three factory units, I should be able to counter anything the zerg can throw at me." Do you really think that is reasonable?
With 3 or 4 (+Vikings) yes, you should. The same for the other races + the different characteristics that they have.
Um, the point of Blizzard forcing you to choose an army composition to begin with is so that army has weaknesses that the enemy can exploit through the appropriate unit counters. It's not supposed to be a purely aesthetic choice.
Mech +strong in direct combat -imobile -hard to rebuild once lost Bio +verry mobile +easy to rebuild -verry hard countered by specific units
It is more then aesthetics you see.
The weaknesses come from the above and from the ratios (marines to marauders/ tanks to thors)
Oh, okay. Obviously because mech is 'imobile' on these great big maps we have, Zerg can just run around the mech army and base race to victory.
If Zerg can not take advantage from some of the weaknesses out there like (lack of mech mobility) means there is a problem, BUT that is not fixed with a imba T3 unit that you most likely will not get the chance to get anyway.
I would be immensely frustrated with you except that I can't take you seriously enough to get worked up over it. You're adorable. Zerg couldn't ask for a more picture perfect example of the stereotypical Terran as an anti-mascot.
I am forever in your debt kind sir! Your wrath and frustration would have been unbearable.
What, exactly, do you think ultralisks are supposed to do with an anti-armor damage type, if not counter armored units that are lower in tech and more versatile than them? What would be 'imba' about ultralisks countering thors in equal cost and food ratios? Do you think that ultralisks were overpowered before this patch without the building splash abuse being used?
Ultras beat tanks silly. He has a million thors and only a few tanks? Go roach mate, they beat thors cost for cost. Or are you just building a type of unit and just 1a rebuild 1a and then cry imba? There are problems with Zerg for sure, but in this case, you are just bad at analyzing the opponents army composition, or you have a verry hard time writing down your thoughts.
If you feel that Zerg should have no unit counters to take down mech in a straight up fight, why does it matter if mech is hard to rebuild, taking you at your word?
No dude, no unit should "take down" mech, thus the Ultra nerf. A combination of units on the other hand should be able to fight with mech. Things have to be changed but, ONE unit should not take down a style of play. Am i getting through?
If you feel that mech versus Zerg should always come down to the Zerg cautiously avoiding mech and base racing, why does Terran have better static defenses, lift off capability, repair, and better units for taking down buildings quickly? Why do you think this makes for a more interesting game and e-sport that Blizzard designed for it deliberately, instead of encouraging army versus army conflict to take place?
I would go through things like: Zerg does need some help, choosing the place for battle, surround etc but you'd only get frustrated
This might have seemed off topic but, a change to a unit that countered a stile is a good change, and those are the reasons that i think that.
PS: stereotypical Terran hahaha
I don't know where you get your info from, but roaches only counter thors in small numbers. At larger food counts thors demolish roaches, easy. It's actually worse than my statement makes it sound since roaches food cap you rather quickly.
Also, ultras beating "mech" is not the problem. Ultras beat the thor part of mech. Slings/blings/mutas are also a key component to the mix needed to counter a mech army (ultras won't beat a tank heavy army and lings won't beat lots of blue flame hellions).
Just did my own experiment. After thinking that it wouldn't be so bad given how fast ultras attack. Man was i wrong.
Had 8 ultras vs 8 thors. Most times with out creep 5 thors with left. With creep 3.
Had my The Thors in a ball. Tho not sure how to determine the geometric effect of that. While being in a ball would produce the most splash dmg. It has the least Surface area. Id imagine now that Ultra splash vs big units is negligible now, so engaging a line of thors would be most optimal for Zerg.
However Ultras arn't nearly the Mech Breakers they were before. Even before patch 1.1.
Hope Cool / Fruit-seller has realized this. Seems like ultra now need support Vs pure Mech.
On September 29 2010 00:48 HiHiByeBye wrote: tanks are rendered almost useless against baneling but terran players arent whining lol. Seriously.
It is not easy to micro bio vs banelings....
Also did you guys not watch banelings just rolling in and kill command centers? so if the zerg player is ahead they can kill expos so easy....
Now ultras are actually counterble as terran (marauder are good against pure ultras but fungal growth/ling/ultra rape them....)
I also dont see terran players complaining about magic box mutas. Mutas are so cost effective against just pure thors.
how much does it cost the zerg to destroy a command center with banelings?
marauders can kill a hatchery almost as fast and the terran player gets to keep them
Wow, just saw this guy's post. So 400/400 worth of mutas to counter 300/200 worth of thors is cost effective? *blink*
Hey if you win, they can only rebuild [gasses/2] Thors at a time.
And the zerg still has to wait to rebuild his surviving muta force so he can survive turrets....
And you need only half as much gas as zerg to rebuild, so effectively 2base terran beats 4base zerg in the hypothetical scenario where mutas magic box is enough to beat thors in the first confrontation.
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.
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.
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.
Starcraft BW worked because EVERY race had units that were "overpowered". Now only T/P have units that are overpowered, and Zerg is so insufferably dull to play because of it.
Just finished watching game on Hashe's stream of him v high level zerg on ladder. Needless to say the zerg player lost but at the end of the game he was still ahead in points. Usually this occurs due to someone leaving prematurely. However this player didn't leave until all his units were dead and all buildings had been destroyed but one. The zerg player was 4 base econ with tier 3 including Ultras with supporting mix, against 2 base econ teir 1.5 - 2 mech. Outside of some kind of ungodly blunder how could this be possible? To simply roll over your opponents army regardless of econ/supply dissadvantage and win the game even though you were behind in nearly every term of measurement? I didn't get the see the entire game but come on...this couldn't happen if the roles were reversed.
On September 29 2010 13:52 mierin wrote: Starcraft BW worked because EVERY race had units that were "overpowered". Now only T/P have units that are overpowered, and Zerg is so insufferably dull to play because of it.
On September 29 2010 14:21 Innovation wrote: Just finished watching game on Hashe's stream of him v high level zerg on ladder. Needless to say the zerg player lost but at the end of the game he was still ahead in points. Usually this occurs due to someone leaving prematurely. However this player didn't leave until all his units were dead and all buildings had been destroyed but one. The zerg player was 4 base econ with tier 3 including Ultras with supporting mix, against 2 base econ teir 1.5 - 2 mech. Outside of some kind of ungodly blunder how could this be possible? To simply roll over your opponents army regardless of econ/supply dissadvantage and win the game even though you were behind in nearly every term of measurement? I didn't get the see the entire game but come on...this couldn't happen if the roles were reversed.
exactly that should never be able to happen unless the ultras are sent in 1 by 1.
but alas this is starcraft 2.
welcome to the ZvT matchup.
where having 2x the income and having tier 3 units against tier 1-2 units doesnt matter.
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.
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.
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 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.
* 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.
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.
I am sure Zerg will get fixed but as is evident from all the balance threads regarding Z, it is very hard to pin point where exactly the problems are. Blizz is probably trying different solutions until they can find the right ones. Until then it is very frustrating for Zerg Mind you, calling Protoss/Terran players names and all that shit does not give some Zerg players a lot of compasion.
has it even been confirmed yet by blizzard that ultra splash is now working as intented? maybe they simply didnt test it and didnt realize they actually made the splash range smaller
seems reasonable to me seeing as they apparently didnt test graviton ability at all after changing it
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.
Let's be honest here, 1.1 Ultra cleave was really no more powerful than igniter hellions when you get right down to it. Only you could run your workers away from the building to save them, hellions do that shit to your workers regardless of where they are.
I admit it shouldn't have been in the game, but that's not really the point. The point is Blizzard's series of fuck ups in a very simple patch.
They failed to foresee the cleave being so big on buildings when they removed Headbutt. In their haste to fix that screw up they just plain broke the Ultralisk, and they had no idea whatsoever they did it. I'm not even sure if they still understand that they broke how its cleave has been working since 1.0. It's ridiculous. I'm beginning to think no one at Blizzard even knows how their game works.
The splash extended from both units and buildings, so 8 ultras could effectively hit 15 stacked thors individually, basically increasing their damage output exponentially. It was more than OP it was unbeatable without heavy air support.
On September 29 2010 21:44 summerloud wrote: has it even been confirmed yet by blizzard that ultra splash is now working as intented? maybe they simply didnt test it and didnt realize they actually made the splash range smaller
seems reasonable to me seeing as they apparently didnt test graviton ability at all after changing it
Quote from a Blue Poster:
Here's the additional information about the Ultralisk change. Keep in mind, we're continuing to watch for constructive feedback with these changes.
In patch 1.1.0 we decreased the damage Ultralisks did from 15 (+25 armored) to 15 (+20 armored) and removed the Ram ability they could use against buildings, which meant they would use their normal attacks instead. When this change was implemented however, a bug was introduced that caused the splash damage of the Ultralisk being unintentionally extended by larger targets. This was corrected today in patch 1.1.1. Because of this bug, however, players did not get to experience the change that was implemented in patch 1.1.0 as it was intended, a slight reduction of damage against armored units. The current damage output for Ultralisks is what was intended in 1.1.0. As always, we will be monitoring the effect of this change and constructive feedback on it.
Zerg can not be imba when T is also imba that would mean protoss are underpowered.
Semantics aside, we used to have ultras to "save" us, truly that's how it felt in-game every time I sweat(sp?) while balancing on a thin line to finally make them spawn from my heavily bleeding hatcheries. It was such a joy because they actually have extra damage against those thors / tanks / stalkers whatever armored unit had been barging on my door the entire game. And not only that, they also splashed so they could really swing things in our favour.
Just like NP was once actually researchable, ultras have now been removed from the metagame. Going for broodlords is now our last resort but that's the same as mothership/carriers being protoss' only viable attacking unit or BC being T's only defence against a horde of zerglings, sounds silly but that's basically the life of us zergs now.
On September 29 2010 21:54 SilverPotato wrote: The splash extended from both units and buildings, so 8 ultras could effectively hit 15 stacked thors individually, basically increasing their damage output exponentially. It was more than OP it was unbeatable without heavy air support.
The splash on units was identical to how it has been since 1.0
There was no change in how Ultra splash worked against units. In fact, since the damage nerf in 1.1, they were still weaker than they ever were in 1.1 against anything but buildings.
Seeing as we weren't getting our points across, and were told once again (by blue) that the splash bug was introduced in patch 1.1.
If you feel it's accurate and like it, feel free to use it anyway you want. If something's wrong feel free to let me know and I'll change it.. and if you hate it then that's fine too. I've just pieced it together from multiple places. It lacks sources. Maybe it will more easily be seen on the NA forums (which i dont have access to)?
Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
On September 29 2010 21:44 summerloud wrote: has it even been confirmed yet by blizzard that ultra splash is now working as intented? maybe they simply didnt test it and didnt realize they actually made the splash range smaller
seems reasonable to me seeing as they apparently didnt test graviton ability at all after changing it
Here's the additional information about the Ultralisk change. Keep in mind, we're continuing to watch for constructive feedback with these changes.
In patch 1.1.0 we decreased the damage Ultralisks did from 15 (+25 armored) to 15 (+20 armored) and removed the Ram ability they could use against buildings, which meant they would use their normal attacks instead. When this change was implemented however, a bug was introduced that caused the splash damage of the Ultralisk being unintentionally extended by larger targets. This was corrected today in patch 1.1.1. Because of this bug, however, players did not get to experience the change that was implemented in patch 1.1.0 as it was intended, a slight reduction of damage against armored units. The current damage output for Ultralisks is what was intended in 1.1.0. As always, we will be monitoring the effect of this change and constructive feedback on it.
so they dont even understand their own game mechanics. nice ! that bluepost makes so little sense it hurts.
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
What about roaches? (Just asking, didn't test, no theorycraft, no skill etc...)
A roach has 145 hp. A Thor does 60 between its two shots unupgraded, now throw in the 1 armor, so 58. 3 barrages and a Roach is dead, and lets not forget that a Roach only has 3 range compared to a thor's... what, 6? 7? And no one pushes out with just one Thor.
Yeah i know that, but numbers dont tell me much, you dont talk about supply etc...
I just want to know if some ppl do it, if it could work or not. Knowing that roaches can move underground etc... Maybe there's too much micro to do compared to T.
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
What about roaches? (Just asking, didn't test, no theorycraft, no skill etc...)
Assuming zerg controlls well and doesn't clump mutas, wouldn't mass muta beat thor/hellion or muta/ling/bling if terran mixes in some marines for support. Fungal growth would probably also have good results by preventing the marines and hellions from kiting.
If you burrow & move, then they still get a free shot in, cause in the time it takes for the roaches to unburrow, theres a good free shot, so they're already down 60 health.
Once theres 3 or 4 Thor's out though, the Roaches just... melt.
Ok, so you want other numbers.
Roaches cost 2 supply, at 75/25, a Thor's 300/200 and 6 supply.
3 roaches per thor, but their 16 vs a Thor's 60 and twice as much range, with 400-esque HP I believe? (don't remember its HP, never really make em)
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
What about roaches? (Just asking, didn't test, no theorycraft, no skill etc...)
Assuming zerg controlls well and doesn't clump mutas, wouldn't mass muta beat thor/hellion or muta/ling/bling if terran mixes in some marines for support. Fungal growth would probably also have good results by preventing the marines and hellions from kiting.
This is all speculation though.
People tested where if you have a good ball of thors, even the normal number of 4 mutas to kill 1 thor is off. You need a larger amount of mutas than that to take on the ball of thors. So just having a mass of mutas doesn't really work.
Of course, you could just skip the thors and try to base race, but that's pretty tough.
Please do note that FruitDealer had way more base and way more ultras then what Top could have done. Splash damage only affected buildings anyways. And I did not know that just because a patch came out to fix the building ultra splash, that also affected the micro for Top and Fruitdealer O_O
On September 30 2010 01:12 Daxunyrr wrote: If you burrow & move, then they still get a free shot in, cause in the time it takes for the roaches to unburrow, theres a good free shot, so they're already down 60 health.
Once theres 3 or 4 Thor's out though, the Roaches just... melt.
Ok, so you want other numbers.
Roaches cost 2 supply, at 75/25, a Thor's 300/200 and 6 supply.
3 roaches per thor, but their 16 vs a Thor's 60 and twice as much range, with 400-esque HP I believe? (don't remember its HP, never really make em)
Anything else?
3 roachs=225/75 6food 1 thor =300/200 6food
mineral/gas wise roaches are good vs thors. Not supply though.
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
I'm pretty sure mech was always using thors with blue flame hellions. Mech is hellions + thors + tanks. Tank marine is tank marine, which isn't mech at all.
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
What about roaches? (Just asking, didn't test, no theorycraft, no skill etc...)
Roaches work if the terran sends his thors in 1 at a time as soon as they are built.
On September 29 2010 23:36 Mizzles wrote: Something I find confusing is that pre-tank nerfs and ultralisk changes (back in beta) everyone was saying that the way to beat mech was to use mutalisks to force more thors and low tank counts so that your ground army could roll over the thors and hellions.
At this point in time, no one was using ultralisks.
Now that tanks have been nerfed and ultralisks have been nerfed and thors unchanged, thors have apparently become unstoppable, when the key to beating mech earlier was to force more thors.
There have been no changes to any zerg ground units, mutalisks, thors or hellions in this period.
This doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Can anyone enlighten me?
Terran started using thor hellion preigniter in unison, which stops almost anything zerg can make.
I'm pretty sure mech was always using thors with blue flame hellions. Mech is hellions + thors + tanks. Tank marine is tank marine, which isn't mech at all.
Mech is thor hellion tank sometimes viking banshee.
Thor/hellion cuts all the excess and makes a ball of death that is more difficult to deal with, can't be caught out of position without infestors and excellent scouting, and complements each other by destroying each others good counter mix.
Still waiting for a counter for heavy mech t now without having to build literally every zerg unit and get a perfect setup with infestors and surround with lings... 300 apm vs 40 apm and most of the time i end up losing anyway
Ultralisk are one of the dumbest units pathfinding wise and anyone who complains they are easy to get a perfect flank with or anything like that needs to go back to bw and use dragoons... cause thats all i think when my 3 ultras run into the corner of a ramp and end up behind your mineral line somehow but boy was did it feel nice when i actually got to attack and kill stuff
Perhaps they should add ram back in but give it a splash like the cleave attack is in 1.1.1 for buildings and revert the cleave attack to how it was in 1.1.
Why hasn't there been a blue response on this? It takes the community a couple hours to recognize the fuck up, and the goddamn blue posters don't even understand what we are talking about! Do they even read our posts?
On September 30 2010 02:27 aka_star wrote: brood lord only good counter vs thor now, not sure what will counter thor viking though.... brood mutas ? :-/
Negative. Thors beat broodlords because they outrange them and splash.
On September 30 2010 02:27 aka_star wrote: brood lord only good counter vs thor now, not sure what will counter thor viking though.... brood mutas ? :-/
Negative. Thors beat broodlords because they outrange them and splash.
Thors definitely do not beat broodlords. They will however tear a few new orafices into your mutas that are trying to take out the vikings.
Watching FruitDealer's latest series, I have to say that the Ultra "nerf" doesn't really change the overall balance of ZvT. Does it really matter that ultras do less splash considering they can just fodder shots so that banelings and lings can clean house?
On September 30 2010 02:48 cr4ckshot wrote: Watching FruitDealer's latest series, I have to say that the Ultra "nerf" doesn't really change the overall balance of ZvT. Does it really matter that ultras do less splash considering they can just fodder shots so that banelings and lings can clean house?
