|
On March 02 2011 03:16 Aerakin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 03:14 PrinceXizor wrote:
saying protoss should always have warp gats on cooldown is like saying that zerg should never have any larva pooled. the best know when and where to pool warp cooldown and larva. I can't think of a scenario where zerg doesn't want to spend his larva unless it's in a max army scenario or if they're waiting to build ultralisks.
And that is why you fail.
You have to pool larva at certain points to avoid losing to all ins if you scout the potential for it.
in addition to waiting for tech buildings to finish to mass that new unit.
Similarly protoss can pool warp gate cooldown to defend vs harrass when you know your army is out of position, you wait to commit your warp gates to your army instead of to defendng until you are sure a hellion drop or banshee, or muta group, ect aren't incoming
|
On March 02 2011 03:21 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 03:16 Aerakin wrote:On March 02 2011 03:14 PrinceXizor wrote:
saying protoss should always have warp gats on cooldown is like saying that zerg should never have any larva pooled. the best know when and where to pool warp cooldown and larva. I can't think of a scenario where zerg doesn't want to spend his larva unless it's in a max army scenario or if they're waiting to build ultralisks. And that is why you fail. You have to pool larva at certain points to avoid losing to all ins if you scout the potential for it. in addition to waiting for tech buildings to finish to mass that new unit. Similarly protoss can pool warp gate cooldown to defend vs harrass when you know your army is out of position, you wait to commit your warp gates to your army instead of to defendng until you are sure a hellion drop or banshee, or muta group, ect aren't incoming
I can see how that works as zerg. But wouldn't doing that as protoss really hurt your macro? This is an honest question. To me, missing production cycles as protoss or terran always meant hurting your macro.
|
On March 02 2011 03:25 Aerakin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 03:21 PrinceXizor wrote:On March 02 2011 03:16 Aerakin wrote:On March 02 2011 03:14 PrinceXizor wrote:
saying protoss should always have warp gats on cooldown is like saying that zerg should never have any larva pooled. the best know when and where to pool warp cooldown and larva. I can't think of a scenario where zerg doesn't want to spend his larva unless it's in a max army scenario or if they're waiting to build ultralisks. And that is why you fail. You have to pool larva at certain points to avoid losing to all ins if you scout the potential for it. in addition to waiting for tech buildings to finish to mass that new unit. Similarly protoss can pool warp gate cooldown to defend vs harrass when you know your army is out of position, you wait to commit your warp gates to your army instead of to defendng until you are sure a hellion drop or banshee, or muta group, ect aren't incoming I can see how that works as zerg. But wouldn't doing that as protoss really hurt your macro? This is an honest question. To me, missing production cycles as protoss or terran always meant hurting your macro.
well typically, but as you play more, you get experienced that at certain times (i think it's 7:20 for cloaked banshees) you might need to defend with warp gate if you plan on containing the opponent with your army or having your army out of your base for any reason. and plannign ahead for those timings can be the difference between losing 2-3 probes to a banshee or 10-12 while your army is running back or the cooldown is incoming.
it's not great to always have pooled cooldown, but it can be smarter depending on circumstance to have a few gates ready to go in case of emergency defense.
thats all, it's not 100% efficient, but it's definitely safer in certain situations to pool your warp gates instead of spending them all constantly.
those times pop up consistantly in play over a large number of games and usually should only be worried about in high level play.
|
On March 02 2011 03:25 Aerakin wrote:
I can see how that works as zerg. But wouldn't doing that as protoss really hurt your macro? This is an honest question. To me, missing production cycles as protoss or terran always meant hurting your macro.
keeping up on your macro going into the battle is super important, when in the battle you need to macro as well but with good scouting and a large ammount of gateways it is unreasonable to say that the warpgates will always be on cd (and if they are it's not 40 seconds or 28 seconds, it will be more like 5 seconds). Theoretically with perfect play you might have grounds for your argument but in game you point of view has multiple flaws.
|
On March 02 2011 03:11 Aerakin wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 02:59 TimeSpiral wrote:
I'm actually a little surprised that so far no one has understood the difference between a Warpgate CD and ordering a unit from the Barracks. Ha. As it appears to be, I understand Warpgates better than you. And I'm saying that you can't constantly instantly warp-in units. You guys some to be talking about a situation where your warp gates aren't on cool down, which only happen at 200/200. You have anywhere from 45 to 0s (not counting the 5s warp-in) to wait until you get an unit from a warp gate. I only wish that people stopped disregarding cooldowns like you do. You don't always end up in a situation where you have a warp gate that isn't in cooldown. Hell, maybe you just warped-in a whole bunch of units and you have to wait the whole cooldown to get your precious HT. If you have the luxury of having a warp gate not producing units just so you can get an HT "instantly", you're doing something wrong. And I'm sorry, but archons are bad. Kitted around by terran tier 1, and EMP happens to be super effective against them (not to mention the additional morphing time) EDIT: I suppose archons aren't too bad against zerg, though Show nested quote +
Warpgates are essentially a "Credit Card w/ free same day shipping", while the Barracks is a "Pay now w/ 3-day shipping standard" plan. I'm not even going to patronize you by explaining the difference. But please don't suggest that I don't understand when you are clearly missing the point being made.
Except that the store is only open 30 minutes a day and that you can't order at any other time.
Okay, just to be as precise as possible, I guess I will have to describe it:
Warpgate Mechanic
- Front-loaded system, on Cooldown.
- You can order any unit you currently have unlocked via tech.
- You can order any combination of available units maxed at the number of Gateways built.
