|
For example: using vultures against dragoons. Dragoons got advantage agains vultures, but with some good spider mine usage you can actually prevent enemy from pwning your ass before you get some tanks out. ( You know, some godly micro play, dropping mines around dragoons and running away and stuff like that )
And that's what was fun to watch, IMO.
It's not fun to watch 5 Immortals decimating 10 Ultralisks just because they "Hard Counter" them.
It's not fun watching 20 Marauders kill 16 Ultralisks with Stim just because they "Hard Counter" anything that is armored. It's not fun watching Helion "Hard Countering" 30 Zerglings with Blue Flame just because of it's design, instead of the player's control over them. I can keep going. In Brood War, you had units that performed well over others, yes. But you didn't have this completely one sided mechanic of "either it counters it or it doesn't, and is generally now useless against X unit.
I think THAT is the core of the issue.
edit. Blizzard is just doing some very bad and very weird design choises for this game.
125 health infantry units? 400 health giant mech robots?
If I knew nothing about new units I would instantly guess that we are talking about new Protoss units, not new Terran units.
Yeah. This thread isn't about Terran HP inflation per se, but yes. Terran has crossed over into Protoss role territory in SC2 with Expensive, Over-performing units like the Thor. Combined with Terran's cheap but versatile T1 it is rather powerful. Protoss no longer has the highest quality units per IMO, Terran does.
|
I see this thread as a Mekka for people who who just haven't figured out what units they need in what situations. Let me try to address OP's problem.
There is no longer a 100% / 75% / 50% Explosive for units with big damage. There is no longer 100% 50% 25% damage penalties for units that are good at killing "Small" targets. Now it's just BAM 10 damage, NO penalty, with a BONUS vs X for fun. It just seems to me like DPS has gotten way out of control as a result.
Regarding what units exactly? We can convert current system to BW one, generalize Armored as Large and Light as Small and suddenly Marauders have 50% penalty against Small targets, Immortals 60%, Stalkers ~29%, Siege Tanks: in Tank mode 40% and in Siege mode 30%, Ultralisks 57%, charging Void Rays 50% and charged 60%, Archons ~29% (remember that Hellions, Ravens, Phoenixes, Interceptors (lol), Observers, Sentries and Banshees aren't biological).
And that's also keeping in mind Stalker can do 14 damage max while Dragoons 20, Siege Tanks: in Tank mode 25 (BW 30) and in Siege mode 50 (BW 70).
+ Show Spoiler +We can even go a bit ridiculous and include Reavers as ancestors of both Immortals and Colossi. While Colossi inherited deadly AoE, Immortals inherited insane damage that can be dealt to a single target.
Comparing Reavers to Immortals, Reavers have smaller penalty against small units (50% while Immortal 60%).
Ghosts cost twice as much as in BW so they have everything multiplied by 2.
Somehow you don't see Carriers used that much even though Interceptors do 66.(6)% damage more, air upgrades give them +2 instead of +1 and the only upgrade for Carriers themselves makes Interceptors deal even more damage faster.
Each Carrier warps in with 4 of them, compared to 0 in BW and there is no upgrade needed for bigger capacity of Carriers (so they can carry more than 4 Interceptors in BW).
Hellions have a lot smaller DPS than Vultures when including Mines in this comparison.
Even though Hellions can deal a lot greater damage, with their standard attack it's not set like this by default, it all comes down to T's micro and mismicro by opponent.
Using Hellions one can only achieve through micro what Mines could do. And only against 1 type of targets, not all of them. AND they have to stop to fire.
Also Mines are only 1 BW example among Storm, Plague and other overpowered but balanced spells and abilities that aren't in SC2 or if they have equivalents (like Stasis has Vortex) they aren't as strong (only 1 Mothership can be made, there is no limit on Arbiters in BW).
There are literally no examples to support statement that "DPS has gotten way out of control".
A point can be made that "unholy trinity" deals a lot of damage to each other but it still doesn't hard counter each other - for the same cost Immortals don't hard counter Marauders and both Immortals and Marauders don't hard counter Roaches when things like:
Roach Speed (and burrow to some degree),
whether battle is going on on creep or not,
is zerg fighting in chokes, coming only from 1 side, or is he trying to flank and surround,
are taken into consideration.