On September 30 2010 02:30 Wr3k wrote: Why hasn't there been a blue response on this? It takes the community a couple hours to recognize the fuck up, and the goddamn blue posters don't even understand what we are talking about! Do they even read our posts?
On September 30 2010 02:27 aka_star wrote: brood lord only good counter vs thor now, not sure what will counter thor viking though.... brood mutas ? :-/
Negative. Thors beat broodlords because they outrange them and splash.
if you dont know what youre talking about, please dont post. or go to bnet forums.
On September 30 2010 02:42 BurningSera wrote: maybe someone should simulate the fight of Thors vs Ultras in Top v Cool Game2 to see Cool's ultras can win that amount of thors or not lol
You'd have to do exactly what Cool did - run like 40 lings, blings, and roaches up the rear of the thors to distract them first.
On September 30 2010 02:27 aka_star wrote: brood lord only good counter vs thor now, not sure what will counter thor viking though.... brood mutas ? :-/
Negative. Thors beat broodlords because they outrange them and splash.
Thors definitely do not beat broodlords. They will however tear a few new orafices into your mutas that are trying to take out the vikings.
On September 30 2010 02:48 cr4ckshot wrote: Watching FruitDealer's latest series, I have to say that the Ultra "nerf" doesn't really change the overall balance of ZvT. Does it really matter that ultras do less splash considering they can just fodder shots so that banelings and lings can clean house?
This mindset of ultras being fodder is rather strange in SC2. In BW Ultras were the tanks but in SC2 lings are the weak attackers while ultras are the insane damage dealers. Against mech banelings aren't useful. Against MMM I believe the most common setup is muta/baneling/ling/infestor not really ultra/baneling but this could be the case. So no ultras are not cannon fodder anymore. If ultras can't do damage than they have no place in their current form.
He only built Ultras in one game and he had wiped out the Terran army several times before he built them. Not really an indicator of the Ultra, and more an indicator that Cool is a monster, baller, crazy sicko, pshyco, awesome Zerg.
Honestly, I'm fine with them nerfing the ultra splash, IF they just fixed Z early-mid game. Expo + tech rushing + trying to desperately survive every game to T3 is pretty dumb in general. If they make ultras weaker without fixing other aspects of the race, Z is now in an even WORSE spot than pre-1.1.
The "bug" was a great feature that should never have been patched. Funny enough this giant Z nerf (don't forget the 10% damage reduction Ultras got on top of that in 1.1) after Z was underpowered anyway will most probably go unfixed until 1.2
I'm getting more and more convinced that Blizzard really has no clue about what they are doing and that they are completely unable to fix any balance issues. After some Blizzard officials said they don't even like Zerg I'm afraid not even HotS will fix this issue.
I'm wondering: What can be done? Blizzard is obviously not listening to pro-gamers raising valid concerns about balance and they aren't listening to theorycrafting. I guess the only hope would be to have one giant tournament with custom balance patched maps to make those popular. But then again with all the ties GomTV has now to Blizzard I doubt this will ever happen in the GSL (they are even using the crappy Blizzard maps after all ...) and other tournaments just aren't bug enough.
On September 28 2010 23:45 Nightcrawler wrote: well iam tending to no race but seeing the ultra change i feel its some way in the right way because even in the past the splash was like the bulding thing but just against units wich i cant understand why hitting units behind a unit far away if u are a melee unit. Maybe blizzard didnt realised the effect of the ultralisk because u need to really look at it to see it and just saw it obvious in the 1.1.0 patch and changed it to what it should be in there eyes. So u could say u got an unfair advantage over other ppl and if blizzard takes it away u cry and make accusations against blizzard wich is really dishonoring
It might have been something to do with their blades being larger than a freaking supply depo.... also if it didn't have splashdamage it would need a much higher singletarget damage output comparable with that of DTs to be even slightly useful. And the correct way to hotfix this is to put the old ability back in the game instead of making ultras severly worse against everything.
I think zerg needs an almost across the board (with the exception of lings, blings, and drones) reduction in the price of their units. Right now zerg needs 2x+1 the number of bases to have a shot of beating a terran, and at least 2x the number of bases to keep up. That's completely unreasonable since terran already has an advantage early game and late game if they can secure 3 bases it's pretty much autolose for zerg.
SIGH. I'm a zerg player, so suffice it to say, i'm not too happy about the nerf, considering how useless ultras were to begin with.
However, they were broken when you could hit planetary fortresses and the scv's repairing too. But imo that was pretty much the only issue. That scvs trying to repair would die to splash. The increased splash range was (i hope) intended, just not to that extent. By trying to fix it with the current patch (1.1.1), they've effectively reduced the splash? I think it can be said that to fix this, all we really need to do is increase the splash radius of the current ultralisk to match up with (to some extent) the previous splash (1.0), though that's just my opinion.
I'm upset at the principle, zerg has other issues going on and then this nerf just makes matters worse. The ultralisk should be the premier ground unit, only to be countered maybe by immortal. The problem comes along yes when cleave no longer cleave sand ram is more useful on occasion, but also mainly when they're dancing around 2 inches from the front lines and not attacking anything. That's what frustrates me more than anything. I'm not asking for cliff walking, or stepping over all zerg units, but with so many zerglings being a staple to a good zerg army/supplement, and the lack of open space to properly surround all the time they just get in the way.
But anyway, this is just another example of Blizzard showing its true colors. They release a patch with a bug, quickly patch that bug with another nerf to the zerg. Didn't they used to say something like "Its not ready until it is ready." ? Either they don't know what they are doing and they are hurting balance more than fixing it with each patch, or they Know what they are doing, and just stealthed double nerfed zerg and can easily fall back on saying it was a bug fix, not a nerf.
We just have to deal with it and hope they fix this, that, and the other with a little more care and testing, so we don't end up with another "bug" that hurts the balance.
Oh shit that sucks. Well I'm not sure how much this will affect my games but every nerf to zerg makes me sad. Only time I can see it being a problem is versus mass thors and maybe zvp.
Man, I was wondering why my Ultras were struggling against Thors today. This is really bad... this patch just greatly diminished Ultras' effectiveness.
I love that in a patch to hot fix Phoenixes and Ultras, Blizzard breaks Phoenixes and Ultras. Also, why were they broken in the first place when they clearly had the patch ready for at least a month?
Ah this explains why my ultras got wrecked by thors today lol
If this isn't patched in a few days I am done with zerg. In the past, we just had to survive til the ultras came out. Now we are surviving to watch our final last stand fail epicly. I'd rather not waste my time anymore.
To summarize, someone didn't believe Blizzard's response stating that Ultralisk splash range was unintentionally extended in patch 1.1, so they decided to test it. They did a fresh install of the game and tested Ultras v. Buildings (this part isn't really important, I think it just showed that the Ultra was using Ram in the unpatched version), then Ultra vs Thors with SCVs behind it, and compared it to patch 1.1.1.
Basically, it just shows that Blizzard is either mistaken, or flat out lying when it comes to their claim that 1.1.1 was fixing an unintentional range increase.
as a customer I am disgusted by the Blizzard's attitude. why so much hate to this race you created? and they went to lie to us about this so called 'fix' is intentional. blizzard lose me as a potential buyer of HotS if they dont fix it asap (is not like they give a damn anyway lol).
What astonishes me is how fast they patched this. Was this really that much of a problem that it warranted a hotfix? I agree that this area of effect size is more believeable and consistent, but it is quite fascinating how they did not find it just to up the ultralisk damage to compensate for the obvious loss of damage output. Blizzard needs to focus on balancing early and mid game Terran versus Zerg before worrying about the late game in my opinion. the Ultralisk may very well be a bit overpowered but there are bigger balance issues than that in the matchup.
The EU bnet forums thread about the Ultra splash bug in the technical support section is still being ignored by blue posters. Post your opinions here, and maybe they will give us at least an explanation (if it's a new bug or an intedned balance change). The more posts the more chances there are that they'll consider answering !
On September 30 2010 16:44 Grend wrote: What astonishes me is how fast they patched this. Was this really that much of a problem that it warranted a hotfix? I agree that this area of effect size is more believeable and consistent, but it is quite fascinating how they did not find it just to up the ultralisk damage to compensate for the obvious loss of damage output. Blizzard needs to focus on balancing early and mid game Terran versus Zerg before worrying about the late game in my opinion. the Ultralisk may very well be a bit overpowered but there are bigger balance issues than that in the matchup.
exactly, the buggy aoe of ultras in 1.1 by all means is no game breaking, especially if you consider how hard to get them out in the first place. Buggy 1.1 is actually a move made zerg players feel that maybe blizzard cleverly do this for the underdog zerg while waiting for the real balance patch to kick in. but no, blizzard hated zerg so much that they patched it asap(less than 1 week time, considering they dont work on weekend). It really made me feel like they hate zerg so much.
To summarize, someone didn't believe Blizzard's response stating that Ultralisk splash range was unintentionally extended in patch 1.1, so they decided to test it. They did a fresh install of the game and tested Ultras v. Buildings (this part isn't really important, I think it just showed that the Ultra was using Ram in the unpatched version), then Ultra vs Thors with SCVs behind it, and compared it to patch 1.1.1.
Basically, it just shows that Blizzard is either mistaken, or flat out lying when it comes to their claim that 1.1.1 was fixing an unintentional range increase.
It was still a bug, but it just wasn't introduced in patch 1.1 (except vs buildings indirectly). It was actually "introduced" in a beta patch, as they intended to change the splash mechanic to what it is like right now but they apparently didn't and nobody noticed. It was only noticed when 1.1 came out because they removed the ram attack, and so as some buildings like command centres are much larger than any unit the old bug was thus more visibly pronounced.
I don't think Blizzard's blue posters understand this though, as they incorrectly stated that the bug was introduced in patch 1.1 as opposed to it having been in the game all along.
EDIT: Actually this is slightly wrong. I took a look at the beta patch notes for myself and I found no mention of them changing the way ultra splash works to the current formula. I could have sworn I read somebody else say that. But either way it's not like they have playtested the new ultra. So any way you slice it, it amounts to a much larger nerf than Blizzard ever probably intended and they seem oblivious to that.
mhh weird never used ultras a lot , was kinda intending to do this since it was a great addition to roaches while attacking the terran mech army and also seeing all the pros working wonders with them...hope Blizzard sometime in the near future will figure out : " uhh we might have nerved a good t3 unit to like well something that kinda sucks."
I basically favor Broodlords way over ultras.... Thors basically cant do shit against massive air units and usually they only have like a cpl vikings which are easy to kill with Corruptors... and Corruptors u have anyways because u got broodlords..
So after the second phase of beta, 2 months of release, Blizzard still hasn't properly addressed the problems with Zerg. Yet after only one week of Terran whining over a small late-game imbalance, they not only address it with top priority, but proceed to further nerf one of the few viable units Zerg has in an already unplayable late-game.
Well done.
I can't wait to see the top 200 list for the next few weeks. (I say 'few' because I have no hope of Blizzard fixing this anytime soon... not for the Zerg anyway)
It was still a bug, but it just wasn't introduced in patch 1.1 (except vs buildings indirectly). It was actually "introduced" in a beta patch, as they intended to change the splash mechanic to what it is like right now but they apparently didn't and nobody noticed.
I agree with you but people get hung up on this "bug" vs "nerf" stuff. That is a distinction without a difference. A "bugfix" that makes a unit demonstrably weaker is a nerf. They are not mutually exclusive. So while I don't necessarily mind nerfing ultralisks because they weren't working as intended, just simply nerfing ultralisks and ignoring the balance issues with zerg is just dumbfounding.
On September 30 2010 22:54 starcrafty wrote: So after the second phase of beta, 2 months of release, Blizzard still hasn't properly addressed the problems with Zerg. Yet after only one week of Terran whining over a small late-game imbalance, they not only address it with top priority, but proceed to further nerf one of the few viable units Zerg has in an already unplayable late-game.
Well done.
I can't wait to see the top 200 list for the next few weeks. (I say 'few' because I have no hope of Blizzard fixing this anytime soon... not for the Zerg anyway)
Don't act like it was just Terran. The insane range Ultralisks have effected all three match-ups as soon as the ultras came out it's not like it was ONLY against terran where the bug existed.
On September 30 2010 03:16 Numy wrote: This mindset of ultras being fodder is rather strange in SC2. In BW Ultras were the tanks but in SC2 lings are the weak attackers while ultras are the insane damage dealers. Against mech banelings aren't useful. Against MMM I believe the most common setup is muta/baneling/ling/infestor not really ultra/baneling but this could be the case. So no ultras are not cannon fodder anymore. If ultras can't do damage than they have no place in their current form.
i think thats simply because zerglings have actually less dps than in bw now (afaik), while there are new ranged units with insane dps like the marauder
the idea of a melee tank doesnt work any more since ranged units do too much damage... thats also one of the biggest faults in sc2 design overall imho... melee units are way too useless, thats why it all degenerates into those big ranged balls
if they wanted ultralisks to be the tanks they were in bw they would have to give them at least 1000hp, since armor doesnt help much vs big damage dealers like thors and marauders
ever since the beta started those "terrible terrible damage" ranged units were the thing that broke sc2 game design the most, and this has been immediately obvious to most ppl, but not to blizzard, who refused to change any of those mechanics
On September 30 2010 22:54 starcrafty wrote: So after the second phase of beta, 2 months of release, Blizzard still hasn't properly addressed the problems with Zerg. Yet after only one week of Terran whining over a small late-game imbalance, they not only address it with top priority, but proceed to further nerf one of the few viable units Zerg has in an already unplayable late-game.
Well done.
I can't wait to see the top 200 list for the next few weeks. (I say 'few' because I have no hope of Blizzard fixing this anytime soon... not for the Zerg anyway)
Don't act like it was just Terran. The insane range Ultralisks have effected all three match-ups as soon as the ultras came out it's not like it was ONLY against terran where the bug existed.
Get off your high horse and use your brain.
zvz ultras? what?
zvp, change only affects buildings. you often form probe rings around a nexus that is attacked by an ultra?
T was the only one that really "felt" it and couldnt just work around it since the mass repair was made impossible.
i dont wanna defend his post or anything but yours is just uninformed .
On September 30 2010 22:54 starcrafty wrote: So after the second phase of beta, 2 months of release, Blizzard still hasn't properly addressed the problems with Zerg. Yet after only one week of Terran whining over a small late-game imbalance, they not only address it with top priority, but proceed to further nerf one of the few viable units Zerg has in an already unplayable late-game.
Well done.
I can't wait to see the top 200 list for the next few weeks. (I say 'few' because I have no hope of Blizzard fixing this anytime soon... not for the Zerg anyway)
Don't act like it was just Terran. The insane range Ultralisks have effected all three match-ups as soon as the ultras came out it's not like it was ONLY against terran where the bug existed.
Get off your high horse and use your brain.
If we only look at forum QQ (I realize this is not an accurate description of OPness, but whatever), there were MASSIVE amounts of Terran "PF IS UP!!!/nerf ultra" posts, and pretty much zero/very close to none P/Z players saying "OMG ULTRAS ARE OP!!!".
Also, did we see any highlevel T players complain about this? Or P players? Or Z players? After what I've read, most people kinda agreed that it wasn't a huge issue, or gave Zerg an extremely overpowered advantage in lategame.
I'm not 2k diamond, though, so feel free to ignore me p:
On September 30 2010 23:18 BeMannerDuPenner wrote:you often form probe rings around a nexus that is attacked by an ultra?
made me smile
By the way, does someone have any numbers on the compared dps (head-butt vs normal now) ? in how far does the splash really affect buildings? I mean they tried to sell us the changed attack with "does actually do more damage against small buildings due to splash". Is this really accurate? I can only imagine that depots would have to be very close together to really provide much opportunity for splash damage. And I can't really think of any other Buildings that would be this close together really (I don't even believe that supply depots are 99% of the time)
About Ultralisk vs Thor/Tank: Not only is the splash and damage lowered, Ultras are also melee. Thors and Tanks can just shoot from within the "ball", with range 7 on Thors right? And one Ultra already loses against a Thor. Overall sounds to me like if you can't get a good surround on Thors, you will need to have quite some more Ultras than the enemy has Thors. And to surround a ball of Thors with a bunch of Ultralisks you really need a very very big open space.
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended. As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
I think everyone is blowing this way out of proportion TBH.
Ok, ultras don't beat a bunch of thors at cost. They really didn't before. Nothing does. Noting beats a bunch of Marauders at cost either, or Marines, or half of Terran units. Zerg still deals with this, and has dealt with it since roaches were neutered.
Ultras take damage and they deal pretty good damage. That's it. They still do that, they just don't level a big mech ball as quickly. You still need other sources of DPS for that.
If this is what Blizzard does with the ultralisk, fine, I'll still use it. At least they can kill a PF and repairing SCVs now.
On October 01 2010 01:18 fdsdfg wrote: I think everyone is blowing this way out of proportion TBH.
Ok, ultras don't beat a bunch of thors at cost. They really didn't before. Nothing does. Noting beats a bunch of Marauders at cost either, or Marines, or half of Terran units. Zerg still deals with this, and has dealt with it since roaches were neutered.
Ultras take damage and they deal pretty good damage. That's it. They still do that, they just don't level a big mech ball as quickly. You still need other sources of DPS for that.
If this is what Blizzard does with the ultralisk, fine, I'll still use it. At least they can kill a PF and repairing SCVs now.
Wait, one of our core units for lategame has its damage output decreased by pretty much 50% and you say it's been blown out of proportion?
