EPTso my advice to you is kill all the surrounding units first and make sure your colossus are not targeting them. to do this you may want to avoid getting near one in the first place, although most terran will back up to them anyways. blah i hate them to death and think they break the game just a little, but w/e. glad you brought the issue up but again, dont see a change coming any time soon
[D] The Planetary Fortress - Page 5
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
KillerPlague
United States1386 Posts
so my advice to you is kill all the surrounding units first and make sure your colossus are not targeting them. to do this you may want to avoid getting near one in the first place, although most terran will back up to them anyways. blah i hate them to death and think they break the game just a little, but w/e. glad you brought the issue up but again, dont see a change coming any time soon | ||
|
AssuredVacancy
United States1167 Posts
On October 06 2010 11:05 Wr3k wrote: PF is fine, PF+SCV's + retarded unit priority = broken mechanic. Also, missile turrets raping the shit out of anything that flies for 125 minerals is also pretty ridiculous. They only cost 100 minerals? It's ridiculous how even if you have 30 mutas you WILL lose at least 1 if you're attacking into a group of 3 turrets because of their ridiculous dps. | ||
|
SubtleArt
2710 Posts
On October 06 2010 06:43 Klive5ive wrote: PF just all around sucks. I don't see professional Terran players of the future ever making one. Mules are just too dam powerful, once the macro of the game is "solved" to an extent players as good as Flash is now in BW are not going to waste the chance to Mule. If they want defence.... bunkers + turrets. To me it just seems nooby and pointless. Because nothing is more useless than a massive cannon that allows you to handle groups of units just by repairing it and gives you absurd defenders advantage in case of a full out attack. The problem with bunkers is that they waste population. When you consider the cost of the units inside, as well as the fact that those units are more or less idle, meaning your army is much smaller, bunkers really aren't that great except for temporary defense. Plus the nature of the Terran army is to grow much quicker in strength as numbers increase, which makes it all the worse that you have 4 marauders or 8 just doing nothing. You don't really have a super mobile unit like zergs have mutas and lings, so defending expansions without sacrificing army becomes a big pain. Hence why I absolutely adore my planetary fortresses and will always build one at my gold  | ||
|
charlie420247
United States692 Posts
| ||
|
oxxo
988 Posts
| ||
|
Asshat
593 Posts
Fact is, there are ways around it. The planetary fortress works no differently than any other piece of static defense. It can be outranged, it can be outmaneuvered and it is a heavy investment made by the player who built it. | ||
|
Karkadinn
United States132 Posts
On October 06 2010 14:14 Asshat wrote: This thread strongly resembles the blue flame hellion thread from a day or two ago. I am curious in finding out what will tomorrow's "this isn't really a bitch thread about 'X' terran related object" be. Terran having the most and best options for pretty much everything is not a new development. Really, you should be used to it by now, if you've been paying attention at all. On October 06 2010 14:14 Asshat wrote: Fact is, there are ways around it. The planetary fortress works no differently than any other piece of static defense. It can be outranged, it can be outmaneuvered and it is a heavy investment made by the player who built it. "The planetary fortress isn't different from any other static defense once we discount the ways in which it is different from other static defenses." | ||
|
Fizbin
Canada202 Posts
On October 06 2010 07:14 McFoo wrote: Yes and people can just whip these units out of the void when ever they need them. It's not like the terran will take his gold base, upgrade the CC into a PF and then kindly type in chat: "Ok, i'll give you 10 minutes to build the proper units to counter this." Yeah, maybe if you split the roaches into ~4+ hotkeys and 1-right-click,2-right-click,3-right-click,4-right-click, repeat on each of the scvs while praying that the pathfinding doesn't implode, otherwise your roaches will die to the PF. Having all 26 roaches fire at 1 SCV at a time takes too long if the base is at decent saturation (i.e. there are a lot of SCVs there repairing). By the time you take down the SCVs you have to have enough roaches left to take down a full health PF. "lol target fire the scv's" doesn't seem very useful. Like before, you can't just magic unit composition. Terran goes hellions, zerg responds with roaches. Zerg ends up with almost a pure roach composition. Watch the first match of TLO vs LosirA from GSL. ---- PF makes terran easier