But saying that Massive is the new Medium isn't correlated to Roach, Marauder, Immortal issue.
edit at ~6:00
I don't understand how it is supposed to be.
The only 1 thing (also not mentioned in OP) I can agree with is it too often can't be said at all who is going to win a battle. In BW, spells make it very clear. It is easy to see who has advantage and where. If stream has even mediocre quality it often can't be seen at all who has advantage, even with force fields, storms and fungal growths used. Or like in PvP, it comes down to who has more Colossi.
that is rather irrelevant to the thread.
/edit~6:00
This lead me to think that many of the cries and whines we have been seeing about balance since Beta / Release are because of Blizzard going in the wrong direction with this "new" approach to the damage system, which results in Starcraft 2 units hard-countering their "countered unit" to the point where things die in seconds and battles don't last at all, especially not with the right unit compositions.
And it's not different from BW. In BW TvZ you make Vessels or Mutas keep harassing, Defilers and Ultras roam free, anything plagued, especially Marines, dies in seconds, not being able to kill anything when covered in Dark Swarm.
Similarly you make enough Scourge and get the Vessels or you can't defend and get rolled by rivers of bio.
In TvP you cheese with bio or hide Barracks ("deep six") for as long as you can because Storm makes bio obsolete.
Protoss needs Arbiters (or Carriers on certain maps) against maxed out Terran mech army because unless he can flank and cast size storm like a god, he doesn't stand a chance with just zeals and goons.
Those are just few examples.
If anything, scouting just matters more in SC2. And 1a isn't the best way to micro available.
To me it seems like the transition between the damage systems is incomplete, and now that (as far as damage is concerned) Massive = Armored, we're left with units that just don't have a very well defined role. And now we get to HP inflation because since everything now counters Armored and Massive, "large" units have seen an HP increase.
What is a Corruptor? What's it supposed to do? Counter capital ships?
What is an Ultralisk? What's it supposed to counter? Armored units? But the Ultralisk IS itself Armored (Because it's Massive, and in SC2 Massive gets hit by + dmg vs Armored), so it gets annihilated by the units that it's supposed to be good at killing, despite the fact that they needed to give it +100 HP with all the + Armor flying around.
Ultralisk isn't Small or Medium size in BW, it is Large and that translates to Armoured.
It has always been like this. And Ultralisk was never meant to fight battles alone.
Alone it is countered by anything, getting +2 carapace against MnM is a matter of life and death.
How changing it's size is supposed to change anything? It is all about number of hits needed to kill it.
Ultralisk HP in Brood War: 400
Ultralisk HP in Starcraft 2: 500
AND it costs 100 minerals more, takes 75 seconds to make, deals splash and can tank for other units as good as ever. AND it started with 600HP in the beta.
Battlecruiser HP in Brood War: 500
Battlecruiser HP in SC2: 550
How is 50HP relevant? They also have much bigger DPS, so strong it had to be nerfed against ground targets in the last patch. And can shoot Yamatos much faster thanks to it's lower cost and faster energy regen. They even have upgrade that gives +25 energy once they are finished.
Medic HP in BW: 60
Firebat HP in BW: 50
Marauder HP in SC2: 125 (Obviously, he's armored, that's why he now needs nearly the same HP of a):
Including Slow, widely considered overpowered even though it can't shoot air.
I don't see how 125HP is a sign of weakness.
Seige Tank HP in BW: 150
Seige Tank HP in SC2: 160
Comparing 10HP is just ridiculous.
SC2 Tank needs more supply and more gas, gas itself being much more precious.
For it's cost, it's more of glass canon then a unit with inflated HP.
|
On October 15 2010 03:26 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +For example: using vultures against dragoons. Dragoons got advantage agains vultures, but with some good spider mine usage you can actually prevent enemy from pwning your ass before you get some tanks out. ( You know, some godly micro play, dropping mines around dragoons and running away and stuff like that ) And that's what was fun to watch, IMO. It's not fun to watch 5 Immortals decimating 10 Ultralisks just because they "Hard Counter" them. It's not fun watching 20 Marauders kill 16 Ultralisks with Stim just because they "Hard Counter" anything that is armored. It's not fun watching Helion "Hard Countering" 30 Zerglings with Blue Flame just because of it's design, instead of the player's control over them. I can keep going. In Brood War, you had units that performed well over others, yes. But you didn't have this completely one sided mechanic of "either it counters it or it doesn't, and is generally now useless against X unit. I think THAT is the core of the issue. Show nested quote +edit. Blizzard is just doing some very bad and very weird design choises for this game.