To summarize, someone didn't believe Blizzard's response stating that Ultralisk splash range was unintentionally extended in patch 1.1, so they decided to test it. They did a fresh install of the game and tested Ultras v. Buildings (this part isn't really important, I think it just showed that the Ultra was using Ram in the unpatched version), then Ultra vs Thors with SCVs behind it, and compared it to patch 1.1.1.
Basically, it just shows that Blizzard is either mistaken, or flat out lying when it comes to their claim that 1.1.1 was fixing an unintentional range increase.
It was still a bug, but it just wasn't introduced in patch 1.1 (except vs buildings indirectly). It was actually "introduced" in a beta patch, as they intended to change the splash mechanic to what it is like right now but they apparently didn't and nobody noticed. It was only noticed when 1.1 came out because they removed the ram attack, and so as some buildings like command centres are much larger than any unit the old bug was thus more visibly pronounced.
I don't think Blizzard's blue posters understand this though, as they incorrectly stated that the bug was introduced in patch 1.1 as opposed to it having been in the game all along.
EDIT: Actually this is slightly wrong. I took a look at the beta patch notes for myself and I found no mention of them changing the way ultra splash works to the current formula. I could have sworn I read somebody else say that. But either way it's not like they have playtested the new ultra. So any way you slice it, it amounts to a much larger nerf than Blizzard ever probably intended and they seem oblivious to that.
It was introduced in Beta patch 13. It was an unlisted change, with the other unlisted change that patch being 33% damage splash instead of 100% damage splash.
Neither change was listed in the patch notes, so I guess if you count the AoE change a 'bug' so was the splash damage change, right Blizzard?
Sorry, but I can't think to myself for a second that those changes (changing AoE to target based while at the same time changing it to 33% damage) weren't intentional and linked.
Edit: They keep calling it a bug introduced in 1.1 because they probably just don't want to admit they were idiots and didn't even test the Ultra building splash.
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended. As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
wait so how exactly am I supposed to fight a Thor/Hellion/Tanks army with Bio/Scvs behind them ?
Dont say Broodlords plz.. plz dont...
Yes I dont possess the insane multitasking abilities as Fruitdealer and my fruits are not as big. I really dont get THIS response. So they nerf Zerg by fixing a bug but at the same time they agree Z being kinda weak. I just dont get it. Gimme back my +damage on Ultras asap. The fuck are they actually patching nowadays.
.. I cant really articulate myself today Ive been working to hard
On October 01 2010 01:08 Bodhi wrote: Update from Blizzard:
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended. As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
wait so how exactly am I supposed to fight a Thor/Hellion/Tanks army with Bio/Scvs behind them ?
Dont say Broodlords plz.. plz dont...
Yes I dont possess the insane multitasking abilities as Fruitdealer and my fruits are not as big. I really dont get THIS response. So they nerf Zerg by fixing a bug but at the same time they agree Z being kinda weak. I just dont get it. Gimme back my +damage on Ultras asap. The fuck are they actually patching nowadays.
.. I cant really articulate myself today Ive been working to hard
Ultralisk/ling is probably the best bet. Roaches will work for some ratios between hellions, tanks, and thors.
Broodlord/corrupter/infestor can work too, but that is harder to manage if the Terran has good micro.
If you're sufficiently up on gas compared to the terran, mass muta + magic box will do it too. Usually with pure mech, you can out expand a terran very easily and take a lot of geysers quickly, so it's a pretty viable thing to do.
On October 01 2010 01:08 Bodhi wrote: Update from Blizzard:
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended. As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
wait so how exactly am I supposed to fight a Thor/Hellion/Tanks army with Bio/Scvs behind them ?
Dont say Broodlords plz.. plz dont...
Yes I dont possess the insane multitasking abilities as Fruitdealer and my fruits are not as big. I really dont get THIS response. So they nerf Zerg by fixing a bug but at the same time they agree Z being kinda weak. I just dont get it. Gimme back my +damage on Ultras asap. The fuck are they actually patching nowadays.
.. I cant really articulate myself today Ive been working to hard
Ultralisk/ling is probably the best bet. Roaches will work for some ratios between hellions, tanks, and thors.
Broodlord/corrupter/infestor can work too, but that is harder to manage if the Terran has good micro.
If you're sufficiently up on gas compared to the terran, mass muta + magic box will do it too.
That it is what the Ultra is made for. I have to agree that we have to wait and play some more games to fully grasp the impact of the area reduction of the cleave attack. But the numbers say its a decrease between 20-50% -> hence making the Ultra worse to fight vs this combo. And it was not that easy at all before. You had to flank maybe use infestors and try to get some banes in etc.
Mass Muta dont work if he has marines there. Also he should have way more than 5 Thors Your Banes will die pretty fast to tanks and the Thors will block them.
Outexpanding a Terran is nice but you have to pay lots of attention to drops. but thats kinda manageable. The Problem with the Deathball he is acquiring he will just roflstomp you when he moves out. Well these are atleast the problems I had.
The thing that annoys me is that I was ok with T mech since I knew I just have to get 3+ bases and wait for my sweet Ultras and they might actually kill the T.
Na I guess I am whinning bit too much. I just have to play some games so I have more facts to based my QQ on. but numbers dont lie
Heaven forbid Zerg gets a unit that can potentially be 1a'd, now it's pretty much non-ideal. Maybe if vikings and thors didn't have 9 AA range, this would be a little more passable as Broodlords would have a better shot at taking down late game mech, but that's not the case.
People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
All these complicated splash damage explanations are interesting, but the bottom line is, in a battle, THOR > ULTRA. And that is just not right. Right now the terran trend is to go bio mech with a lot of thors, and pretty much anything that zerg cand do is get roflstomped by the deathball. Ultras used to save that situation, now they don't.....
wouldnt it be cool if they made ultras push smaller units around? that way you could divide a terrans bio ball by running in a couple ultras, then surround the individual groups of mm with lings
yeah, and add another one dimensional micro ability which disable the opponent from micro. not like we haven't alrdy enough of such game crushers (ff, concussive, fungal)
Well no matter how hard that nerf actually hits, no one can deny it's a nerf, and it is definitely not what Zerg needs right now.
What really boggles my mind is that some protoss reports the phoenix bug (with one single and easily misunderstandable sentence) and not one day later a blue has replied like 3 times.
This issue is very well documented reported and repostet over and over again, and we hardly hear anything.
Also ... doesn't Blizzard test their patches?? They basically tried to sell us on the removal of head butt with the argument that splash would also work on buildings (supply depots where the exact example used). I mean what the hell, they should have noticed that if they had tried it out even once right? I don't get it.
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
You should at least have read the quote from a Blizzard rep that's just a few posts above yours, instead of making stuff up. The ultra splash behaviour has existed for months. It was not introduced in 1.1.0
On October 01 2010 02:37 Ajunoo wrote: What really boggles my mind is that some protoss reports the phoenix bug (with one single and easily misunderstandable sentence) and not one day later a blue has replied like 3 times. .
the phoenix bug breaks phoenix even more than this nerf breaks ultras
also with the phoenix bug they cannot deny it was an oversight. maybe it would have been too embarassing to confirm that they managed to fuck up ultras in two patches in a row just because they have not a single competent person testing their patches
Don't get me wrong it's great they fix the phoenix bug, it's just that we haven't gotten as much as a lousy "we'll look into it" yet, and quite frankly the ultralisk splash couldn't have been an oversight, at least i can't possibly imagine how.
On October 01 2010 02:37 Ajunoo wrote: Well no matter how hard that nerf actually hits, no one can deny it's a nerf, and it is definitely not what Zerg needs right now.
What really boggles my mind is that some protoss reports the phoenix bug (with one single and easily misunderstandable sentence) and not one day later a blue has replied like 3 times.
This issue is very well documented reported and repostet over and over again, and we hardly hear anything.
Also ... doesn't Blizzard test their patches?? They basically tried to sell us on the removal of head butt with the argument that splash would also work on buildings (supply depots where the exact example used). I mean what the hell, they should have noticed that if they had tried it out even once right? I don't get it.
Well the phoenix thing was actually a bug while this is a bug FIX. Fixing the mechanic so that it works intuitively is a plus. The fact that it imbalances the unit is unfortunate, but that doesn't mean the fix shouldn't happen. I don't get why so many people are crying for the fix to be reverted. This is how Blizzard should have implemented the cleave attack in the fist place. It makes no sense the damage would be spread from the attacked unit instead of from the attacking unit.
Balance-wise, :-/ If it's true that this makes Zerg crippled in the late game, then Blizzard should rebalance the game. However, I don't think that "ultras don't counter thors anymore!" is a valid argument. I don't think a fat melee unit with a splash attack was ever meant to counter an equally fat ranged unit with a powerful single-target attack.
On October 01 2010 02:37 Ajunoo wrote: Well no matter how hard that nerf actually hits, no one can deny it's a nerf, and it is definitely not what Zerg needs right now.
What really boggles my mind is that some protoss reports the phoenix bug (with one single and easily misunderstandable sentence) and not one day later a blue has replied like 3 times.
This issue is very well documented reported and repostet over and over again, and we hardly hear anything.
Also ... doesn't Blizzard test their patches?? They basically tried to sell us on the removal of head butt with the argument that splash would also work on buildings (supply depots where the exact example used). I mean what the hell, they should have noticed that if they had tried it out even once right? I don't get it.
Well the phoenix thing was actually a bug while this is a bug FIX. Fixing the mechanic so that it works intuitively is a plus. The fact that it imbalances the unit is unfortunate, but that doesn't mean the fix shouldn't happen. I don't get why so many people are crying for the fix to be reverted. This is how Blizzard should have implemented the cleave attack in the fist place. It makes no sense the damage would be spread from the attacked unit instead of from the attacking unit.
Balance-wise, :-/ If it's true that this makes Zerg crippled in the late game, then Blizzard should rebalance the game. However, I don't think that "ultras don't counter thors anymore!" is a valid argument. I don't think a fat melee unit with a splash attack was ever meant to counter an equally fat ranged unit with a powerful single-target attack.
so what are they supposed to counter then? small tier 1 units? marines zerglings and zealots? give me a break. So a Thor can destroy things at range, and has and insane anti air attack...
Why are people thinking only in terms of counters. Counter Thors? The Thor is a slow, clumsy and expansive unit. It has enough flaws as it is. It doesn't need a hard counter.
If the ultra sucks too much, it will get its +5 dmg back. It used to be way more useless in Beta before the +dmg to Armored units. The splash around the target unit made no sense esthetically.
Just watch that replay. 2/2 ultra/ling vs 1/1(not sure about the armor) helion/thor. 180 vs 130. Guess what wins?
He did a semi all in in the beginning and I countered it, macrod up, took the gold and harassed a bit. he came for the final push and I was just waiting for the ultras so I paniced and lost some units, but I got him to turn around with my mutas(his fault). He then comes back and my ultras are up but he just chews threw them.
This is actually the biggest nerf I have seen(i have only been playing this game since patch 13 or something). Please tell me what to do....
I usually refrain myself from hopping onto the bandwagon but this one is actually pretty infuriating... It's like blizzard took one step forward and two steps back balancing zerg. Why didn't they just keep the RAM attack in the first place and left the ultralisk's splash alone.... They say this was how they truly intended the ultralisk to be like but really?? Maybe they have some mid game buffs coming up in 1.2 (i.e. fixing NP pretty please?)
Just watch that replay. 2/2 ultra/ling vs 1/1(not sure about the armor) helion/thor. 180 vs 130. Guess what wins?
He did a semi all in in the beginning and I countered it, macrod up, took the gold and harassed a bit. he came for the final push and I was just waiting for the ultras so I paniced and lost some units, but I got him to turn around with my mutas(his fault). He then comes back and my ultras are up but he just chews threw them.
This is actually the biggest nerf I have seen(i have only been playing this game since patch 13 or something). Please tell me what to do....
If you have mutas and Hive tech, you can have Brood Lords instead of Ultras, no?
If someone is massing thor like in top vs seller, you really do have a bunch of options. You can keep dropping him to slow down and prevent moveout, while denying any additional bases that he's trying to take for gas.
You use this time to confirm his composition and set up for his move out, which will be around 10-20 thors.
When you engage (probably heavy roach comp), you need to parasite at least 8, if not more of the thors. 8 parasited thors (considering positioning + armor) will one shot a thor. If cannons is upgraded, you just quickly select all the NP thors and just cannon on the rest. If not, select them all and just burst down 1 thor at a time (probably get 4-5 before NP wears off).
Just watch that replay. 2/2 ultra/ling vs 1/1(not sure about the armor) helion/thor. 180 vs 130. Guess what wins?
He did a semi all in in the beginning and I countered it, macrod up, took the gold and harassed a bit. he came for the final push and I was just waiting for the ultras so I paniced and lost some units, but I got him to turn around with my mutas(his fault). He then comes back and my ultras are up but he just chews threw them.
This is actually the biggest nerf I have seen(i have only been playing this game since patch 13 or something). Please tell me what to do....
If you have mutas and Hive tech, you can have Brood Lords instead of Ultras, no?
Dude, you totally missed the point. Besides, Broodlords are grea till the opponent makes 5 vikings and then it becomes almost impossible to protect them due to their speed, and the viking insane range.
It's just a stupid nerf, especially considering it was supposed to be a buff. It started with a buff to buildings, and now its just a big overall nerf.
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
This totally makes sense, but it implies a total lack of communication within blizzard.
Bug team: "Hey, ultralisks have a bug with splash that makes it too big" Dev team: "Ultralisks are doing too much damage, lets nerf it" Bug team: "Hey, when we fix this bug, ultralisks will do less damage" Dev team: "Still nerfing ultralisk damage"
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
On October 01 2010 01:18 fdsdfg wrote: I think everyone is blowing this way out of proportion TBH.
Ok, ultras don't beat a bunch of thors at cost. They really didn't before. Nothing does. Noting beats a bunch of Marauders at cost either, or Marines, or half of Terran units. Zerg still deals with this, and has dealt with it since roaches were neutered.
Ultras take damage and they deal pretty good damage. That's it. They still do that, they just don't level a big mech ball as quickly. You still need other sources of DPS for that.
If this is what Blizzard does with the ultralisk, fine, I'll still use it. At least they can kill a PF and repairing SCVs now.
Wait, one of our core units for lategame has its damage output decreased by pretty much 50% and you say it's been blown out of proportion?
50% in absolute ideal situations.
Think about the ultralisk. If you build 6 ultralisks as part of a larger army and send it all against an equal mech army and it's a close fight, how many total hits do you think the ultralisks get in before they die? 4? 6? Add up all the damage of those hits - is that worth 1800/1200/36? Almost definitely not. The damage is only a small part of the value of an ultralisk.
The only exception to this is when you are fighting such a small mech army that your army completely steamrolls him. That's still going to happen just the same - it's still a mismatch in Zerg's favor.
There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
I found Ultralisks quiet micro intensive due to their size, you have to micro them around a lot to give them correct targets.
Btw. I had a ZvZ today, which was pretty nice. It ended with a MassHydra vs Ultra/Infestor(my part) My experience showed me that UltraInfestor is far superior over Hydra, well today I lost some fights, where u felt like u should have had enough to kill him. So I really felt the difference. Ultra in late ZvZ isnt that great anymore =/ even with the right support. Poor fattys.
They NEED to change that back. i hope some1 can squeeze a statement out of Blizzard on Blizzcon
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
I am not so sure about that. They used to do 100% splash damage which was really good. But later it was changed to something like 33%. That was probably the single biggest nerf the Ultra ever got.
I find it bizarre that they actually nerf the race who is considered the worst atm. They basicly removed the only chance fruitseller had to win GSL.
I understand that there was a bug, and it should be fixed. But the splash on ultra has been live forever and they have been balanced around it. So to "fix" it to correct another smaller problem when zerg is considered a pretty weak race is insane.
They should atleast have buffed the attack at the same time. Ultralisk is not even good in any way now. They get destroyed by bio AND thors. Whats the new counter to mass thor/hellion?
Make Ultralisks be able to walk over Zerglings and Roaches (and allow them to both attack the same targets). Easy buff/fix for the frustrating Ultralisk AI.
There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
I found Ultralisks quiet micro intensive due to their size, you have to micro them around a lot to give them correct targets.
Btw. I had a ZvZ today, which was pretty nice. It ended with a MassHydra vs Ultra/Infestor(my part) My experience showed me that UltraInfestor is far superior over Hydra, well today I lost some fights, where u felt like u should have had enough to kill him. So I really felt the difference. Ultra in late ZvZ isnt that great anymore =/ even with the right support. Poor fattys.
They NEED to change that back. i hope some1 can squeeze a statement out of Blizzard on Blizzcon
May as well just do baneling infestor. Baneling splash is more effective and they don't get stuck behind other banelings when they try to attack....
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
I am not so sure about that. They used to do 100% splash damage which was really good. But later it was changed to something like 33%. That was probably the single biggest nerf the Ultra ever got.
It definitely was - but the ultra was near useless at the beginning of beta due to the investment in upgrades (extra 150/150 for speed) and the lack of any real affect in battle. Marauders took them apart, and they didn't do much damage at all.
Bringing the damage from 20 to 15+35 was really important. Nerfing the splash and HP at the same time sucked, and it was arguable if they were better before or not, but then when the speed was free and they couldn't be stunned and got 50 more hp, it was pretty clearly a buff.
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
My error there. I checked it out, it was 25 dmg straight up in beta with the 100% splash. Certainly a different unit now. I recall it being quite deadly to tier 1, totally obliterating marine / zealot balls
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended.