to play. You don't have to manage your army to be able to defend your expansions and harrass/push at the same time. You just make a PF and a few turrets around it-- the SCVs do the rest. It's quite dull. edit: it can also severely limit zerg's counter attack options, which apparently is supposed to be one of zerg's strengths. umm drag select a few roach's then right click an scv, hold shift, right click click another scv rinse repeat. not very freaking hard. magic unit composition? i hardly ever build ANY roachs EVER vs terran... muta baneling is so much better its almost silly not to go. and i do fine. my best matchup is zerg vs terran if u let a terran go 3rd without harass or dropping his main or deserve to lose. if ur going to argue with me about stuff like this go post on the blizzard forums. also i agree there are things wrong with the matchup. PF is so minor when it comes to things that are actually important it sickens me to see this QQ. if ur gunna call imba on something at least point out something that matters. Example: hydra speed off creep, tier1 anti air.. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
umm drag select a couple roach's and right lick and scv then hold shift right click ect ect not very freaking hard. learn to play Are you kidding me? I'd seriously like to see anyone do this in a timely manner, half the time you have to use your Mouse wheel to change the pane to shift click all the SVC's at the back, by the time your managed to get all of them your units are attacking the PF since you can't click the SVC's fast enough and God forbid you click the PF while shift clicking.. | ||
|
ZaaaaaM
Netherlands1828 Posts
On October 06 2010 06:43 Klive5ive wrote: PF just all around sucks. I don't see professional Terran players of the future ever making one. Mules are just too dam powerful, once the macro of the game is "solved" to an extent players as good as Flash is now in BW are not going to waste the chance to Mule. If they want defence.... bunkers + turrets. To me it just seems nooby and pointless. Exactly, even 1 mule would give more than 1 turret and 1 bunker would cost (i know it doesnt work 100% like that but the games are so short in sc2 being mined out is not often the case) | ||
|
Raislin
United States144 Posts
On October 06 2010 06:58 eloist wrote: Terran macro is easier than Protoss macro? I would say so. Keeping your production cycles tight on warpgates definitely requires more attention than being able to queue units (at the very last moment, mind you) just before they finish. Otherwise, you waste seconds that add up. Of course, that's probably one reason why the cooldown on warp-ins is less than the normal build time. Even so, is not optimal if you aren't building exactly when you're able to. Also, there's little decision making in MULEs, whereas Chrono requires more, unless you opt to Chrono your Nexus repeatedly. So yes, Terran macro is easier than Protoss macro. As for the OP, I don't find a Planetary Fortress to be anything more than a nuisance as a Protoss player. The cost of a Planetary Fortress is n times the number of MULEs you would have received from an Orbital Command, plus the normal cost (minus the 150 minerals a OC would have cost if you'd like to get nit-picky). Collosus outrange them, Immortals drop them fast despite reps and they can't shoot up. Also, low-tech like a Nexus and can't lift off. The inability to lift-off makes me think Terran blatantly stole the idea of a Planetary Fortress from the Protoss. | ||
|
Dommk
Australia4865 Posts
The inability to lift-off makes me think Terran blatantly stole the idea of a Planetary Fortress from the Protoss. If you played the campaign, you gain it from Zerg Research As for the OP, I don't find a Planetary Fortress to be anything more than a nuisance as a Protoss player. The cost of a Planetary Fortress is n times the number of MULEs you would have received from an Orbital Command, plus the normal cost (minus the 150 minerals a OC would have cost if you'd like to get nit-picky) It is a loss in income, not minerals. Minerals still stay on the patches. But the PF pretty much becomes immune to counter attacks or Run-bys, it's difficult to put the gains/losses of a PF up like that, but overall, because people get it over an OC, it is a preserved gain. | ||
|
[Agony]x90
United States853 Posts
On October 06 2010 09:41 sjschmidt93 wrote: Unprotected colossi or broods at a super far third die to vikings. I can't afford to take 2-3 colossi plus a support units to a third, if I do my main army is weak as shit. Also... his natural probably has his.. uh... army sitting outside of it. "If you got all bio..." should never be an argument, learn to make more than 3 units. Yo, reading composition. He's saying that it's bad for the Terran to go all bio. Aka, he is saying "learn to make more than 2(3) units". | ||
|
kyarisan
United States347 Posts