125 health infantry units? 400 health giant mech robots?
If I knew nothing about new units I would instantly guess that we are talking about new Protoss units, not new Terran units. Yeah. This thread isn't about Terran HP inflation per se, but yes. Terran has crossed over into Protoss role territory in SC2 with Expensive, Over-performing units like the Thor. Combined with Terran's cheap but versatile T1 it is rather powerful. Protoss no longer has the highest quality units per IMO, Terran does.
Immortals lose in 1v1 fights against Ultras.
Marauders kite because you let them by doing 1a instead of trying to surround or simply casting a Fungal on them.
Exactly the same goes for ling vs hellion. Hellions do reach critical mass of units as any other ranged unit but lings is all they can kill as long as you are aware what is flying near your bases.
Once you know that, they are minerals dumped into something that can't hurt anything else you have. They are a cannon fodder at best.
The core of the issue is I don't think you are even Gold because your comparisons show how bad is your skill in this game. The game is not at fault, you are just bad at it sir O_O
And Terran mech is the most cost effective army in the BW.
|
Immortals lose in 1v1 fights against Ultras.
Marauders kite because you let them by doing 1a instead of trying to surround or simply casting a Fungal on them.
Exactly the same goes for ling vs hellion. Hellions do reach critical mass of units as any other ranged unit but lings is all they can kill as long as you are aware what is flying near your bases.
Once you know that, they are minerals dumped into something that can't hurt anything else you have. They are a cannon fodder at best.
The core of the issue is I don't think you are even Gold because your comparisons show how bad is your skill in this game. The game is not at fault, you are just bad at it sir O_O
And Terran mech is the most cost effective army in the BW.
Although I don't see what my division has to do with it, I'm a Platinum
http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/672138/1/Archael/
I don't see what my comparisons are telling you about my skill level, though, but thanks for the guess.
Immortals might lose to 1v1 against Ultras but they start countering them HARD when numbers on both sides start going up, and that's exactly what you see when you spectate this game. Big Mara ball wiping the floor with superior cost of Ultralisks.
|
Ya seriously...who thought of 125 HP infantry tanks? It used to be firebats would "tank" in some sense. Now you have a unit with double HP, but it's almost a requirement because everything else hits real hard too.
Meanwhile lings still suck. 6 lings were>photon cannon in BW, now it's really not close at all.
in starcraft, good micro could make your units perform against all expectations against units who are supposed to counter yours. But in SC2, this is nigh impossible, the countering is often just too one sided.
|
On October 15 2010 03:52 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +Immortals lose in 1v1 fights against Ultras.
Marauders kite because you let them by doing 1a instead of trying to surround or simply casting a Fungal on them.
Exactly the same goes for ling vs hellion. Hellions do reach critical mass of units as any other ranged unit but lings is all they can kill as long as you are aware what is flying near your bases.
Once you know that, they are minerals dumped into something that can't hurt anything else you have. They are a cannon fodder at best.
The core of the issue is I don't think you are even Gold because your comparisons show how bad is your skill in this game. The game is not at fault, you are just bad at it sir O_O
And Terran mech is the most cost effective army in the BW. Although I don't see what my division has to do with it, I'm a Platinum http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/672138/1/Archael/I don't see what my comparisons are telling you about my skill level, though, but thanks for the guess. Immortals might lose to 1v1 against Ultras but they start countering them HARD when numbers on both sides start going up, and that's exactly what you see when you spectate this game. Big Mara ball wiping the floor with superior cost of Ultralisks.
Your comparisons are that bad, making them over exaggerated in that way doesn't prove anything.
Ultras aren't the only unit meant counter them. Zerg didn't win GSL by making only Ultras.
1 dimensional comparisons get you only that far and make lose armies superior in cost. Think beyond that or you will just keep blaming random things like unit damage system.
|
Yeah, this is not the reason you don't enjoy watching starcraft 2 as much as brood war.
That's like saying you don't enjoy watching action movies because they use european guns exclusively.
|
On October 15 2010 04:02 beetlelisk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2010 03:52 Archael wrote:Immortals lose in 1v1 fights against Ultras.