As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
Basically, they had meant it to be this way since beta!! What's stupid is that they base balance changes with this bug in mind and now they remove the 'bug', completely neutering the ultra. Why couldn't they have either made it clearer in the patch notes rather than denying this for so long! More importantly, why couldn't they have recognised this bug earlier.
Thats pretty sad to hear. Who cares if its a bug, when its around since early beta stages and worked fine? Thats how u create artificial imbalances ...
I cannot remember exact examples right now, but in WoW blizzard has done this a few times (buffing an ability only to nerf it to worse than it originally was a few weeks later..
Edit: Rogue sword specialization was one, I'm sure there was a few more.
We did a little extra tracking on our end, and indeed, the Ultralisk bug existed at one point during the beta, so unfortunately, it's been around awhile and thus why many people thought it had been working as intended.
As it stands now, this unit is working as intended. As always though, we are continuing to keep a close eye on how this affects gameplay on multiple levels and will continue to watch for constructive feedback from the community.
Basically, they had meant it to be this way since beta!! What's stupid is that they base balance changes with this bug in mind and now they remove the 'bug', completely neutering the ultra. Why couldn't they have either made it clearer in the patch notes rather than denying this for so long! More importantly, why couldn't they have recognised this bug earlier.
They didn't made it clear in the patch notes, because they did not know about it at all, that's why they were denying it for so long. They did "a little extra tracking" long after the players started complaining that they don't even know how their own game works.
To me being in the software industry it's pretty obvious what happened here. The designer of the new ultralisk in SC2 in testing found that there was an error in hitting buildings with splash damage. The splash damage extended past the building. The designer probably couldn't find a good fix for this in the code so developed the workaround of giving the ultralisk the ram ability. At some point this developer quit or moved on to something else.
Here comes the new developer or group of developers as the game goes into maintenance mode. These guys are apparently not all that big into testing. They see wow this ram ability is really odd and doesn't quite fit what we want the ultralisk to do, it's odd it was even here in the first place. In the code it looks like it was just kinda added on, lets get rid of it.
We get 1.1 ultralisk from this. All of the sudden they realize the splash damage is a bit out of hand, now they realize why ram was in there. Instead of saying wow we screwed up, they try a fix that will not work. $5 says they can not find a fix that will ever bring the ultralisk back to 1.0 without putting ram back in because the original developer probably tried a variety of things before adding ram.
So the upshot of it is is that zerg the most underrepresented race ends up getting another serious nerf. I understand that it was because of previous mistakes that this happened but can't they see that nerfing zerg more at this point in time is not the smartest thing to do?
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
Does that really matter how bad Ultra was? It's same as saying Thor had 100hp in the begining, then they buffed to 400hp and now nerfed to 200hp. So Thor has twice as much hp as in the Beta, but is the Thor good with 200hp lol ?
Ultra got 5hp nerf in the patch, and now splash nerf without any intend to nerf it, cause blizzard made that accidently, imo they should at least immediatly return 5 dmg to Ultras now.
On October 01 2010 02:09 kcdc wrote: People understand that this was Blizzard's intention, right? Originally, splash extended at a range of 2 from the center of the target hit. In 1.1, splash was buffed to extend at a range of 2 from the outer surface of the target hit. In 1.1.1, splash was nerfed to extend (as intended) at a range of 2 from the front of the ultralisk, where the attack originates. This does nerf splash from the original version because the distance from the front of the ultralisk to the center of the target hit extended the splash radius beyond the intended radius of 2. Since the additional splash range was equal to the radius of the target hit, it was most visible with large targets like thors and siege tanks, but it was also present with smaller units like marines. It seems clear to me that this patch reverts the splash radius to the original design intents, but people seem upset because it is an effectively smaller splash radius than they were used to.
I won't comment on what the optimal splash radius is, but I think it makes much more sense for the splash to originate from the front of the ultralisk than from the center of the target hit. The latter created an odd situation where splash radius depended on the size of the target. Now, the splash radius will be constant. The issue shouldn't be whether splash should be reverted to its previous state, but rather what the optimal radius is. If ultras are found to be too weak now, splash radius could be buffed slightly beyond 2.
1.1 didn't change it at all, it simply introduced the ordinary attack on buildings, at which point it became obvious.
Ultras in beta did more splash, 50 dmg to everything ( iirc ), 100% splash dmg and about the same radius as now. The only difference compared to the beta ultra, which everyone thought was useless, is that the current incarnation can't be affected by slow effects.
Personally I think the ultra is a boring T3 unit, especially as it is now. There's barely any micro involved at all, there's nothing really strategically interesting about it except that you need "bigger stuff" if the game gets to T3.
The original ultra was only 20 damage, splash was smaller (splash was what it is now), it didn't have speed, it had 50 more hp, and it was affected by slow/stun.
Then they had the splash change.. they changed the damage to the 15+35 armored, nerfed the hp to 400, then gave them back 50 hp, immunity to slow/stun, and the speed upgrade for free. Then they took off 5 damage to armored and changed the splash back to original.
It's much better than it was at the beginning of beta.
Does that really matter how bad Ultra was? It's same as saying Thor had 100hp in the begining, then they buffed to 400hp and now nerfed to 200hp. So Thor has twice as much hp as in the Beta, but is the Thor good with 200hp lol ?
Ultra got 5hp nerf in the patch, and now splash nerf without any intend to nerf it, cause blizzard made that accidently, imo they should at least immediatly return 5 dmg to Ultras now.
they should immediatly return the splash to what it was. it worked fine and made the ultra the saving grace of countless ZvX games for several months. k it was unintended by them (nice playtesting blizz) but it was good.
blizz just shows again and again how stubborn they are. but i lost my hope in the company anyways. if this wasnt sc2 i wouldve quit long ago just because their pure idiocy rages me out again and again.
keep splash as it is but increase it by a flat 50% and also increase ultras dmg to everything but armored by 6 while keeping armored the same and it should be decent. Currently I feel like BLs always are good... but with these changes and the existence of Vikings, I feel like Z isn't ahead the T even with hive tech. So basically dis-adv at every stage =/
On October 02 2010 02:31 Glockateer wrote: I find it funny that if a terran cries it is patched in a week. If a zerg cries it is thrown in the well and forgotten.
I find it funny that you don't watch tournament VODs. They patched it because a player with a significant economic advantage and unit advantage STILL got thrashed by ultralisks and lost so many SCVs trying to repair the PF. The splash was an issue on buildings like CCs. It demonstrated a very serious issue. Analogy to a terran problem please? Nothing is that powerful TvZ.
Also, I love how people say Ultralisks were almost OP... after in the beta everyone said they were useless. Got the balance right this time boys? Know what's OP for sure? Every few months some individuals (let's be honest, most), bitch that some unit is underpowered than later they say they are overpowered. Why not just play the fricking game? If you're not a higher level diamond player [I am], you have no sense in discussion what is too powerful [I don't, for the most part, except in obvious cases like the ultralisk building splash]
On October 02 2010 02:31 Glockateer wrote: I find it funny that if a terran cries it is patched in a week. If a zerg cries it is thrown in the well and forgotten.
I find it funny that you don't watch tournament VODs. They patched it because a player with a significant economic advantage and unit advantage STILL got thrashed by ultralisks and lost so many SCVs trying to repair the PF. The splash was an issue on buildings like CCs. It demonstrated a very serious issue. Analogy to a terran problem please? Nothing is that powerful TvZ.
Significant eco advantage? Cool had 90 drones over 4 bases vs Top's 3 bases, also cool was sitting on a measly 140~ roach ling baneling army that he stalled with till hive tech, the best analogy I can think of is a terran with 120 food of just marines/scvs throwing down 5 starports and building bc's while doing drops everywhere and hoping to not get attacked till 200/200
Also, I love how people say Ultralisks were almost OP... after in the beta everyone said they were useless. Got the balance right this time boys? Know what's OP for sure? Every few months some individuals (let's be honest, most), bitch that some unit is underpowered than later they say they are overpowered. Why not just play the fricking game? If you're not a higher level diamond player [I am], you have no sense in discussion what is too powerful [I don't, for the most part, except in obvious cases like the ultralisk building splash]
Ultralisks have been buffed a ton since beta, if they didnt have +armored, where mc/stun/snareable, still needed speed to be researched, and didnt break forcefields, I think most people would still agree that they were underpowered, not sure why you just ignored all those changes...
Common face it, anything that can almost beat a terran unit by just 1a is WAY too overpowered for terran players. Even if it takes a crazy amount of tech and can't hit air.
Ultralisks should be nerfed so they can't hit ground as well.
Ok that sounds pretty rude but really it gets old hearing this over and over. Ultralisks take forever to tech to, take forever to make, and can't hit air. To beat ultralisks micro is needed or an overwhelming unit advantage, or two banshees.
On October 02 2010 06:10 Ekko wrote: Common face it, anything that can almost beat a terran unit by just 1a is WAY too overpowered for terran players. Even if it takes a crazy amount of tech and can't hit air.
Ultralisks should be nerfed so they can't hit ground as well.
Ok that sounds pretty rude but really it gets old hearing this over and over. Ultralisks take forever to tech to, take forever to make, and can't hit air. To beat ultralisks micro is needed or an overwhelming unit advantage, or two banshees.
This explains why I felt like my ultras just became utter trash and got severely owned each time I used them. Guess my "on the move" conclusion to not use them anymore was a good idea.
Can we expect balance changes soon? By seen I don't mean by the end of the year, that is kind of far away. It's disheartening that Zerg is having such a hard time right now and the only thing introduced to us in the last minor balance patch was a significant nerf to one of our extremely hard to get units. Sure we got the OP race nerf but that was a generous, gentle, touch.
Even some positive patch notes would hold me over for awhile but this is getting quite frustrating. All my hero's are switching races which means no more instructional replays for me.
I don't want to give a time period, but yes, more will be coming "soon".
There are a few variations of soon I've used for the sake of variety.
I know everyone keeps bringing up that this was a nerf. I also understand that this is an understandable perception to have given that the bug fixed altered the way the damage was being done by changing the epicenter of the splash damage. Unfortunately, utilizing the word "nerf" does not change the fact that it was a bug that was fixed (whether it should have been discovered before or not) that by extension lead to many of you feeling as if it was a straight forward nerf. As I said before though, this is one unit among many in the zerg arsenal and we'll be providing more information on future balance changes as soon as we can. We absolutely want to make sure that we're giving you the best possible information that we can. Just please keep in mind, patches take time to create, test, and release, but we'll keep pushing to do what we can and keep you as informed as possible.
Neth, when you say "we've spent a lot of disccusion time on just one unit," and "at some point we have to move on," who are you referring to? Are you referring to yourself and the forum community, or are you referring to the development/balance team?
If you're talking about the community, I'd completely understand, I doubt there's much more that needs to be said on the forums on this topic. I just really hope you're not referring to the development/balance team. It seems like no matter how many hours the development/balance team has spent working on the ultralisk, they really shouldn't stop working on it until they've specified what it's role is, and have balanced it for that role. I don't really think they should just leave it, "as is," if they're having a hard time figuring it out.
It was in reference to the current conversations within the community. We are currently working on some additional information to provide everyone to better explain what we are seeing as far as balance between the races as well as our next plans for ongoing balance tweaks. As I mentioned earlier though, and as much as people don't like it, we are being very careful not to make changes that tip the scales too far askew. We are still taking in feedback, listening, and looking at the ideas and perceptions that people have about the current balance state so that we can better address various concerns.
So it is summed up with... go f-yo, dont build Ultras and wait for ages to get a patch thats like: Neural Parasite now lasts 17 seconds, up from 15 Roaches now regnerate 6 instead of 5 HP while burrowd
I find it funny how people never try to find other ways to use the ultra other than conventional ideas like just building a ton and expecting to win the game.
Its just like with the infestor in some ways. For almost the entire time and as long as i can remember seeing in the beta, the infestor could spawn infested marines. Almost no one used it, not because it was a bad spell but apparently no one could think of a reason to. For a while they even got rid of the spell cause no one was using it and replaced it with a bland bloodlust clone. Since release i have been seeing tons of interesting ways to use it, from using the eggs to turn tank blasts onto ally ranks of marines to sneaky infiltrations into the mineral line in order to spawn a butload of I-Marines to decimate the workers and CC's.
Just cause Ultralisks are changed to be worse than before or even UP doesnt mean they are useless. Nor does it mean you should just stop using them altogether. If they are no longer usefull for the old style of play find a new one. Be inovative.
Dont get into the midset of Y counters X on this game as the primary dogma. Prime examples are zerglings, marines and hellions.
A lot of people say that marines and hellions counter zerglings. While its true that marines and hellions are great combatants against the speedy menace, In conflicts solely between the 2, you can see that its largely a toss up who actually wins out more in the engagement. In other words just having the unit does not automatically mean you will win if the foe uses something it *counters*. Ill explain the details of hellion and marine against ling interactions.
Lings can easily surround a hellion and devour it with only minimal losses if the hellions are not microed right and the same goes for the hellion if they can intellegently line up the lings tomaximse their AOE damage. Between zerglings and marines, on a low unit count, cost per cost fight 1 marine is easily killed by 2 zerglings. But zerglings seem to be less effective against equivalent costs of rines at times dont they? This ussualy happens due to changes in marine troop formation as they increase in number and against certain foes. Being in a ball rather than a thinner line thus reduces the attackable surface area while the marine range preserves the potential damage output until a certain diameter is acheived. These balls of marines also kite in order to help reduce the effectiveness of a zerg tactic, the surround, which can be deadly to marine balls. The surround if completed on a terran infantry ball immobalizes it however and can be a terrans downfall and the cost of using the ball formation since the reduced area exposed to enemy attacks also means a reduced amount of bodies needed to block your foe from escaping.
This just shows the begginning of the complexities between just a few of the low tier units and most importantly the falacy of thinking of the game only in terms of counters. Think of how hard it is to really balance a game when small changes CAN and often times do make major differences in the way the game is played. Think of all the other wierd anomalies that can play a part in games that most players overlook and dont ponder about. Rather than moping over patches that do weird things to prior gameplay or destroy old ways of doing things find out how to use what you have to makethe best of the situation.
Can we expect balance changes soon? By seen I don't mean by the end of the year, that is kind of far away. It's disheartening that Zerg is having such a hard time right now and the only thing introduced to us in the last minor balance patch was a significant nerf to one of our extremely hard to get units. Sure we got the OP race nerf but that was a generous, gentle, touch.
Even some positive patch notes would hold me over for awhile but this is getting quite frustrating. All my hero's are switching races which means no more instructional replays for me.
I don't want to give a time period, but yes, more will be coming "soon".
There are a few variations of soon I've used for the sake of variety.
I know everyone keeps bringing up that this was a nerf. I also understand that this is an understandable perception to have given that the bug fixed altered the way the damage was being done by changing the epicenter of the splash damage. Unfortunately, utilizing the word "nerf" does not change the fact that it was a bug that was fixed (whether it should have been discovered before or not) that by extension lead to many of you feeling as if it was a straight forward nerf. As I said before though, this is one unit among many in the zerg arsenal and we'll be providing more information on future balance changes as soon as we can. We absolutely want to make sure that we're giving you the best possible information that we can. Just please keep in mind, patches take time to create, test, and release, but we'll keep pushing to do what we can and keep you as informed as possible.
Neth, when you say "we've spent a lot of disccusion time on just one unit," and "at some point we have to move on," who are you referring to? Are you referring to yourself and the forum community, or are you referring to the development/balance team?
If you're talking about the community, I'd completely understand, I doubt there's much more that needs to be said on the forums on this topic. I just really hope you're not referring to the development/balance team. It seems like no matter how many hours the development/balance team has spent working on the ultralisk, they really shouldn't stop working on it until they've specified what it's role is, and have balanced it for that role. I don't really think they should just leave it, "as is," if they're having a hard time figuring it out.
It was in reference to the current conversations within the community. We are currently working on some additional information to provide everyone to better explain what we are seeing as far as balance between the races as well as our next plans for ongoing balance tweaks. As I mentioned earlier though, and as much as people don't like it, we are being very careful not to make changes that tip the scales too far askew. We are still taking in feedback, listening, and looking at the ideas and perceptions that people have about the current balance state so that we can better address various concerns.
A couple counterpoints that were made to the blue posts in that thread:
According to the situation report Ultras were supposed to do considerably more damage after removing the Ram attack, after the nerf this is no longer true.
If it was a "bug" then the Ultra was balanced around that bug. Since the bug was removed shouldn't the Ultra be rebalanced.
Just please keep in mind, patches take time to create, test, and release, but we'll keep pushing to do what we can and keep you as informed as possible.
ye ofc, they must be testing a lot, if players discover 15 mins after the patch is up that phx is totally broken, basically unusable and ultra got hit by the stealthed nerfhammer once again...
Just please keep in mind, patches take time to create, test, and release, but we'll keep pushing to do what we can and keep you as informed as possible.
ye ofc, they must be testing a lot, if players discover 15 mins after the patch is up that phx is totally broken, basically unusable and ultra got hit by the stealthed nerfhammer once again...
Yeah, that's one huge disappointment of mine. Basically that's what all the zerg players were happy about. "Now we can hurt SCVs while hitting a PF!".
But apparently Blizzard never tried that since it was totally bugged.
What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
On October 04 2010 07:35 GathFox wrote: What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
ye right, only terran should be previlged to right click a hatch/nex and kill it with t1 units faster than others with t3 units. i understand your point...
