| Forum Index > SC2 General |
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On October 07 2010 02:44 Karkadinn wrote: And Terran and Protoss just happen to attract better, less whiny players, right? Right. I don't even know why you bothered to post this hate mongering drivel. You're not exactly helping your point by being way more combative than the posts you're responding to. | ||
|
GaussWaffle
United States211 Posts
On October 07 2010 00:28 kthnx wrote: fix: overseer's contaminate makes building unable to repair.  wat. *zerg domination booms across the world* | ||
|
228zip
France36 Posts
On October 06 2010 22:49 Arokh wrote: Has anyone tried the speedling / zealot-slipknot on a PF repaired by SCVs? link: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=157013 Looks interesting on paper, I'll check how it does with PFs on the editor. EDIT : Turns out it fails miserably. Zerglings are too far from the targets when you hit Hold Position, and won't attack anything. Others will attack the fortress. Also, the damage dealt by zerglings is insufficient for all the SCVs to be actually required; they'll just auto-repair themselves because there isn't enough pressure on the fortress. I also tested it with SCVs surrounding the fortress on hold position, the results were equally bad : Not a single SCV was killed. This was tested with 33 zerglings, a planetary fortress and 21 SCVs. Nothing else. I also tested simply running the zerglings into a mineral line and hitting hold position. Damage was dealt, but the lack of range of the zerglings made it so that they couldn't focus SCVs. A few SCVs were killed, and a large portion of the survivors were heavily damaged. And, just for fun, I tried outrunning the turret's rotation with my speedlings. Turns out it works ! However, the AI is smart and will turn the other way if it's shorter, so you'd better be very good at micro if you want any use out of that. | ||
|
Garaman
United States556 Posts
On October 06 2010 07:21 niteReloaded wrote: I'm T and I think they're a pretty great tool for the Terran, perhaps slightly too strong. I abuse them whenever I can. the most honest post i've read yet! | ||
|
GinNtoniC
Sweden2945 Posts
Combined with tanks they can make a fine block-off. But as a general building, at the pro level, OC is going to be favored most of the time. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
Just build another fricken OC. It costs you 550m, but gives you a depot-and-a-half of supply, saving you 150m. How many mules does it take to pay the rest off? Two? More like one if it's at a gold expansion. Or look at it the other way around: you're building the OC you wanted to anyway, nice and safe behind your front lines, and paying 550/150 for a repairable armoured supply depot that can collect the minerals on behalf of the OC and blow the enemy's fucking face off if he comes sniffing around. I'm not sure why 'constantly build workers, constantly build supply' hasn't been joined by 'constantly build OCs' in the mantra of good macro. Even if you just maintain the same economy as you would have normally, each OC effectively gives you 4 supply extra for army when you hit 200/200 (1 MULE instead of 4 SCVs). | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On October 07 2010 06:31 Umpteen wrote: I'm posting this from my desktop PC, because the number of people in this thread still saying that a PF incurs an opportunity cost of mules+scan made me bite through my laptop. Just build another fricken OC. It costs you 550m, but gives you a depot-and-a-half of supply, saving you 150m. How many mules does it take to pay the rest off? Two? More like one if it's at a gold expansion. Or look at it the other way around: you're building the OC you wanted to anyway, nice and safe behind your front lines, and paying 550/150 for a repairable armoured supply depot that can collect the minerals on behalf of the OC and blow the enemy's fucking face off if he comes sniffing around. I'm not sure why 'constantly build workers, constantly build supply' hasn't been joined by 'constantly build OCs' in the mantra of good macro. Even if you just maintain the same economy as you would have normally, each OC effectively gives you 4 supply extra for army when you hit 200/200 (1 MULE instead of 4 SCVs). Because while the OC eventually pays for itself, time is a crucial resource. In the time it takes for you to build an OC and repay its cost, a Protoss or Zerg could take a real base and pay for it as well. And an actual base is still worth more than an OC that has no safe base to float to. | ||
|
Xlancer
United States126 Posts
On October 06 2010 07:00 Fa1nT wrote: Planetary fortress is fine. AI attacking it instead of repairing SCV is not. ^ This sums up my opinion perfectly. | ||
|
Sanguinarius
United States3427 Posts
| ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
However I strongly suspect that they will not be viable. Yes, you are paying 550 minerals, which is paid off in two MULEs. However you sunk 400 of those minerals at the start of the command center's build time, and you are not going to pay off the cost of that orbital command until you've finished two mules, which is about a minute after the completion of the orbital command. The command center takes 100 game seconds to make, the orbital command takes 35 game seconds to morph, and you're going to need about 180 game seconds for the orbital command to pay for itself (each MULE lasts 90, the next one is ready pretty much exactly when its predecessor dies). This is a total game time investment of 295 game seconds, although for 180 seconds of that you can be producing SCV's out of your new in-base orbital command. And bear in mind, this is the time it takes just to BREAK EVEN on this orbital command. The Orbital Command is amazingly economical at your first base because you get a free command center there. It's also economical at your natural, and maybe your third, but only when you were going to build a command center anyway since you want the base. | ||
|
ParasitJonte
Sweden1768 Posts
I just think that PF in general is a very, very, very bad idea. Or at least executed extremely poorly. It takes a lot of fun out of playing the game. I don't care if it's balanced right now or not. It's just so boring to play against. And I imagine it's boring building one as well. And as has been pointed out dozens of times, targetting scvs gets old rather quick. I really don't get what they were thinking when they thought of this. It just goes against starcraft gameplay. In sc1, command centers were still pretty damn hard to take out as terrans could repair them while you were shooting and a moment later his army came and you had to redirect your fire. Now, terrans just take the gold with a PF and if it's an even game you have to work around it. I don't know what to say, it's just such a boring addition to the game. It's awful. | ||