Marauders kite because you let them by doing 1a instead of trying to surround or simply casting a Fungal on them.
Exactly the same goes for ling vs hellion. Hellions do reach critical mass of units as any other ranged unit but lings is all they can kill as long as you are aware what is flying near your bases.
Once you know that, they are minerals dumped into something that can't hurt anything else you have. They are a cannon fodder at best.
The core of the issue is I don't think you are even Gold because your comparisons show how bad is your skill in this game. The game is not at fault, you are just bad at it sir O_O
And Terran mech is the most cost effective army in the BW. Although I don't see what my division has to do with it, I'm a Platinum http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/672138/1/Archael/I don't see what my comparisons are telling you about my skill level, though, but thanks for the guess. Immortals might lose to 1v1 against Ultras but they start countering them HARD when numbers on both sides start going up, and that's exactly what you see when you spectate this game. Big Mara ball wiping the floor with superior cost of Ultralisks. Your comparisons are that bad, making them over exaggerated in that way doesn't prove anything. Ultras aren't the only unit meant counter them. Zerg didn't win GSL by making only Ultras. 1 dimensional comparisons get you only that far and make lose armies superior in cost. Think beyond that or you will just keep blaming random things like unit damage system.
You keep posting like this thread is about blaming the game for me being in Platinum (or something???) I'm not blaming the damage system or the game for my losses in this thread. Please read it.
This isn't a QQ post, or a balance thread. I'm not a Zerg player that uses Ultralisks. I play Protoss.
I'm pointing out that the new damage system is worse than it was in BW, and more 1-dimensional, something which I believe contributes to it being less fun to watch.
Did you even read the OP??
|
I don't think u can give an accurate assessment of the game at platinum, let alone this early in the game's life considering its constantly being patched. I don't get why you're comparing it to BW which is a different game, you either enjoy both or one or the other. Just my 2 cents.
|
I really like the point about how more DPS means that battles arent as epic because they end too quickly. While it places a premium on handspeed in those critical situations it is MUCH harder for spectators to follow.
|
On October 15 2010 04:27 lGy wrote:
I don't think u can give an accurate assessment of the game at platinum, let alone this early in the game's life considering its constantly being patched. I don't get why you're comparing it to BW which is a different game, you either enjoy both or one or the other. Just my 2 cents.
I barely play SC2 anymore, working all the time.
That said, I can't assess how fun SC2 is as a spectator sport without being in top Diamond?
Because that's what this thread is about. I'm not pretending to be some top level player who just won the GSL giving my opinions on SC2 balance, man.
I'm a guy who loves watching pro level BW / SC2 explaining why I feel like the new damage system makes SC2 less interesting to watch. If you read the OP this is very clearly stated.
|
On October 15 2010 04:15 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +On October 15 2010 04:02 beetlelisk wrote:On October 15 2010 03:52 Archael wrote:Immortals lose in 1v1 fights against Ultras.
Marauders kite because you let them by doing 1a instead of trying to surround or simply casting a Fungal on them.
Exactly the same goes for ling vs hellion. Hellions do reach critical mass of units as any other ranged unit but lings is all they can kill as long as you are aware what is flying near your bases.
Once you know that, they are minerals dumped into something that can't hurt anything else you have. They are a cannon fodder at best.
The core of the issue is I don't think you are even Gold because your comparisons show how bad is your skill in this game. The game is not at fault, you are just bad at it sir O_O
And Terran mech is the most cost effective army in the BW. Although I don't see what my division has to do with it, I'm a Platinum http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/profile/672138/1/Archael/I don't see what my comparisons are telling you about my skill level, though, but thanks for the guess. Immortals might lose to 1v1 against Ultras but they start countering them HARD when numbers on both sides start going up, and that's exactly what you see when you spectate this game. Big Mara ball wiping the floor with superior cost of Ultralisks. Your comparisons are that bad, making them over exaggerated in that way doesn't prove anything. Ultras aren't the only unit meant counter them. Zerg didn't win GSL by making only Ultras. 1 dimensional comparisons get you only that far and make lose armies superior in cost. Think beyond that or you will just keep blaming random things like unit damage system. You keep posting like this thread is about blaming the game for me being in Platinum (or something???) I'm not blaming the damage system or the game for my losses in this thread. Please read it. This isn't a QQ post, or a balance thread. I'm not a Zerg player that uses Ultralisks. I play Protoss. I'm pointing out that the new damage system is worse than it was in BW, and more 1-dimensional, something which I believe contributes to it being less fun to watch. Did you even read the OP??