On October 04 2010 07:35 GathFox wrote: What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
ye right, only terran should be previlged to right click a hatch/nex and kill it with t1 units faster than others with t3 units. i understand your point...
ya right like terrans and protoss should be forced to snipe the CC hard to kill equivalent because if one tries to target all the drones at later game a zerg can just macro about 35 more off of 5 bases in a very short amount of time, the same amount of time compared to a terran with five bases being able to make at most 5 for the same amount of time or toss being able to chrono boost a slight bit mroe out than terran.
If anything this shows how privileged zerg is that a hit to their drones isnt nearly as devastating as what that to a terran or toss can be. The only time killing drones really is significant is early game when your resources and larvae are more stressed. also your hatcheries are cheaper than a command center and at the same time increase the production capacity of every unit for your army(cept morphs directly lol) that you have teched to.
So try to see this from a rational standpoint for a moment. Killing drones with harrass gives you little advantage in resources or time. killing an expansion while being more risky than picking off drones has a lot more reward mainly in time since those are cheap as heck to throwdown in comparison to 2 rax and a CC. Its a fricken wonder building for the zerg so of course we have to resort to killing it to do anything significant to a zergs economy.
Also you dont seem to see how foolish the idea of trying to take down a terran CC is in most cases. If you go for that rather than SCV's in late game, we can just float in an older one at a just mined out base to replace it as well as simply fly it off. SCV's take a longer time to rebuild for a terran than a zerg so if we lose a lot we cant just explode much more than five per worker build time. So what the heck would possess you to even want to attack the CC in the first place? Just cause its there? So if you see a bunch of photon cannons powered by only one pylon do you attack the cannons and complain taht you lose units or do you attack the pylon powering them all, thus rendering them null in a much faster amount of time? The mentality that you should be rewarded for making foolish tactical decisions is apalling.
Also last time i checked zerglings can eat up buildings *and workers* pretty dam fast so your tier one arguement is invalid especialy since marines and marauders dont have the speed to just run into a relatively ungaurded natural kill as they will and then speed out before anything too brutal comes along. Heck, losing zerglings late game seems to mean little to you in terms of resources, only larvae. a drop of *TIER 1 UNITS* is awfully costly if you must use 2 dropships, which clearly are not TIER 1 and if they are not using a dropship, heck why didnt you see the hatchery snipe coming due to overlords and creep tumors? Not only that but zerglings are largely the reason for the wallin itself, not jsut cause it protects your units but cause if it was not there zerglings could just do a *run-by*. The only problem agaisnt terrans is that their SCV's if given room to access something big like a CC can repair it well. But as i said before, why are you even attacking the CC?
You dont even want to get me started about PF's but ill give you a quick summary. They are built from a command center, obviously meant to serve a command centers purpose somehow. Ah i got it! They are supposed to protect it. That means they are supposed to provide a greater deterance form marauding zerg while serving the role of a command center that has no lift off ability but the same durability. Ill let you figure out the rest if you can.
On October 04 2010 07:35 GathFox wrote: What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
ye right, only terran should be previlged to right click a hatch/nex and kill it with t1 units faster than others with t3 units. i understand your point...
ya right like terrans and protoss should be forced to snipe the CC hard to kill equivalent because if one tries to target all the drones at later game a zerg can just macro about 35 more off of 5 bases in a very short amount of time, the same amount of time compared to a terran with five bases being able to make at most 5 for the same amount of time or toss being able to chrono boost a slight bit mroe out than terran.
If anything this shows how privileged zerg is that a hit to their drones isnt nearly as devastating as what that to a terran or toss can be. The only time killing drones really is significant is early game when your resources and larvae are more stressed. also your hatcheries are cheaper than a command center and at the same time increase the production capacity of every unit for your army(cept morphs directly lol) that you have teched to.
So try to see this from a rational standpoint for a moment. Killing drones with harrass gives you little advantage in resources or time. killing an expansion while being more risky than picking off drones has a lot more reward mainly in time since those are cheap as heck to throwdown in comparison to 2 rax and a CC. Its a fricken wonder building for the zerg so of course we have to resort to killing it to do anything significant to a zergs economy.
Also you dont seem to see how foolish the idea of trying to take down a terran CC is in most cases. If you go for that rather than SCV's in late game, we can just float in an older one at a just mined out base to replace it as well as simply fly it off. SCV's take a longer time to rebuild for a terran than a zerg so if we lose a lot we cant just explode much more than five per worker build time. So what the heck would possess you to even want to attack the CC in the first place? Just cause its there? So if you see a bunch of photon cannons powered by only one pylon do you attack the cannons and complain taht you lose units or do you attack the pylon powering them all, thus rendering them null in a much faster amount of time? The mentality that you should be rewarded for making foolish tactical decisions is apalling.
Also last time i checked zerglings can eat up buildings *and workers* pretty dam fast so your tier one arguement is invalid especialy since marines and marauders dont have the speed to just run into a relatively ungaurded natural kill as they will and then speed out before anything too brutal comes along. Heck, losing zerglings late game seems to mean little to you in terms of resources, only larvae. a drop of *TIER 1 UNITS* is awfully costly if you must use 2 dropships, which clearly are not TIER 1 and if they are not using a dropship, heck why didnt you see the hatchery snipe coming due to overlords and creep tumors? Not only that but zerglings are largely the reason for the wallin itself, not jsut cause it protects your units but cause if it was not there zerglings could just do a *run-by*. The only problem agaisnt terrans is that their SCV's if given room to access something big like a CC can repair it well. But as i said before, why are you even attacking the CC?
You dont even want to get me started about PF's but ill give you a quick summary. They are built from a command center, obviously meant to serve a command centers purpose somehow. Ah i got it! They are supposed to protect it. That means they are supposed to provide a greater deterance form marauding zerg while serving the role of a command center that has no lift off ability but the same durability. Ill let you figure out the rest if you can.
there's so much completely wrong and idiotic in this post, I won't even begin to bother replying to every one of your copper league anecdotes.
It's very hard not to rage after reading that much bullshit mixed with that much arrogance, lol.
Killing drones is not worth it lategame. Hatch is cheaper than CC or Nexus. comparing lings to marauders when attacking buildings.
On October 04 2010 07:35 GathFox wrote: What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
ye right, only terran should be previlged to right click a hatch/nex and kill it with t1 units faster than others with t3 units. i understand your point...
ya right like terrans and protoss should be forced to snipe the CC hard to kill equivalent because if one tries to target all the drones at later game a zerg can just macro about 35 more off of 5 bases in a very short amount of time, the same amount of time compared to a terran with five bases being able to make at most 5 for the same amount of time or toss being able to chrono boost a slight bit mroe out than terran.
If anything this shows how privileged zerg is that a hit to their drones isnt nearly as devastating as what that to a terran or toss can be. The only time killing drones really is significant is early game when your resources and larvae are more stressed. also your hatcheries are cheaper than a command center and at the same time increase the production capacity of every unit for your army(cept morphs directly lol) that you have teched to.
So try to see this from a rational standpoint for a moment. Killing drones with harrass gives you little advantage in resources or time. killing an expansion while being more risky than picking off drones has a lot more reward mainly in time since those are cheap as heck to throwdown in comparison to 2 rax and a CC. Its a fricken wonder building for the zerg so of course we have to resort to killing it to do anything significant to a zergs economy.
Also you dont seem to see how foolish the idea of trying to take down a terran CC is in most cases. If you go for that rather than SCV's in late game, we can just float in an older one at a just mined out base to replace it as well as simply fly it off. SCV's take a longer time to rebuild for a terran than a zerg so if we lose a lot we cant just explode much more than five per worker build time. So what the heck would possess you to even want to attack the CC in the first place? Just cause its there? So if you see a bunch of photon cannons powered by only one pylon do you attack the cannons and complain taht you lose units or do you attack the pylon powering them all, thus rendering them null in a much faster amount of time? The mentality that you should be rewarded for making foolish tactical decisions is apalling.
Also last time i checked zerglings can eat up buildings *and workers* pretty dam fast so your tier one arguement is invalid especialy since marines and marauders dont have the speed to just run into a relatively ungaurded natural kill as they will and then speed out before anything too brutal comes along. Heck, losing zerglings late game seems to mean little to you in terms of resources, only larvae. a drop of *TIER 1 UNITS* is awfully costly if you must use 2 dropships, which clearly are not TIER 1 and if they are not using a dropship, heck why didnt you see the hatchery snipe coming due to overlords and creep tumors? Not only that but zerglings are largely the reason for the wallin itself, not jsut cause it protects your units but cause if it was not there zerglings could just do a *run-by*. The only problem agaisnt terrans is that their SCV's if given room to access something big like a CC can repair it well. But as i said before, why are you even attacking the CC?
You dont even want to get me started about PF's but ill give you a quick summary. They are built from a command center, obviously meant to serve a command centers purpose somehow. Ah i got it! They are supposed to protect it. That means they are supposed to provide a greater deterance form marauding zerg while serving the role of a command center that has no lift off ability but the same durability. Ill let you figure out the rest if you can.
there's so much completely wrong and idiotic in this post, I won't even begin to bother replying to every one of your copper league anecdotes.
It's very hard not to rage after reading that much bullshit mixed with that much arrogance, lol.
Killing drones is not worth it lategame. Hatch is cheaper than CC or Nexus. comparing lings to marauders when attacking buildings.
give me a break.
i was about to comment on his post also with some epic words of hate.
but i thought to my self. do i want to get banned again.
it still amazing people can have such scewed views on the game.
On October 04 2010 07:35 GathFox wrote: What i dont get is why zerg are even in the mentality of attacking a PF in the first place when the target should be the SCV's all along. Sure the ai makes an attack move target the closest aggressive thing as top priority rather than the squishy SCV, but the micro needed to specifically target the SCV is worth it since attacking a PF normally does not end well and should not end well and if you dont want to attack the SCV's themselves you shoudnt attack the PF at all.
ye right, only terran should be previlged to right click a hatch/nex and kill it with t1 units faster than others with t3 units. i understand your point...
ya right like terrans and protoss should be forced to snipe the CC hard to kill equivalent because if one tries to target all the drones at later game a zerg can just macro about 35 more off of 5 bases in a very short amount of time, the same amount of time compared to a terran with five bases being able to make at most 5 for the same amount of time or toss being able to chrono boost a slight bit mroe out than terran.
If anything this shows how privileged zerg is that a hit to their drones isnt nearly as devastating as what that to a terran or toss can be. The only time killing drones really is significant is early game when your resources and larvae are more stressed. also your hatcheries are cheaper than a command center and at the same time increase the production capacity of every unit for your army(cept morphs directly lol) that you have teched to.
So try to see this from a rational standpoint for a moment. Killing drones with harrass gives you little advantage in resources or time. killing an expansion while being more risky than picking off drones has a lot more reward mainly in time since those are cheap as heck to throwdown in comparison to 2 rax and a CC. Its a fricken wonder building for the zerg so of course we have to resort to killing it to do anything significant to a zergs economy.
Also you dont seem to see how foolish the idea of trying to take down a terran CC is in most cases. If you go for that rather than SCV's in late game, we can just float in an older one at a just mined out base to replace it as well as simply fly it off. SCV's take a longer time to rebuild for a terran than a zerg so if we lose a lot we cant just explode much more than five per worker build time. So what the heck would possess you to even want to attack the CC in the first place? Just cause its there? So if you see a bunch of photon cannons powered by only one pylon do you attack the cannons and complain taht you lose units or do you attack the pylon powering them all, thus rendering them null in a much faster amount of time? The mentality that you should be rewarded for making foolish tactical decisions is apalling.
Also last time i checked zerglings can eat up buildings *and workers* pretty dam fast so your tier one arguement is invalid especialy since marines and marauders dont have the speed to just run into a relatively ungaurded natural kill as they will and then speed out before anything too brutal comes along. Heck, losing zerglings late game seems to mean little to you in terms of resources, only larvae. a drop of *TIER 1 UNITS* is awfully costly if you must use 2 dropships, which clearly are not TIER 1 and if they are not using a dropship, heck why didnt you see the hatchery snipe coming due to overlords and creep tumors? Not only that but zerglings are largely the reason for the wallin itself, not jsut cause it protects your units but cause if it was not there zerglings could just do a *run-by*. The only problem agaisnt terrans is that their SCV's if given room to access something big like a CC can repair it well. But as i said before, why are you even attacking the CC?
You dont even want to get me started about PF's but ill give you a quick summary. They are built from a command center, obviously meant to serve a command centers purpose somehow. Ah i got it! They are supposed to protect it. That means they are supposed to provide a greater deterance form marauding zerg while serving the role of a command center that has no lift off ability but the same durability. Ill let you figure out the rest if you can.
wow. How bad are you? Tip for you: don't give advice when you're bronze
you can't possibly tell zerg/protoss to "just kill the SCVs." Killing a Terran's SCVs is borderline meaningless thanks to MULEs.
That said I think Cool demonstrated that Ultras are far from useless or neutered, plus he brought a couple Infestors for keeping SCVs from repairing PFs. Seems reasonable to me as you should be building Infestors in almost any game vs. T
On October 04 2010 11:01 theqat wrote: you can't possibly tell zerg/protoss to "just kill the SCVs." Killing a Terran's SCVs is borderline meaningless thanks to MULEs.
I am inclined to agree with you but instead of calling killing SCVs meaningless I would say that it is as meaningless (or meaningful) as killing drones.
Gathfox: On the subject of killing larvae the re-saturation of a mineral line not only costs a ton of minerals it also costs a production cycle or two which means that zerg will be able to make less units. Each egg could be an ultralisk but it has to be a drone.
Comparing the production cycles of each race is a fruitless task because of the differences between them. That is not the issue at hand. The thread is discussing the changes to the ultralisk, a unit which is an anti-ground anti-armor unit which has now lost the ability to be cost effective against a unit that is both armored and ground, the thor.
Ya and your words of wisdom are so enlightening. Just shows you dont have a good answere. Obviously you havnt thought this through very hard to be so intellectually owned by me. Really, Id expect if you had any deep grasp to the game mechanics you could support your arguement.
You forget most of all... a hatchery is cheaper than a CC AND barracks, it fills the role of resource gathering point, worker producer and military producer all in one. (i wont even go through the fact that it boost production of EVERY unit in your repetoir since you do have to invest a bit mroe in individual technologies and that counters some of the advantage that zerg have due to the lack in production capacity is countered in some ways by terran tech versatility) really id expect if you had any grasp to the game mechanics you could support your arguement.
The simple and hillarious fact is about the predicament with PF's is, if your not gonna succeed in killing it why have you been trying to attack it at all? Its so easily avoidable if you just need to get past it if you are not interested in harming your foes economy (its not gonna chase ya). It COULD be used as a Giant road block though lol so that is the only time you really need to fight it directly and may not have an actual choice. But common zerg rarely mention that scenario so clearly it must not be the case.
Next time have the balls to come up with a logical arguement.
On October 04 2010 11:09 Moa wrote: The thread is discussing the changes to the ultralisk, a unit which is an anti-ground anti-armor unit which has now lost the ability to be cost effective against a unit that is both armored and ground, the thor.
I find it most annoying that when the opposing units are armored and also anti-armored, the Ultras get raped. That shows the ineffectiveness of the Ultra to me. Marauders and Immortals are armored and anti-armored and they make Ultras wish they were still in the larva stage. Of course Immortals aren't that good against, uh, lings I guess, and Marauders don't have counters as we all know. But Ultras have great counters, including units they're supposed to be good against (Marauders/Immortals/Thors/Blink Stalkers) and units like Marines, Zealots, Archons, and of course flying units.
Why does it have to be this way? Why do zerg units always have half the unit pool as counters, while units like Marauders, Thors, Tanks, Stalkers, Colossi, Immortals all can be massed and have at most one (ground) unit that are good against them, and have to be dealt with using spells and good micro? Zerg units can be countered just building a different attacking unit and you're ok.
The simple and hillarious fact is about the predicament with PF's is, if your not gonna succeed in killing it why have you been trying to attack it at all? Its so easily avoidable if you just need to get past it if you are not interested in harming your foes economy (its not gonna chase ya). It COULD be used as a Giant road block though lol so that is the only time you really need to fight it directly and may not have an actual choice. But common zerg rarely mention that scenario so clearly it must not be the case.
You're a troll, right?
If not, let me tell you that PF's are usually built next to those blue shiny things we call minerals, and leaving the PF alone (since it can't chase you!) lets the Terran expand freely and mine his heart out.
On October 04 2010 11:01 theqat wrote: you can't possibly tell zerg/protoss to "just kill the SCVs." Killing a Terran's SCVs is borderline meaningless thanks to MULEs.
That said I think Cool demonstrated that Ultras are far from useless or neutered, plus he brought a couple Infestors for keeping SCVs from repairing PFs. Seems reasonable to me as you should be building Infestors in almost any game vs. T
Your assessment of mules to me is a bit innacurate. Yes they do help especialy if you have been saving up the energy for the rainy day *or due to lazy macro* and perhaps it really does soften the blow more than it should but while this boosts resource gathering it doesnt deny the fact that if you destroyed the SCV's you still would have slowed his economy much more compared to what you would have accomplished if you had just targeted the PF alone and lost most of your forces while still not destroying the PF. Im not saying microing to kill scv's is easy, but its more worth your effort to kill those than waste an army on a PF. And If your already there, them using mules that are still vulnerable to attacks if he hasnt routed your army back can pose another oppertunity, perhaps for an infestor burrowed in the chaos of an attack.
At least you have the cunning to respond with an arguement.
On September 29 2010 12:34 afiddy wrote: Dear Blizzard,
Please stop putting your dick in my anus, it is very uncomfortable and I think it's bleeding.