|
DoubleReed
United States4130 Posts
I will say that as zerg it is very scary to deal with PF. We don't have any units that are particularly good at killing it aside from ultralisk (and I guess BLs). And you really should assume that PFs have turrets around them otherwise just burrow-roach/muta can take it. Maybe if we had a anti-armor flyer or the lurker or something it would be easier, but as it stands, zerg cannot realistically/economically deny a PF until T3. | ||
|
zekie
Canada380 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. TvP in BW the terran players would leave tanks as defence for bases so it would deter from counter attacks because it wouldn't be cost effecient for the toss having to break through the wall taking shots the whole time and by the time they do the main army is almost there. On October 06 2010 07:00 Fa1nT wrote: Planetary fortress is fine. AI attacking it instead of repairing SCV is not. ^ This sums up my opinion perfectly.[/QUOTE] do you guys want the computer to do EVERYTHING for you? personally i'd rather micro on my own. | ||
|
Umpteen
United Kingdom1570 Posts
On October 07 2010 06:34 TheYango wrote:Because while the OC eventually pays for itself, time is a crucial resource. In the time it takes for you to build an OC and repay its cost, a Protoss or Zerg could take a real base and pay for it as well. And an actual base is still worth more than an OC that has no safe base to float to. Mmm. Ok, look at it this way: If you could upgrade an OC to an OCPF, which combined both functions, provided an additional 11 supply and allowed two SCVs to be queued simultaneously for 550/150, would you do it? What if, after tanking 1500 damage, only the PF part was destroyed and the remaining OC would instantly teleport to somewhere safe inside your main? Bear in mind that to achieve something similar, Zerg would have to upgrade an expo hatch to a lair (for the hitpoints), build an overlord (100m) and some spinecrawlers (150 a pop). Yes, you are paying 550 minerals, which is paid off in two MULEs. However you sunk 400 of those minerals at the start of the command center's build time, and you are not going to pay off the cost of that orbital command until you've finished two mules, which is about a minute after the completion of the orbital command. It's actually not all that much worse than building and paying for 2 depots and 4 SCVs (yes, an OC only gives 1.5 depots' supply, but dropping MULEs rather than SCVs saves you 4 supply). And don't forget, this is something you can do as well as building SCVs normally. It enables you to overcome the command-centre bottleneck on worker production, both in the short term (by building an OC and calling down MULEs in parallel with SCV production) and in the long term (by having lots of OCs). EDIT: Not to mention the benefit of having OCs ready and waiting to float out over the map when the opportunity arises or an expo is lost and retaken. And the impossibility of losing a base-trade. | ||
|
lastmotion
368 Posts
On October 07 2010 03:07 Saechiis wrote: Lol, have you seen your post history? How do you expect me to tell you that you aren't whiny? It's exactly these immature responses to thought out posts that makes no-one care about your (biased) opinion. I don't see how you out of anyone have the right to call other peoples' posts biased. Did you see some of the stuff you just posted on this thread? Of course not, you clearly can't see your own bias. No reason to argue with you | ||
|
toadstool
Australia421 Posts
On October 06 2010 10:56 divertiti wrote: If you know you're not skilled enough to target the scvs first, you shouldn't be engaging in the first place. You can't blame the game for you making bad decisions. So the solution for bronze players is to never attack Planetary Fortresses? Same as the nerf for zealot build times. Pre-nerf, the solution to avoiding early 2 gate pressure is don't get yourself into that situation and never fast expand as Zerg right? We're talking about balance here. It's hard to kill Planetary Fortresses, and it's hard to click on SCVs. Oh wait, your solution is to not attack them in the first place, right? | ||
|
forcestealer
Canada60 Posts
but ofcourse it should be fairly obvious that 6 zerglings won't be able to take down a planetary fortress, if that were the case then the planetary fortress would be useless  | ||
|
morimacil
France921 Posts
The first one, is that terran is immobile. Im not sure if that is really true, because terran has some of the most mobile units around, with stimmed bioballs, hellions, reapers, banshees, medivacs, and so on. The only unit that isnt very good at moving around is the siege tank, and you dont really see tons of those anymore. Its not like if you had 15 siegetankes and were leapfrogging them around to get somewhere really slowly, its more like you have 1-2 siege tanks with your army, and just siege them when you arrive, if you have them at all. So I would argue that terran isnt really more immobile than other races. The second assumption is the more important one though. The second assumption is that being immobile is terran's weakness, and that planetary fortresses are there to counter that. In essence, the idea here is that there should not be any weakness. At all. Which is kind of ridiculous | ||
|
AmstAff
Germany949 Posts
P colossus or HTs or voids and Z infestors or ultras or mutas even 2-3 banelings are enough to kill the repairing scvs. sure if you just a move 10 zealots/lings and all scvs are repairing the PF the AI will fuck up and the melee units will just run around and die without doing anything, but this is stupidity not imbalance or anything else! | ||
|
jambam
United States324 Posts
On October 07 2010 03:35 GaussWaffle wrote: wat. *zerg domination booms across the world* Can someone confirm? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War League of Legends Counter-Strike Other Games |
|
WardiTV Invitational
Gerald vs YoungYakov
Spirit vs MaNa
SHIN vs Percival
Creator vs Scarlett
Replay Cast
WardiTV Invitational
ByuN vs Solar
Clem vs Classic
Cure vs herO
Reynor vs MaxPax
Replay Cast
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Krystianer vs TBD
TriGGeR vs SKillous
Percival vs TBD
ByuN vs Nicoract
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
|
|
|
EPT