I elaborated why the damage system is IMO irrelevant on this page. At least in the way I understand your post.
It sounds like a pretty huge QQ when you say 5 Immortals "decimate 10 ultralisks" or 20 Marauders kill 16 Ultralisks. I have no idea how can you let that happen.
It makes me wonder if you are just exaggerating or are you that ignorant to what is the reality.
I have no problem with arguing if microing units that are meant counter one another is vaible, if micro itself can, like in BW, win you battles that seem to be unworthy to engage in, judging just by unit compositions.
But the question is: is micro (done by top players) in SC2 on the level good enough to say that all you need is a better army composition and it doesn't matter if you 1a or try to do something more?
This whole thread would be excellent if there would be any analysis about situations that actually happened, instead of generalizing. What could be done? How economy of both players influenced number of units on both sides? What was the positioning? What unit could be used but wasn't there? Was it that certain units weren't used because player disregarded them and just assumed simplier unit composition would do?
This thread would be excellent if focusing on damage systems being just different, without using games that happened as examples, was the only thing it does.
And saying one system is worse because it adds instead of dividing is really saying that it is different and nothing more.
|
On October 14 2010 19:33 beetlelisk wrote:
How the damage system is bad? You can point at some units and say they are overpowered or underpowered. But those are your feelings regarding certain units, not whole damage system.
How about the fact that your entire army can be in 1 hotkey and grouped into a tiny compact ball that dishes out 10,000 dps to any unit that comes within 9 range of it?
|
On October 14 2010 18:58 iD.NicKy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 18:51 Felix_mk wrote:
I actually agree that battles are too short because units do too much damage.
Another game from another genre "guild wars" was killed by massive buffs to offensive skills which lead to tons of gimmicky builds that killed everything way too fast. no don't make it like w3 .. maps are just too small + chokes are just useless to defend on sc2
He never mentions w3.....But to the OP, units simply do too much damage right now. Battles are extremely short and almost every game comes down to one large mid to late game fight. I really wish they just ported BW to SC2 graphics, because it was so flawless. I mean, keep in mind that it took SC 7 years to get to where it is now, so give SC2 time to balance out.
|
Damage system alone is not the problem. The problem is that Blizzard is trying to design a somekind of net of counters where each unit type counters some unit type and gets pwned by some other unit type and leaves space for nothing else. Very little space for some creative unit usage.
What they should be doing is giving us different kind of units with different kind of tools for fighting and killing enemies. Letting us to find best way to use this unit type to counter that unit type in this specific situation, which would make game much more dynamic. Now its too much about massing unit A and B, because they work nicely againts enemys units C and D.
At least thats how I feel about it.
|
One system starts with maximum damage value and this value has to be divided to calculate damage done to other types of units.
Another system starts with minimum damage value and you have to add to calculate damage done to other types of units.
How is one worse than the other? What matters are the numbers, not percentages.
On October 15 2010 04:59 CellTech wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 19:33 beetlelisk wrote:
How the damage system is bad? You can point at some units and say they are overpowered or underpowered. But those are your feelings regarding certain units, not whole damage system. How about the fact that your entire army can be in 1 hotkey and grouped into a tiny compact ball that dishes out 10,000 dps to any unit that comes within 9 range of it?
What is the composition of both armies? What is the positioning? How did the game look like earlier? Did anyone get advantage over the other? Where can I find the replay?
Was there any gameplan and did any scouting occur? What is the level of players?
|
This whole thread would be excellent if there would be any analysis about situations that actually happened, instead of generalizing.
I gave 2 examples of scenarios that are common when spectating games, and are lame to watch, IN A REPLY, NOT THE OP - And you're already speculating how amazing the thread would have been if specific examples were used with theory-crafting of alternative possibilities instead of vague examples? lol seriously?
That's not what this thread is about AT ALL. If you're looking for in-depth strategic analysis, please go to the Strategy Forum.
I'll put this in very simple terms so that you stop criticizing this thread on the basis that you think it should be something that it's not.
SC2 top level games. Too much damage. Forced counters. Not fun to watch.