User was warned for this post
LoL. He gets a warning for this and I get banned for saying "blue is being a scumbag." I don't think that is very consistent but w/e. Anywho, I'm not sure what to do anymore with this change.
On October 04 2010 11:01 theqat wrote: you can't possibly tell zerg/protoss to "just kill the SCVs." Killing a Terran's SCVs is borderline meaningless thanks to MULEs.
I am inclined to agree with you but instead of calling killing SCVs meaningless I would say that it is as meaningless (or meaningful) as killing drones.
Gathfox: On the subject of killing larvae the re-saturation of a mineral line not only costs a ton of minerals it also costs a production cycle or two which means that zerg will be able to make less units. Each egg could be an ultralisk but it has to be a drone.
Comparing the production cycles of each race is a fruitless task because of the differences between them. That is not the issue at hand. The thread is discussing the changes to the ultralisk, a unit which is an anti-ground anti-armor unit which has now lost the ability to be cost effective against a unit that is both armored and ground, the thor.
Indeed you have a point about the larvae cost, which would come into play if the actual larvae count has been pressured a lot in a game. To say comparing each races mode of production is fruitless is incorrect i believe since it allows you to understand how to better neuter that production *killing a tech building to deny zerg an entire particular unit for example* but if anything is fruitless about it its arguing balance with it.
And yes this is rather off topic a thing for me to get fired up about. And i can imagine what a psychological blow losing the ultralisks profficiency at its prior tasks can be for a zerg.
I must ask though. are Ultras the only way to deal with a thor? And if other counters can be made enough against them what should the ultras purpose be changed to?
Ultra AoE nerf has a huge affect ZvZ as well. Used to be able to pump out Ultras to beat hydra infestor roach, which was somewhat soft countering eachother, except the ultras cant be rooted down like if you sent in lings + banelings.
Now, the splash is so minimal that even the slightest positional spacing of hydras or roaches will nullify it entirely. With no micro, its a fairly even battle usually ending with almost no forces for either side, or, all of you ultras dieing and you having to reinforce. The only reason units will take ultra splash is because they don't take the time to space a few packed units apart, and you nulify that damage. Before 1.1.1, if you saw Ultras, you needed mutas, or lots more hydra in a choke, and even then there was even losses for hydra. Now hydra do so much better vs ultra.
I think the latest patch makes more sense, even if it is unfair to zerg. The splash area should not depend on the unit you are hitting. That said, the splash area could be buffed to compensate for this difference. Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. A larger splash would help them hit Thors and SCVs more easily.
ultras are pretty beastly even with this "nerf," so its not that big a deal for most players. its the professionals who might have a real pain with it.
On October 04 2010 11:09 Moa wrote: The thread is discussing the changes to the ultralisk, a unit which is an anti-ground anti-armor unit which has now lost the ability to be cost effective against a unit that is both armored and ground, the thor.
I find it most annoying that when the opposing units are armored and also anti-armored, the Ultras get raped. That shows the ineffectiveness of the Ultra to me. Marauders and Immortals are armored and anti-armored and they make Ultras wish they were still in the larva stage. Of course Immortals aren't that good against, uh, lings I guess, and Marauders don't have counters as we all know. But Ultras have great counters, including units they're supposed to be good against (Marauders/Immortals/Thors/Blink Stalkers) and units like Marines, Zealots, Archons, and of course flying units.
Why does it have to be this way? Why do zerg units always have half the unit pool as counters, while units like Marauders, Thors, Tanks, Stalkers, Colossi, Immortals all can be massed and have at most one (ground) unit that are good against them, and have to be dealt with using spells and good micro? Zerg units can be countered just building a different attacking unit and you're ok.
It's so true...
The thor is armored, ground, and can attack ground and air, and is all around good vs everything - especially light air units.
The ultralisk is an anti-armored unit that can only attack ground, and costs the same. It takes much much much longer to tech to.
And it loses!
But, that's really how Zerg is - with the exception of the zergling and muta, every unit is just plain BAD on paper. Marauder vs Roach, which would you rather have? Hydralisk or Stalker? Infestor or any other caster? Corruptor or Viking?
However, Zerg's advantages can overcome this. Zerg's advantage of building everything from larvae is enough to overcome their inherent speed gimp off creep, their early game impotence, their difficult macro, their battles with one-way micro (ie roach/hydra vs army w/ forcefields), their slow-as-hell tech, their expensive tech, their inability to wall, etc etc.
They have a looong list of disadvantages, and one huge advantage - the larvae mechanic. That's enough to make up for it, believe it or not, as Cool demonstrated.
Cool demonstrated he can win with a race no one else can consistently. GSL prooved that Cool was better than the rest, NOT that zerg is better than terran or protoss.
On October 04 2010 11:09 Moa wrote: The thread is discussing the changes to the ultralisk, a unit which is an anti-ground anti-armor unit which has now lost the ability to be cost effective against a unit that is both armored and ground, the thor.
I find it most annoying that when the opposing units are armored and also anti-armored, the Ultras get raped. That shows the ineffectiveness of the Ultra to me. Marauders and Immortals are armored and anti-armored and they make Ultras wish they were still in the larva stage. Of course Immortals aren't that good against, uh, lings I guess, and Marauders don't have counters as we all know. But Ultras have great counters, including units they're supposed to be good against (Marauders/Immortals/Thors/Blink Stalkers) and units like Marines, Zealots, Archons, and of course flying units.
Why does it have to be this way? Why do zerg units always have half the unit pool as counters, while units like Marauders, Thors, Tanks, Stalkers, Colossi, Immortals all can be massed and have at most one (ground) unit that are good against them, and have to be dealt with using spells and good micro? Zerg units can be countered just building a different attacking unit and you're ok.
It's so true...
The thor is armored, ground, and can attack ground and air, and is all around good vs everything - especially light air units.
The ultralisk is an anti-armored unit that can only attack ground, and costs the same. It takes much much much longer to tech to.
And it loses!
But, that's really how Zerg is - with the exception of the zergling and muta, every unit is just plain BAD on paper. Marauder vs Roach, which would you rather have? Hydralisk or Stalker? Infestor or any other caster? Corruptor or Viking?
However, Zerg's advantages can overcome this. Zerg's advantage of building everything from larvae is enough to overcome their inherent speed gimp off creep, their early game impotence, their difficult macro, their battles with one-way micro (ie roach/hydra vs army w/ forcefields), their slow-as-hell tech, their expensive tech, their inability to wall, etc etc.
They have a looong list of disadvantages, and one huge advantage - the larvae mechanic. That's enough to make up for it, believe it or not, as Cool demonstrated.
Larva mechanic still require great economy which you cannot get vs decent terran that harass you, cool won only becouse ITR failed to do any harass.
I'll be happy with an ultra speed buff. I maen in BW they move as fast as zerglings so you can 1a your entire army w/o worryin gabout they become dislodged
On October 04 2010 15:58 EriktheGuy wrote: Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. .
Right... what? Ever heard about mutalisks, infestors, broodlords or banelings?
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash. Even now, Ultra is still a killer unit.
So when siege tank got heavily nerfed, it's normal and l2p. But if the bugged ultralisk is fixed (and slightly nerfed, -5 dmg v armor), it is a very cruel nerf and the unit is now useless (lol at that seriously, you obviously dont know what a 1.1 ultra is, because as a terran, I know it very precisely).
And what's your problem, Moa makes some points, he comes up with an elaborate text, and you ppl just insult him ? What kind of person are you...
On October 04 2010 15:58 EriktheGuy wrote: Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. .
Right... what? Ever heard about mutalisks, infestors, broodlords or banelings?
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash. Even now, Ultra is still a killer unit.
So when siege tank got heavily nerfed, it's normal and l2p. But if the bugged ultralisk is fixed (and slightly nerfed, -5 dmg v armor), it is a very cruel nerf and the unit is now useless (lol at that seriously, you obviously dont know what a 1.1 ultra is, because as a terran, I know it very precisely).
And what's your problem, Moa makes some points, he comes up with an elaborate text, and you ppl just insult him ? What kind of person are you...
First of all siege tank nerf is really small, cause it only works vs. non armored (lings, hydras, banes), which dies in seconds vs. tanks anyway, so no big deal.
It seems that you don't understand the point people are saying, that it is okey that they fixed Ultra's splash, but right before they nerfed Ultra according to old spash. So Ultras has now double nerf, and that wasn't intended!
I didn't try much Ultras vs. terran but vs. toss they are so weak that it just does not worth making them anymore, unless you have absolutely perfect flank where ultras attack from all angles. Yesterday I played vs. toss and had 11 Ultras and they died in ~3 seconds w/o dealing any damage. Yeah they wasn't in good position, but still 11 of strongest unit in game shouldn't be like a paper.
On September 28 2010 23:41 OreoBoi wrote: Awesome, psi storm splash nerfed, ultra splash nerfed, tank splash BUFFED! (talking about patches in the beta till now)
you mean the one where they changed it from 60 to 50?
The biggest problem I've had since the ultra nerf is dealing with Protoss in the late game. Fully upgraded blink stalkers with colossi backup and sentries are a tough army to kill. Broodlords are useless as they die so fast, but ultras were always the end game goal to even things out. Now I feel I'm at a big disadvantage in the late game.
Obviously my experiences only count as anecdotal evidence, but I think I've also noticed a change in ZvT because of it. The terrans I've faced are much more likely to go mass thor/hellion/marine but maybe that's just the current popular strat. I think someone mentioned earlier how powerful ultras forced terran to not sit and sit and sit to mass these because once zerg had too many ultras out the army got countered pretty well. In any case, I've been using more broodlords once again. At least they do benefit a lot from melee/carapace upgrades that I get for lings/blings (my broodling wall gets that much stronger).
In any case, it's well known that the patch where they changed the ultra splash to target centered +radius was the same patch where they changed the splash damage from 100% to 33%. I think if the ultras splash is now reverted to pre- beta patch 13 levels the splash damage should be increased somewhat, probably to 50-60%, and the 5dmg vs armored reduction should be undone, as it was based on faulty aoe area.
On October 04 2010 15:58 EriktheGuy wrote: Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. .
Right... what? Ever heard about mutalisks, infestors, broodlords or banelings?
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash. Even now, Ultra is still a killer unit.
So when siege tank got heavily nerfed, it's normal and l2p. But if the bugged ultralisk is fixed (and slightly nerfed, -5 dmg v armor), it is a very cruel nerf and the unit is now useless (lol at that seriously, you obviously dont know what a 1.1 ultra is, because as a terran, I know it very precisely).
And what's your problem, Moa makes some points, he comes up with an elaborate text, and you ppl just insult him ? What kind of person are you...
Please test the ultras vs any terran units at same cost... add roaches to the ultras and see how beutiful they get stuck behind the roaches... or how roaches with their great range of 3 cannot shoot becouse ultras are huge! Do you realize that mele units need time to get to the enemy... Zerg vs T is like goin to gun fight with knife... with the spalsh T had to have bio behind thors so thors tank while low health terran army do dmg. Now bio take the hits and thors doing the damage once the ultras are low hp terran still has the thors which then repair and after such battle T is way ahead destroying 1-2 expos b4 your next ultras pop out...
Bad times to be a zerg for sure... but to cheer every zerg up, imagine, just imagine when blizzard will fix zerg balance just how awesome every match will be, because we're already doing OK with this half broken race.
On October 04 2010 15:58 EriktheGuy wrote: Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. .
Right... what? Ever heard about mutalisks, infestors, broodlords or banelings?
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash. Even now, Ultra is still a killer unit.
So when siege tank got heavily nerfed, it's normal and l2p. But if the bugged ultralisk is fixed (and slightly nerfed, -5 dmg v armor), it is a very cruel nerf and the unit is now useless (lol at that seriously, you obviously dont know what a 1.1 ultra is, because as a terran, I know it very precisely).
And what's your problem, Moa makes some points, he comes up with an elaborate text, and you ppl just insult him ? What kind of person are you...
I forgot about banes. Broods don't AoE (but I know what you mean). Fungal and muta are good damage against bio, but I sort of meant that ultra is the only good AoE against the heavy units they are meant to deal with (Thors, tanks). Fungal stops these units from moving (like terran was going to move anyways ), mutas get depressed when your opponent gets his armory up. Even banes do way less than zerglings against these targets. If any unit is dealing good AoE damage to Thor/tank, it is the ultralisk (and perhaps the broodlord as you mentioned).
Please test the ultras vs any terran units at same cost... add roaches to the ultras and see how beutiful they get stuck behind the roaches... or how roaches with their great range of 3 cannot shoot becouse ultras are huge!
This is easily mitigated by roach-burrow. It works insanely well.
I agree, the main problem with the ultra-nerf is now they don't work well against stalkers-balls. Which is actually something we desperately need.
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash.
Regardless of whether its a fix, a bug, or whatever, it's also a nerf. A significant nerf to the splash of the ultralisk. The damage output of the ultralisk is significantly decreased (much moreso than the -5 to armored).
On October 04 2010 15:58 EriktheGuy wrote: Ultras are really the only good AoE zerg gets without lurks. .
Right... what? Ever heard about mutalisks, infestors, broodlords or banelings?
On topic.. This is not a nerf, this not a bug, its a FIX. Blizzard just said it pretty clearly.. Ultra splash was bigger than intended, it needed to be fixed. And as far as I am concerned, this splash was indeed too big. And I'm not talking about PF splash, but pre 1.1 splash. Even now, Ultra is still a killer unit.
So when siege tank got heavily nerfed, it's normal and l2p. But if the bugged ultralisk is fixed (and slightly nerfed, -5 dmg v armor), it is a very cruel nerf and the unit is now useless (lol at that seriously, you obviously dont know what a 1.1 ultra is, because as a terran, I know it very precisely).
And what's your problem, Moa makes some points, he comes up with an elaborate text, and you ppl just insult him ? What kind of person are you...
The Ultralisk attack didn't change from 1.0 to 1.1 apart from Headbutt being removed, Kaiser Blades being allowed to attack buildings, and +5 armor damage being taken off. The splash radius was not increased or decreased. The AoE was decreased universally, but to a varying degree based on target, from 1.1 to 1.1.1. This means that 1.0 to 1.1.1 universally weakened the ultralisk attack.
What they should do is flag the current Ultralisk attack as hidden and make it only capable of attacking buildings. Then, give the 1.1 attack back to Ultralisks and make it only capable of hitting non-buildings. It'll be just like 1.1 without the insane building splash.
On October 04 2010 21:09 Jzerg wrote: In any case, it's well known that the patch where they changed the ultra splash to target centered +radius was the same patch where they changed the splash damage from 100% to 33%. I think if the ultras splash is now reverted to pre- beta patch 13 levels the splash damage should be increased somewhat, probably to 50-60%, and the 5dmg vs armored reduction should be undone, as it was based on faulty aoe area.
The Ultralisk attack didn't change from 1.0 to 1.1 apart from Headbutt being removed, Kaiser Blades being allowed to attack buildings, and +5 armor damage being taken off. The splash radius was not increased or decreased. The AoE was decreased universally, but to a varying degree based on target, from 1.1 to 1.1.1. This means that 1.0 to 1.1.1 universally weakened the ultralisk attack.
I'm very aware of what you're saying. Maybe I did not explain myself good enough.
What I'm saying (and Blizzards too) is that the aoe range (based on the unit attacked) from 1.0 was a bug according to blue post.. It was not supposed to work like that.
So 1.1.1 changed that, to give the ultra the proper aoe mechanic, range, splash or whatever you want to call it. In other words, ultra 1.0 was OP because of broken aoe, 1.1.1 he's working as intended. On a side note it's still a unit that roflstomps any terran ground (except if you throw them 1 by 1 in a choke point, that is).
So yea it was actually nerfed -5 v armored. One nerf(damage v armored) and one fix(aoe mechanic). Not two nerfs.
In other words, ultra 1.0 was OP because of broken aoe, 1.1.1 he's working as intended. On a side note it's still a unit that roflstomps any terran ground (except if you throw them 1 by 1 in a choke point, that is).
So yea it was actually nerfed -5 v armored. One nerf(damage v armored) and one fix(aoe mechanic). Not two nerfs.
Have you ever seen someone post that Ultralisks are OP between 1.0 and 1.1? I sure haven't - now to your even worse 2. point: Ultras still roflstomp every terran ground unit? Are you kidding me?
6 Thors vs 6 Ultras - 2-3 Thors(!!!) survive Marauders vs Ultras - well we don't even need to speak about that one, so ridiculous Tanks vs Ultras - once critical tank mass is reached Ultras die instantly Marines vs Ultras - lol... let me just tell you: Ultras don't work vs Marines either
so: which unit exactly do Ultras "roflstomp"?!
EDIT: I am sure Ultras still counter SCVs just fine - I'll give you that one
In other words, ultra 1.0 was OP because of broken aoe, 1.1.1 he's working as intended. On a side note it's still a unit that roflstomps any terran ground (except if you throw them 1 by 1 in a choke point, that is).
So yea it was actually nerfed -5 v armored. One nerf(damage v armored) and one fix(aoe mechanic). Not two nerfs.
Have you ever seen someone post that Ultralisks are OP between 1.0 and 1.1? I sure haven't - now to your even worse 2. point: Ultras still roflstomp every terran ground unit? Are you kidding me?
6 Thors vs 6 Ultras - 2-3 Thors(!!!) survive Marauders vs Ultras - well we don't even need to speak about that one, so ridiculous Tanks vs Ultras - once critical tank mass is reached Ultras die instantly Marines vs Ultras - lol... let me just tell you: Ultras don't work vs Marines either
so: which unit exactly do Ultras "roflstomp"?!