also as to a PF vs a mule: i think the reason terrans get a PF on their third is that their main is mined out by the time their third is up so they just send those SCV's to the third, they dont need to mule at it while building up the SCVs necessary to saturate. | ||
|
Malminos
United States321 Posts
Ultras work okay, but nothing is quite as effective as banelings if u can pull it off. | ||
|
Chen
United States6344 Posts
On October 06 2010 16:11 Malminos wrote: A great tactic for taking out Planetary Fortresses as zerg is using banelings. A lot of times planetary fortresses will be left relatively undefended because of a little overconfidence of how good they are. Just send in a sacrificial ling or two ahead, followed by the proper amount of banes, and they can be instantly sniped fairly easily before SCVs even know what happened. Ultras work okay, but nothing is quite as effective as banelings if u can pull it off. Banelings cost 50/25 each and do 80 building damage. PF's have 3(?) armor, so it takes 1500/77 rounded up banelings to kill a PF. thats 20 banelings. 1000/500. Sadly thats probably more cost-efficient than any other non-terran race really can brag about. On October 06 2010 14:11 oxxo wrote: Planetary fortress = gas + lost mules/scans/supply + no lift. It's a much bigger sacrifice than you people are making it out to be. what you arnt taking into account is that PF lets a terran take a gold that he normally would not be able to. so you are actually comparing lost mules/supply from 1 base to boosted mules off of 2 OC's plus the added income of the scvs mining from the high yield. if after all of that PF is STILL a big net negative in the econ game then its not a problem, but from my quick calcs on hand 2 Mules from a gold is not a huge loss compared to 3 mules from normal patches, not to mention max scv saturation at gold compared to normal. | ||
|
Fizbin
Canada202 Posts
On October 06 2010 16:03 kyarisan wrote: i think its time to bring back this little guy (happened to me during beta): + Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XE2bOP0qAdA also as to a PF vs a mule: i think the reason terrans get a PF on their third is that their main is mined out by the time their third is up so they just send those SCV's to the third, they dont need to mule at it while building up the SCVs necessary to saturate. QUICK QUESTION... if u think u can take on the terrans army AND his PF why didnt u attack his main? SECOND QUESTION... if ur gunna storm stimmed marauders when there are 20 scv's all bunched up are u doing something right? THIRD QUESTION.... is this a good idea: lets stop targeting the PF and run the zealots into the scv line so more scv's can repair and the zealots bug out... or hey maybe we should have kept most the zealots on the PF and then target fired some of the scv's (prolly would have still lost your whole army anyways because of positioning when marauders hit, but at least you would have done something use full) FORTH QUESTION.... if your going to tech all the way to storm why are u pushing when u only have one templar... thats like saying as a zerg player im going to push with zergling roach but when i tech all the way to ultra im only gunna build one before i push if u dont know the answer to these questions please PM me and i will explain another note: terran has PF and turrets as non supply defense (PF even cuts into mule production) protoss has cannons zerg has spine and spore crawls | ||
|
Raislin
United States144 Posts
On October 06 2010 15:58 Dommk wrote: If you played the campaign, you gain it from Zerg Research It is a loss in income, not minerals. Minerals still stay on the patches. But the PF pretty much becomes immune to counter attacks or Run-bys, it's difficult to put the gains/losses of a PF up like that, but overall, because people get it over an OC, it is a preserved gain. Sshhh, I was making a joke. And I agree that the gains/losses of a PF are difficult to quantify like that, but I was just trying to point out that it's not so invincible as the OP made it seem. Even so, I still think it's a great option for a player's third, depending on how risky it is (some maps like Metalopolis don't have terribly risky expansions under certain conditions), as it'll really help secure the advantage you gain at that point. | ||
|
brain_
United States812 Posts
| ||
|
NuclearStar
United Kingdom57 Posts
And yeah really a few void rays charged on close by destructable rocks or a proxy pylon will destroy the few turrets around it, then they can just destroy the PF easily. Terran dont have anything that is able to attack ground like spine crawlers or photon cannons, except bunkers which when filled up with marines cost 300 minerals that could be used elsewhere. Now, if you give us some permenant turrets that ravens drop, then I would probably opt to get an orbital command instead of a PF. | ||
| ||