I hope that clears it up for you.
|
About too many hard countters:
Most of you probably agree that Reaver was one of the coolest units in sc. It had a very powerfull splash attack and very weird attack mechanic that was quite hard to use.
Then some guy invented reaver drop and other cool ways to use that huge damage potential reaver has.
Was reaver somekind of anti armor or anti massive or perhaps worker harrasing tool? No. It was very good at killing workers, balls of hydralisk and stuff like that, but you could also use it againts other targets too, when controlled correctly.
Reaver was an unit with attack mechanic that had its huge potential and its weaknesses.
IMO Blizzard should have offered us more different kind of weapons and fighting mechanics, instead of just this net-of-hard-counters. Few hard counttering units are cool, but game should have more diversity and depth. Not just a fancy version of rock-paper-sciccors.
|
On October 15 2010 05:18 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +
This whole thread would be excellent if there would be any analysis about situations that actually happened, instead of generalizing.
I gave 2 examples of scenarios that are common when spectating games, and are lame to watch, IN A REPLY, NOT THE OP - And you're already speculating how amazing the thread would have been if specific examples were used with theory-crafting of alternative possibilities instead of vague examples? lol seriously? That's not what this thread is about AT ALL. If you're looking for in-depth strategic analysis, please go to the Strategy Forum. I'll put this in very simple terms so that you stop criticizing this thread on the basis that you think it should be something that it's not. SC2 top level games. Too much damage. Forced counters. Not fun to watch. I hope that clears it up for you.
Lol what are your examples? You said you like Goon vs Vulture micro. That's one, BW example.
I can see you edited and added content to your OP so I have to reread it but you said you gave them in responses.
I don't get how in depth analysis can hurt your point. If you are right it should prove that you are right more than anything.
There are no SC2 examples at all. Once someone posted about how Archons work you asked if he was joking:
On October 15 2010 03:01 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +On October 14 2010 23:56 lololol wrote:
Armored isn't medium, medium simply doesn't exist anymore.
Hydras were medium, now they are light.
Vultures were medium, Hellions are light.
Corsairs were medium, Phoenixes are light.
Lurkers don't have a closely related unit.
Massive is "extra large" and if corruptors didn't have a bonus against it, it wouldn't matter at all.
^ To whoever said I was misunderstanding SC2 unit types, I'm quoting this for truth. Medium doesn't exist anymore.OP here. I wrote this post before going to bed like at 5 AM my time, so I'm sorry if my thought process jumps around a little bit. My point was that SC2 feels forced. Build this vs this, or die. Not fun to watch. Show nested quote +And in SC2, archons suddenly don't suck vs all types of damage and can actaully be used effectively to TANK damage, because they have NO armor type. just Psionic.
And +dmg vs biological?
The new system is more versatile than the BW damage system, BUT it hasn't been fully explored by Blizzard. This is a joke, right? Just because 1 oddball Protoss unit has + Bio damage doesn't make the system more versatile, just like 1 oddbal Zerg Corruptor having an exclusive +Massive bonus doesn't compensate for the rest of the system causing damage inflation. It's cute and gimmicky, but like you said, it hasn't been fully explored, everything feels and behaves half-way, so we're stuck in this: Show nested quote +Great points, and the current damage system (and how blizzard has used it) really lends to the overwhelming number of "hard counters" that exist in starcraft 2, IMO. It helps make the battles seem less dynamic and more forced.
You gave no scenarios at all, yet you are dismissing anything defending the system.
On October 14 2010 18:58 Archael wrote:Show nested quote +
The actual representation doesn't really matter imo. However, what I do miss is the finer grainularities of the 100, 75, 50 system. There are some intermediate values to go about, now it's too 1 dimentional, either bonus or no bonus.
OP here. 100% Agree.
And I would like to know what units demand to be medium size.
|
- Listed damage vs Light with bonus damage vs Armored AND Massive (Marauder, Immortal)
They have no bonus against massive targets, only against armored.
And another thing I'd like to see is you giving me reply to this:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=160624¤tpage=3#42
about at least how the actual numbers look like.
Let's take your example from the OP:
Meaning that your Stalker, which says 10 Damage (14 vs. Armored) also does 14 to Massive, despite the fact that the Stalker has no listed damage for vs. Massive units.
It doesn't deal any additional damage to massive targets. And it deals less damage than Dragoon but you use it as an example of the worse system at work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