EDIT: I am sure Ultras still counter SCVs just fine - I'll give you that one
He was talking about Terran units though... Yes without micro hellions die - but I'm sure you could kill an Ultra with a microed hellion just fine (even though it's probably not worth the effort considering the time required until it dies). And stalker balls are now MUCH stronger vs. Ultras.
He was talking about Terran units though... Yes without micro hellions die - but I'm sure you could kill an Ultra with a microed hellion just fine (even though it's probably not worth the effort considering the time required until it dies). And stalker balls are now MUCH stronger vs. Ultras.
Roaches with minimal micro also beat Ultras pretty easily - you just need to space out a little bit to make sure he doesn't get 100% splash all the time. It's one-way micro too, there's nothing the Ultra can do to overcome that. Ultras certainly cannot beat roaches at gas cost.
Hellions I'll give you, but theoretically they will win if micro'd, so it has to be unmicro'd hellions.
So the direction of argument in this thread is leaning towards the 'ultras too weak' side. Still, why would they get their epic splash back? It was unintentional and didn't make any sense. The tusks shouldn't hit a larger area because they are attacking a Thor instead of a marine. If the Ultras are too weak, they need another buff, but not a non-nonsensical dynamic splash area. More damage, more splash damage, or larger splash AoE would all make more sense.
I don't understand the huge issue with this. Its not like Ultralisks had splash damage in Starcraft 1.
Its not like there has been Marauders/Planetary Fortresses/ Thors.... should I really keep goin on? what a stupid argument =)
marauders and thors are designed to counter ultras though...
How are Thors designed to counter ultras? They don't do bonus damage versus them, and they have bonus damage done unto them. Ultras are supposed to be a counter to Thors. At least that's my understanding.
I don't understand the huge issue with this. Its not like Ultralisks had splash damage in Starcraft 1.
Its not like there has been Marauders/Planetary Fortresses/ Thors.... should I really keep goin on? what a stupid argument =)
marauders and thors are designed to counter ultras though...
How are Thors designed to counter ultras? They don't do bonus damage versus them, and they have bonus damage done unto them. Ultras are supposed to be a counter to Thors. At least that's my understanding.
Well, to be fair, every Terran unit is designed to counter ultlras and all other zerg units. Just the way Blizz likes it.
I don't understand the huge issue with this. Its not like Ultralisks had splash damage in Starcraft 1.
Its not like there has been Marauders/Planetary Fortresses/ Thors.... should I really keep goin on? what a stupid argument =)
marauders and thors are designed to counter ultras though...
How are Thors designed to counter ultras? They don't do bonus damage versus them, and they have bonus damage done unto them. Ultras are supposed to be a counter to Thors. At least that's my understanding.
they have a spell that does massive amounts of damage to a target unit... i mean.. it doesnt get more simple than that...
I don't understand the huge issue with this. Its not like Ultralisks had splash damage in Starcraft 1.
Its not like there has been Marauders/Planetary Fortresses/ Thors.... should I really keep goin on? what a stupid argument =)
marauders and thors are designed to counter ultras though...
How are Thors designed to counter ultras? They don't do bonus damage versus them, and they have bonus damage done unto them. Ultras are supposed to be a counter to Thors. At least that's my understanding.
they have a spell that does massive amounts of damage to a target unit... i mean.. it doesnt get more simple than that...
But Ultras have that bonus damage vs armored and Thors are indeed armored. Well, no problem, I guess ultras instead are the counter to... uh... to...
On October 05 2010 13:25 oxxo wrote: And? The way the splash worked before was silly. It should've ALWAYS been this way.
The way that splash worked before was perfectly fine on UNITS. When Bliz used the splash dmg attack for buildings as well, that's where it all went wrong... and now Ultralisks are a complete waste of money (at least compared to how they were before).
Seems like every Zerg player is fighting a losing argument and not realizing it both here and on the Bnet forums - the fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if we know that the Ultralisk has been greatly nerfed from its patch 1.0 days. Blizzard is going to stick to its "working as intended" tagline, and every Terran player is going to parrot it.
At this point all we can do is hope for buffs in other areas in the next balance patch (due some time next year) and just move on.
On October 05 2010 14:46 archon256 wrote: Seems like every Zerg player is fighting a losing argument and not realizing it both here and on the Bnet forums - the fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter if we know that the Ultralisk has been greatly nerfed from its patch 1.0 days. Blizzard is going to stick to its "working as intended" tagline, and every Terran player is going to parrot it.
At this point all we can do is hope for buffs in other areas in the next balance patch (due some time next year) and just move on.
You sir, get a star! =D We zerg players are going to have to wait and just play with even more perfection until then.
I would like to change the direction a little: What have zerg players been doing now that ultralisks aren't really worth getting in the late game anymore? From experience, going for ultralisks the moment I hit tier 3 has felt like a mistake ever since the new patch. The ultras come out and they can't even hold their own weight to defend against an enemy push. It's like sending zerglings single-filed into pre-igniter helions.
More specifically, I'm having a difficult time transitioning out of muta/baneling vs terran. It gets to the same point every game: banelings to counter the marines and mutas to black box the thors. Now that I survived the mid-game, I have nothing to transition into during the late game. I've gotten brood lords a bunch of times, but if the brood lord push doesn't win you the game it feels like an uphill struggle thereafter.
Prior to 1.1.1, I was in diamond @1670, I'm currently sitting around 1550. Lost a lot of points learning new ways to play against terran/protoss without the ultralisk in the late game. Also, I think it's preferable to get opinions from people around my rating please?
I've just checked things in a unit tester and I rejoiced. Ultras still kill Thors in the same numbers when not even on creep. When numbers get bigger it's just a matter of a good spread and flanking to still let Ultras win.
I didn't toy with spreading Thors by millimeters because I don't think this will be used much. It's not as easy as using magic box to keep mutas spread - they do it under 5 seconds without any help from player. No matter whether they are on the move or not. Thors need to be picked and ordered one by one. If there are other units too close, they will mess up with that by pushing Thors back. And it needs to be done each time Thors were moved and there may be battle happening. All zerg needs to do is threat battles but not engage and terran will go crazy having to spread Thors in vain. Spreading them using patrol works however.
But if Terran will do it then to make this comparison fair and not just another whine we need to include what zerg can do. We need to include Queens with transfuse in this. And that is still comparing pure Thor army to pure Ultra army and that kind of armies aren't used by top players -_^ and I don't think we will see them unless that's all what's left after earlier battles and both players still want to engage.
Another thing is upgrades, during testing I got an impression that Ultras are getting stronger against Thors at even upgrades. Zerg players rather will upgrade both carapace and melee but will terrans upgrade vehicle armor as much? That's another plus for zerg.
What really makes Thors strong against Ultras is their 250mm cannon upgrade but it's damage can be greatly reduced by picking targeted Ultras with overlords. It is also pretty much wasted energy if used on front row ultras, that are targeted by other thors. Those few seconds that Thors need to set their cannons up and later to go back to their standard mode can be used against them too if terran uses too many of them at once.
One more thing: I can't believe that so many players expect ultras to be the ultimate unit against everything including marines, that needs for example no banelings to help them. It's strange because as far as I know ultras in BW were mainly tanks and cracklings were the main damage dealers. Why do people want ultras as the only thing needed in the late game now, in SC2?
On September 28 2010 23:43 Superouman wrote: Can't they just reduce the splash area only for buildings?
This. Including the radius of the building to the count, so that very large buildings don't create ridiculous splash.
Ultras never had splash radius so big it could hit something on the other side of larger buildings. The bug made their splash to be extended by buildings and that's something completely different.
On October 05 2010 21:53 beetlelisk wrote: Ultras never had splash radius so big it could hit something on the other side of larger buildings. The bug made their splash to be extended by buildings and that's something completely different.
The ultra normal attack vr units has always been (sense beta) 2+radius of the unit attacked. The building attack (also called ram), had no splash at all. The building attack was removed and replaced with the normal attack in 1.1 (This was recorded in the patch notes as expected behavior). So there was no bug that caused splash to be extended by the radius of the building, it was just a change purposfuly introduced by the dev team in patch 1.1. Now in patch 1.1.1, the bug team (a totaly diffrent team at blizzard), saw the splash on the ultra and thought it was a bug. Its only a matter of time before the dev team (the real game balancers) get a chance to fix the ultra eather by resetting the AOE, or by improving the DPS at the new splash radius so that it is back to balanced. New patches (especialy balance patches), take a long time to test before they can release them.
On October 05 2010 21:33 beetlelisk wrote: I've just checked things in a unit tester and I rejoiced. Ultras still kill Thors in the same numbers when not even on creep. When numbers get bigger it's just a matter of a good spread and flanking to still let Ultras win.
I didn't toy with spreading Thors by millimeters because I don't think this will be used much. It's not as easy as using magic box to keep mutas spread - they do it under 5 seconds without any help from player. No matter whether they are on the move or not. Thors need to be picked and ordered one by one. If there are other units too close, they will mess up with that by pushing Thors back. And it needs to be done each time Thors were moved and there may be battle happening. All zerg needs to do is threat battles but not engage and terran will go crazy having to spread Thors in vain. Spreading them using patrol works however.
But if Terran will do it then to make this comparison fair and not just another whine we need to include what zerg can do. We need to include Queens with transfuse in this. And that is still comparing pure Thor army to pure Ultra army and that kind of armies aren't used by top players -_^ and I don't think we will see them unless that's all what's left after earlier battles and both players still want to engage.
Another thing is upgrades, during testing I got an impression that Ultras are getting stronger against Thors at even upgrades. Zerg players rather will upgrade both carapace and melee but will terrans upgrade vehicle armor as much? That's another plus for zerg.
What really makes Thors strong against Ultras is their 250mm cannon upgrade but it's damage can be greatly reduced by picking targeted Ultras with overlords. It is also pretty much wasted energy if used on front row ultras, that are targeted by other thors. Those few seconds that Thors need to set their cannons up and later to go back to their standard mode can be used against them too if terran uses too many of them at once.
One more thing: I can't believe that so many players expect ultras to be the ultimate unit against everything including marines, that needs for example no banelings to help them. It's strange because as far as I know ultras in BW were mainly tanks and cracklings were the main damage dealers. Why do people want ultras as the only thing needed in the late game now, in SC2?
Idk if that was sarcasm but we clearly saw ogstop vs fruitdealer on Kulas have this engagement. Ultras pwndizzled, but I agree, ti would have been much stronger to have added 2 more reactored factories and pump hellions and have slightly less Thors.
started playing random today and had 2 ZvTs where i had like 12 ultras and 4 infestors. he had like 8 thors and a few marauders and some blue flamed hellions. i was sure i was going to win but ALL my ultras died when he lost half his thors. pretty ridiculous.
On October 06 2010 02:08 Telcontar wrote: started playing random today and had 2 ZvTs where i had like 12 ultras and 4 infestors. he had like 8 thors and a few marauders and some blue flamed hellions. i was sure i was going to win but ALL my ultras died when he lost half his thors. pretty ridiculous.
Welcome to zerg.
Terran only need light unit to tank the ultras and they are fine.
So you need to mix in banelings and infestors but then you dont have much gaz to spend on ultras.
On October 06 2010 02:08 Telcontar wrote: started playing random today and had 2 ZvTs where i had like 12 ultras and 4 infestors. he had like 8 thors and a few marauders and some blue flamed hellions. i was sure i was going to win but ALL my ultras died when he lost half his thors. pretty ridiculous.
Welcome to zerg.
Terran only need light unit to tank the ultras and they are fine.
So you need to mix in banelings and infestors but then you dont have much gaz to spend on ultras.
they dont even need that. a slight thor spread(like moving the front thors one tile away from the rest) will makes ultras do really bad vs em.
mass thors (10+) did ok against ultras in 1.0. now they just stomp em.
On October 06 2010 02:08 Telcontar wrote: started playing random today and had 2 ZvTs where i had like 12 ultras and 4 infestors. he had like 8 thors and a few marauders and some blue flamed hellions. i was sure i was going to win but ALL my ultras died when he lost half his thors. pretty ridiculous.
Welcome to zerg.
Terran only need light unit to tank the ultras and they are fine.
So you need to mix in banelings and infestors but then you dont have much gaz to spend on ultras.
Yeah, if you're going to play zerg (or random) get used to hearing "We require more vespene gas"
I don't understand the huge issue with this. Its not like Ultralisks had splash damage in Starcraft 1.
Its not like there has been Marauders/Planetary Fortresses/ Thors.... should I really keep goin on? what a stupid argument =)
marauders and thors are designed to counter ultras though...
How are Thors designed to counter ultras? They don't do bonus damage versus them, and they have bonus damage done unto them. Ultras are supposed to be a counter to Thors. At least that's my understanding.
they have a spell that does massive amounts of damage to a target unit... i mean.. it doesnt get more simple than that...
Thors can deal higher dps with their normal attack and can focus fire with it, while ultras have a passive that makes them immune to the stun, so using it on ultras is pretty stupid.
I feel like in most games ultras just aren't ENOUGH to win, gotta get more stuff, like, everything. roaches, lings, blings, bling dropbombs, infestors...I've been seriously considering starting getting hydras against T to be able to stop the 2 base thors push by terran, it seems no amount of infestor/ling/roach is enough
On October 05 2010 21:33 beetlelisk wrote: I've just checked things in a unit tester and I rejoiced. Ultras still kill Thors in the same numbers when not even on creep. When numbers get bigger it's just a matter of a good spread and flanking to still let Ultras win.
I didn't toy with spreading Thors by millimeters because I don't think this will be used much. It's not as easy as using magic box to keep mutas spread - they do it under 5 seconds without any help from player. No matter whether they are on the move or not. Thors need to be picked and ordered one by one. If there are other units too close, they will mess up with that by pushing Thors back. And it needs to be done each time Thors were moved and there may be battle happening. All zerg needs to do is threat battles but not engage and terran will go crazy having to spread Thors in vain. Spreading them using patrol works however.
But if Terran will do it then to make this comparison fair and not just another whine we need to include what zerg can do. We need to include Queens with transfuse in this. And that is still comparing pure Thor army to pure Ultra army and that kind of armies aren't used by top players -_^ and I don't think we will see them unless that's all what's left after earlier battles and both players still want to engage.
Another thing is upgrades, during testing I got an impression that Ultras are getting stronger against Thors at even upgrades. Zerg players rather will upgrade both carapace and melee but will terrans upgrade vehicle armor as much? That's another plus for zerg.
What really makes Thors strong against Ultras is their 250mm cannon upgrade but it's damage can be greatly reduced by picking targeted Ultras with overlords. It is also pretty much wasted energy if used on front row ultras, that are targeted by other thors. Those few seconds that Thors need to set their cannons up and later to go back to their standard mode can be used against them too if terran uses too many of them at once.
One more thing: I can't believe that so many players expect ultras to be the ultimate unit against everything including marines, that needs for example no banelings to help them. It's strange because as far as I know ultras in BW were mainly tanks and cracklings were the main damage dealers. Why do people want ultras as the only thing needed in the late game now, in SC2?
This sounded dubious to me so I tested it and it is not true. Thors start to win at 3 and it gets very lopsided from there. Once you get up to 12 half the Thors survive. This is with max upgrades for both without using 250mm cannons.
On October 05 2010 21:33 beetlelisk wrote: I've just checked things in a unit tester and I rejoiced. Ultras still kill Thors in the same numbers when not even on creep. When numbers get bigger it's just a matter of a good spread and flanking to still let Ultras win.
I didn't toy with spreading Thors by millimeters because I don't think this will be used much. It's not as easy as using magic box to keep mutas spread - they do it under 5 seconds without any help from player. No matter whether they are on the move or not. Thors need to be picked and ordered one by one. If there are other units too close, they will mess up with that by pushing Thors back. And it needs to be done each time Thors were moved and there may be battle happening. All zerg needs to do is threat battles but not engage and terran will go crazy having to spread Thors in vain. Spreading them using patrol works however.
But if Terran will do it then to make this comparison fair and not just another whine we need to include what zerg can do. We need to include Queens with transfuse in this. And that is still comparing pure Thor army to pure Ultra army and that kind of armies aren't used by top players -_^ and I don't think we will see them unless that's all what's left after earlier battles and both players still want to engage.
Another thing is upgrades, during testing I got an impression that Ultras are getting stronger against Thors at even upgrades. Zerg players rather will upgrade both carapace and melee but will terrans upgrade vehicle armor as much? That's another plus for zerg.
What really makes Thors strong against Ultras is their 250mm cannon upgrade but it's damage can be greatly reduced by picking targeted Ultras with overlords. It is also pretty much wasted energy if used on front row ultras, that are targeted by other thors. Those few seconds that Thors need to set their cannons up and later to go back to their standard mode can be used against them too if terran uses too many of them at once.
One more thing: I can't believe that so many players expect ultras to be the ultimate unit against everything including marines, that needs for example no banelings to help them. It's strange because as far as I know ultras in BW were mainly tanks and cracklings were the main damage dealers. Why do people want ultras as the only thing needed in the late game now, in SC2?
This sounded dubious to me so I tested it and it is not true. Thors start to win at 3 and it gets very lopsided from there. Once you get up to 12 half the Thors survive. This is with max upgrades for both without using 250mm cannons.
In my results Thors didn't start to win until 14 vs 14 on a tight map without spreading them but I will try this again with different upgrades. Using mock battle unit tester on the brawl map I could go 20 vs 20 and with good ultra spread ultras were winning. Well Thors were spread too in a 2-4 Thor wide line so I need to check this one again too. My general impression was Ultras gain more from upgrades then Thors.
On October 05 2010 21:33 beetlelisk wrote: I've just checked things in a unit tester and I rejoiced. Ultras still kill Thors in the same numbers when not even on creep. When numbers get bigger it's just a matter of a good spread and flanking to still let Ultras win.
I didn't toy with spreading Thors by millimeters because I don't think this will be used much. It's not as easy as using magic box to keep mutas spread - they do it under 5 seconds without any help from player. No matter whether they are on the move or not. Thors need to be picked and ordered one by one. If there are other units too close, they will mess up with that by pushing Thors back. And it needs to be done each time Thors were moved and there may be battle happening. All zerg needs to do is threat battles but not engage and terran will go crazy having to spread Thors in vain. Spreading them using patrol works however.
But if Terran will do it then to make this comparison fair and not just another whine we need to include what zerg can do. We need to include Queens with transfuse in this. And that is still comparing pure Thor army to pure Ultra army and that kind of armies aren't used by top players -_^ and I don't think we will see them unless that's all what's left after earlier battles and both players still want to engage.
Another thing is upgrades, during testing I got an impression that Ultras are getting stronger against Thors at even upgrades. Zerg players rather will upgrade both carapace and melee but will terrans upgrade vehicle armor as much? That's another plus for zerg.
What really makes Thors strong against Ultras is their 250mm cannon upgrade but it's damage can be greatly reduced by picking targeted Ultras with overlords. It is also pretty much wasted energy if used on front row ultras, that are targeted by other thors. Those few seconds that Thors need to set their cannons up and later to go back to their standard mode can be used against them too if terran uses too many of them at once.
One more thing: I can't believe that so many players expect ultras to be the ultimate unit against everything including marines, that needs for example no banelings to help them. It's strange because as far as I know ultras in BW were mainly tanks and cracklings were the main damage dealers. Why do people want ultras as the only thing needed in the late game now, in SC2?
Idk if that was sarcasm but we clearly saw ogstop vs fruitdealer on Kulas have this engagement. Ultras pwndizzled, but I agree, ti would have been much stronger to have added 2 more reactored factories and pump hellions and have slightly less Thors.
TBH I haven't seen that series until now, I was going to but I forgot :/ but yeah, just adding Hellions to tank would make things different and then Cool would have to respond with something against Hellions, and so on.
On October 06 2010 03:22 Grond wrote: I used Superferret's Unit_Tester_Map. I spread them out up to 4 which seems reasonable. Then I let them bunch up.
OK I will find this one and make tests again on both edit: could you please give me a link to that unit tester? I'm havinghard time trying to find it :/
On October 05 2010 21:53 beetlelisk wrote: Ultras never had splash radius so big it could hit something on the other side of larger buildings. The bug made their splash to be extended by buildings and that's something completely different.
The ultra normal attack vr units has always been (sense beta) 2+radius of the unit attacked. The building attack (also called ram), had no splash at all. The building attack was removed and replaced with the normal attack in 1.1 (This was recorded in the patch notes as expected behavior). So there was no bug that caused splash to be extended by the radius of the building, it was just a change purposfuly introduced by the dev team in patch 1.1. Now in patch 1.1.1, the bug team (a totaly diffrent team at blizzard), saw the splash on the ultra and thought it was a bug. Its only a matter of time before the dev team (the real game balancers) get a chance to fix the ultra eather by resetting the AOE, or by improving the DPS at the new splash radius so that it is back to balanced. New patches (especialy balance patches), take a long time to test before they can release them.
Splash damage being extended could be made so on purpose. Maybe they wanted more people using Ultras to get more data and balance them. Or it could be just that it was a bug, they wanted to change ultras so they would do splash and hit more buildings with it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=147880
Zerg
Ultralisk damage is being decreased from 15, +25 vs. armored to 15, +20 vs. armored. This reduction is comparable to the changes being made to the battlecruiser and siege tank. Like the battlecruiser, ultralisks are simply too powerful for the cost, even though they are difficult to muster. Also, in combination with other units, ultralisks are difficult to counter from the ground. The ultralisk building attack (Ram) is being removed because the damage rate is too similar to its normal attack, which will be used against buildings instead. When ultralisks target tightly packed smaller buildings such as supply depots, the Ram attack is actually outputting considerably less overall damage than its normal attack, as Ram only hits a single target.
I think that jsut 1unit vs 1unit army comparisons are not nearly adequate to display a units relative effectiveness. I also dont think that the basic design concept of the ultra really suggest it should be a counter to a Thor *Ultra being a highly tanky AOE melee, (well, range 1,) unit taht has a fair amount of speed and is resistant to slowing effects ect* and ill explain why.
The extra damage to armor doesnt neccessarilly mean that: This unit MUST counter all units it does bonus damage to, in the same way that a tanks seige damage MUST be counter to all armored units. The basic idea of a Ultra consisting of splash damage suggests its more proficient agaisnt tightly packed small size units as well.
The Ultra is also a "fast" speed unit, that has the ability to resist most things that immobilize it. This also makes me think that its purpose isnt naturally inclined to counter thors. This more suggests it should be good at neutralizing swift, kiting fond units and tactics and give the enemy the sense that he cant easily avoid or dance around or deter his foe and have to stand his ground or risk a costly retreat. With this Logic an ultra should be a higher priority for your foe to focus down and thus makes greater use of the tanking aspect of it.
Thus with this logic i dont think the Thor should be its natural target anyway and a thor does a lot of damage concentrated in 2 attacks which would serve well in bypassing an ultras high armor rating *overpowering its tanking prowess*. To me at least, the attributes of a Ultra is idealy designed to take care of lets say marauders since it resists its slow, does AOE to the relatively small unit, and does extra damage to heavy. Thors should be countered by something else.
Im not saying this means Ultras are anywhere near balanced or that they are good enough against marauders. These factors to me indicate that we should want the Ultra to be more proficient for these purposes *killing smaller sized armored units like marauders, tanks, and stalkers and acting as a tank for damage and affecting the foes psychology so he reasons he has to deal with the ultra first* and should be made to excell against certain bioball builds and bio tank builds.
Perhaps it needs more uses than just this to make it a unique and dynamic unit that is worth fielding, but at least if it needs enhancing we can direct it to be better for a more targeted nich rather than it being a spread thin, all around anti-armor idea and risk it being a deal with everything unit or a good agaisnt nothing unit. Maybe the Ultra could use a move while attack attribute like the pheonix in order to fullfill the anti marauder ball role better.
OK I will find this one and make tests again on both edit: could you please give me a link to that unit tester? I'm havinghard time trying to find it :/
I checked and it doesn't seem to be available right now. Really not liking Blizzard's map system. Hopefully it will show up again soon. Usually you can just search maps by Superferret and it will show up.
i.e. Multiplayer-> Create game-> Popular then search for Superferret.
I think everybody that has followed the patch notes through beta knows there was no bug. Blizzard didn't adequately test the change and it was stronger than they wanted. They then compounded the issue by overreacting and not adequately testing the fix either. The problem is this diminishes their credibility and this methodology is not conducive to achieving balance.
Not just "stronger than they wanted". With a PF it was visually ridiculous, to have units so far from the ultra get damaged, to the point that it was obviously retarded and had to be changed.
And it was similarly ridiculous with thors, just wasn't noticed until now, because you don't see 20 SCVs repair one thor as often as a PF.
You can't have the area of the damage depend on the size of attacked unit, simple as that. It just doesn't make sense - the ultra doesn't grow up his blades in accordance with the target or anything, nor is it launching some magical projectiles all around the target. So the 1.1.1 fix was correct. Stop whining.
On October 06 2010 17:54 georgir wrote:You can't have the area of the damage depend on the size of attacked unit, simple as that. It just doesn't make sense - the ultra doesn't grow up his blades in accordance with the target or anything, nor is it launching some magical projectiles all around the target. So the 1.1.1 fix was correct. Stop whining.
Why not? No need to search for logic in this game.
Also people like you seem not to understand the problem. Noone says that old mechanic is right, thing is that they nerfed Ultra so much w/o any intentions to do so. Making splash much lower w/o boosting overall damage just shows how ignorant Blizzard is when it comes to balancing the game.
If we assume for a second that it's a bug it's still not OK.
1. Ultralisk has splash that is too big but goes unnoticed. 2. Ultralisk gets a -5 damage nerf for being too strong. 3. The splash bug gets noticed and fixed.
Is the -5 damage nerf still justified? I'd like to hear anyone say yes to this one.
On October 06 2010 17:54 georgir wrote: You can't have the area of the damage depend on the size of attacked unit, simple as that. It just doesn't make sense - the ultra doesn't grow up his blades in accordance with the target or anything, nor is it launching some magical projectiles all around the target. So the 1.1.1 fix was correct. Stop whining.
The game does not need to make sense, it needs to be balanced. Using your words: "the SCV doesn't grow up his repair tools in accordance with the target or anything, nor is it launching some magical repairing projectiles all around the target" It does not make sense, but a SCV is able to repair a PF from the side that is not being damaged, the game is like this for balance purposes.
The recent "fix" of the Ultralisk reduced its damage output beyond Blizzard's expectations and therefore broke the balance of the game. The 1.1.1 was everything but correct, fixing an issue just to create another one.
Damnit Blizzard doing things the wrong way. Why is Ultralisk splash damage originating from the Ultra's target anyway? It should be a fixed, V shaped area in front of him, it is a Melee unit after all!! Of course it should be more like Hellion splash than Tank/HSM splash.
This is just bad programming. The tools to fix it the right way are all in the game, but the coders did it wrong. Same thing with the phoenix graviton beam. Same thing with the Colossi "splash in predetermined line before the beam fires, instead of where the animation hits" thing... which wasn't implemented in the Ultras - the unit that actually deserved this for being Melee.
I'm starting to think that Blizzard fired most of their good coders, it can't be just WoW since these things have been showing up since the beta.
In general i think its safer to risk a unit being underpowered than overpowered. This is cause an overpowered unit can eliminate the incentive to use more than jsut one other unit in a races military repetiour. Ultras clearly still need to find their place in the zerg army.
Blizzard may be having troubles with balancing the game but i dont think we should hate on them too much for it. Its a new game with even more incongruent mechanics than most other RPG's i have seen. Not only are hp, move speed, attack defense, ect factors but things like space and relative mobility and potential for deception *not the kind that comes from just being able to cloak a unit* come into the game as a factor too and a lot of units have great potential for versatility.
In general I think this game allows for a lot of potential creativity and unorthodox reasons for tactics. This to me is in general a good thing but can be very hard to balance especialy since there is a lot of hidden potential still in all the races and all it takes is for someone to find out another way to exploit some aspect of their units and then popularize it and suddenly the balance of the game seems to shifts yet again.
I just hope that the races will expand their potential strategies making each mroe versatile and less predictable, at least that should make having one or more units unbalanced not kill a race but only limit the potential strategies at most.
On October 08 2010 00:43 GathFox wrote: In general i think its safer to risk a unit being underpowered than overpowered. This is cause an overpowered unit can eliminate the incentive to use more than jsut one other unit in a races military repetiour.
I would agree that the correct fix would be to nerf the Thor. It does more DPS than a BC for less cost and much less construction time.
On October 08 2010 00:43 GathFox wrote: In general i think its safer to risk a unit being underpowered than overpowered. This is cause an overpowered unit can eliminate the incentive to use more than jsut one other unit in a races military repetiour.
I would agree that the correct fix would be to nerf the Thor. It does more DPS than a BC for less cost and much less construction time.
First of all i dont agree with the ultralisk nerf but this argument of yours is just silly.
All units should have theyr dps calculated by some factor cost*(modifier) = DPS
Dps is only part of balance, and is generally a small one. Range is easily the most important factor, and there is also survivability. Lastly there is splash damage and other special effects.
I'm not sure why they didn't just change Ram to have splash. IIRC it had a DPS similar to the regular attack anyway. So what you do is put the regular attack back to the way it was (radius centered upon attacked unit), and make Ram have a fixed cone/semi-circle/whatever from the point of contact with the building -- you can imagine falling debris or whatever be the cause of the damage (maybe even add the graphic) -- so that nearby repairing SCV's are also affected by the attack. Anyway, it seems like a pretty simple fix to give keep the Ultra as buff as possible without being rediculous.
I started as Z switched to p because i struggled hard vs terran, now switched back to Z and only struggle vs P. I think ultras need to do more than they currently do vs a l8 game p army.
On October 11 2010 23:16 tacrats wrote: thors are too strong all around. hopefully they get fixed soon.
Thors are also expensive, sluggish, and cost a lot of supply. They're not the issue.
Same cost and supply as Ultra. They have long range, shoot air and have spalsh. Yet they beat the Ultra which can only hit melee and supposed to counter Armored units.
One of those units or maybe both is clearly broken.
On October 11 2010 23:16 tacrats wrote: thors are too strong all around. hopefully they get fixed soon.
Thors are also expensive, sluggish, and cost a lot of supply. They're not the issue.
Same cost and supply as Ultra. They have long range, shoot air and have spalsh. Yet they beat the Ultra which can only hit melee and supposed to counter Armored units.
One of those units or maybe both is clearly broken.
They serve different purposes. Why are you comparing a zerg unit to a terran unit?
On October 11 2010 23:16 tacrats wrote: thors are too strong all around. hopefully they get fixed soon.
Thors are also expensive, sluggish, and cost a lot of supply. They're not the issue.
Same cost and supply as Ultra. They have long range, shoot air and have spalsh. Yet they beat the Ultra which can only hit melee and supposed to counter Armored units.
One of those units or maybe both is clearly broken.
They serve different purposes. Why are you comparing a zerg unit to a terran unit?
ZvT does happen sometimes in SC2. This might be news to you.
In any case, in Ultras vs. Thors, ultras are better below some critical mass. After some critical mass thors will ALWAYS destroy ultralisks regardless of upgrades or engagement micromanagement simply because the long range unit dominates. Some experiments will show that this critical mass is somewhere around 8-12 thors.
On October 11 2010 23:16 tacrats wrote: thors are too strong all around. hopefully they get fixed soon.
Thors are also expensive, sluggish, and cost a lot of supply. They're not the issue.
Same cost and supply as Ultra. They have long range, shoot air and have spalsh. Yet they beat the Ultra which can only hit melee and supposed to counter Armored units.
One of those units or maybe both is clearly broken.
They serve different purposes. Why are you comparing a zerg unit to a terran unit?
That is exactly the point. Units that can shoot air are supposed to pay a penalty in DPS. For example Stalker 11.8 max DPS, Marauder 26 max DPS. When a melee unit that is supposed to counter armored unit in fact loses to an armored unit that can also shoot air there is definitely something wrong since they are the same cost and supply.
On October 11 2010 23:16 tacrats wrote: thors are too strong all around. hopefully they get fixed soon.
Thors are also expensive, sluggish, and cost a lot of supply. They're not the issue.
Same cost and supply as Ultra. They have long range, shoot air and have spalsh. Yet they beat the Ultra which can only hit melee and supposed to counter Armored units.
One of those units or maybe both is clearly broken.
They serve different purposes. Why are you comparing a zerg unit to a terran unit?
That is exactly the point. Units that can shoot air are supposed to pay a penalty in DPS. For example Stalker 11.8 max DPS, Marauder 26 max DPS. When a melee unit that is supposed to counter armored unit in fact loses to an armored unit that can also shoot air there is definitely something wrong since they are the same cost and supply.
Not just shoot air, but be a splash-damaging hard counter to air.
so this isnt getting fixed in 1.2 according to the notes.
ive a hard time believing they were not aware of the bug given this huge thread and other reports im sure theyve received.
so either theyre doing the exact same thing they did with Neural Parasite in beta where they stealth nerfed them by adding a time duration 'on accident' but then never ever changing it back nor ever listing in in any patch notes nor any post, anywhere.
or they may still change it (or it wasnt listed in patch notes), both of which seem unlikely at this point
On October 15 2010 03:35 Zelniq wrote: so this isnt getting fixed in 1.2 according to the notes.
ive a hard time believing they were not aware of the bug given this huge thread and other reports im sure theyve received.
so either theyre doing the exact same thing they did with Neural Parasite in beta where they stealth nerfed them by adding a time duration 'on accident' but then never ever changing it back nor ever listing in in any patch notes nor any post, anywhere.
or they may still change it (or it wasnt listed in patch notes), both of which seem unlikely at this point
Pretty sure they said it's working as intended now. I think they said that it's been bugged forever and they finally just fixed it. This is how they wanted it to be all along. But they also said something like "like always, we are keeping an eye on how this affects balance". These were from some blue posts on the battle.net forums.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/qVE7K.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/LcLJw.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cK3Sz.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/eFxSf.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/f9YWW.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dIwUm.jpg)
)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/xCzNd.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/9MqQv.png)
). /irony One can ask himself: can it be, that Zerg is simply to complicated for people living in cultures, that consider fast food being appropriate nutrition? /irony. Please, use your heads. Bring your skill in playing your beloved race to the maximum, spot the weknesses, call them by their name, contribute to the forums, be creative with your ideas, but always respecting the players of the other races, and maybe then we could look forward to a better game. It's a pitty, you have to do partialy the job of the game designers, but hey, we are a community and they are also just human...![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/dIwUm.jpg<br>)
![[image loading]](http://img16.imageshack.us/img16/6149/photoproof.jpg)
but numbers dont lie