- Warping in units requires a psi-field.
- You wait a maximum of 5 seconds after you order the unit to warp in.
- Every single unit, times the number of Warpgates for each unit, then builds in the background after you order the units of your choice. THIS is the essence of a front loaded system.
- An on-screen alert icon notifies you when your Warpgate CD is ready (lol)
- A built-in hot key automatically selects all Warpgates (lol)
So, every single time you order a warp-in you get to select whatever combination you want and you have it in 5 seconds. This happens every single time, not just when you're maxed.
I don't think I need to describe the difference in a back-loaded system to you. But I will if I must.
|
On March 02 2011 02:11 Shiladie wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 01:16 holynorth wrote:
Just wanted to point out that both Zerg and Terran work off the tier system.
Barracks - Tier 1
Factory - Tier 2
Starport - Tier 3
Every additional building needed is +.5. So a ghost would be 1.5, thors would be 2.5, etc.
Of course, The tier system in SC2 does not actual strength of the unit. This is a very flawed way of looking at it. Buildings required, not including supply depot/pylon/cc/hatch/nexus: 1: ling/marine/zealot/queen 1.5: marauder/reaper 2: helion/roach/baneling/overseer/stalker/sentry 2.5: tank 3: Hydra/infester/muta/corruptor/medivac/viking/phoenix/voidray/immortal 3.5: Thor/raven/banshee 4: Colossus/carrier/high templar/dark templar/mothership 4.5: Battlecruiser 5: Broodlord/ultralisk Keeping in mind all of the .5s after the 1.5 take 0 time to get if you're fast-teching due to addon-swapping. This is also an extremely flawed way of looking at it, non-zerg units really can't be divided into tiers the same way zerg units can be, also the races are different enough that the tiers are all fairly irrelevant anyways. Now, aside from that, I think the warning when spawn larva finishes will be an extremely helpful tool for zergs of all levels, but that's the only real 'buff' that zerg can claim to have from this. Fungal growth change will be interesting to see how it turns out, I can see both positives and negatives from this. it will make mutas slightly more viable in zvz over mass roach, though I don't know if it will be enough to see a change in the metagame. Mass marine balls I'll need to reserve judgement on, as they will take the damage faster, but be held in place for the zerg army to swarm in around them for less time. vs protoss, again I'll have to reserve judgement on whether it will be worth it to throw a few FGs in amongst the stalker ball, both to prevent blinking away, and to do the increased armour damage.
You tell me that it is flawed but you don't say why it is flawed. I believe it is the correct way to determine unit tiers in terran as it is the traditional way of determining tiers in any strategy game. The thing to learn from is that in Starcraft 2, tiers do NOT determine unit strength.
|
And I understand that.
I just want to make a distinction between "this is always true" and "it is true in some circumstances".
I was gonna say something about how warp gates are dependant on your previous choices (compared to terrans where you can cancel and chose something else), but at that point I think we'd just mutually misunderstand each other =(
|
I honestly don't understand what they are getting at with nerfing templar, it seems like everyone was expecting the colossus and no one was even complaining about the templar. Not to mention that the colossus only makes the templar more powerful and will only push people further into colossus dedicated play.
That and I'm surprised the marine was left untouched and they nerfed stim timing as well, it's getting old to watch pro zerg games where zerg has a big league and then loses to the game of "can you kill all the marines?" which having only one melee/suicide unit that can take them on.
I'm sorry to rant a little, but outside of banelings and infestors, there is fuck all zerg can do against the the game ending tier one unit. Only they both take much longer to build so if you do not deal a decisive blow to the marine army and get stuck in a tempo game, you will lose.
|
Sorry if it's already been mentioned, but why not replace the amulet upgrade with a somewhat inexpensive upgrade for movement speed? Even as a T I agree that without amulet HTs need either a straight movement speed buff or an upgrade to prevent P from getting stale on colossi.
|
Why would they need a movement speed buff when they can still warp in? People are acting like they are forced to walk across the map simply because they don't have the amulet.
I think it would be better to reduce the nerf and not make amulet give as much starting energy or remove the nerf entirely.
|
Warping them in as a reinforcement does nothing if they have to wait to storm. I'd imagine P will keep them close to home to protect them until they're ready to storm and then move the army out when they have close to the required energy.
What good is warp-in in a forward position if they don't have storm? May as well flush the 150 gas down the drain.
I'd also be cool with reducing the nerf so as not to give as much starting energy. Pretty much anything other than 5-second anywhere storm.
|
On March 02 2011 03:45 Treemonkeys wrote:
Why would they need a movement speed buff when they can still warp in? People are acting like they are forced to walk across the map simply because they don't have the amulet.
I think it would be better to reduce the nerf and not make amulet give as much starting energy or remove the nerf entirely.
Why would you warp it in close to a battle if it cant do anything? You are only gonna put it at risk of getting sniped.
|
On February 26 2011 09:56 tsuxiit wrote:
- Revivable abilities now show revivable units all the time. If they cannot currently be revived, the buttons are shown disabled.
- The revive ability now works with multiple dead units.
- Revived units now properly dispatch a trigger event when killed again.
[/QUOTE]
What exactly is this part referring to?
|
On March 02 2011 03:48 tenklavir wrote:
Warping them in as a reinforcement does nothing if they have to wait to storm. I'd imagine P will keep them close to home to protect them until they're ready to storm and then move the army out when they have close to the required energy.
What good is warp-in in a forward position if they don't have storm? May as well flush the 150 gas down the drain.
I'd also be cool with reducing the nerf so as not to give as much starting energy. Pretty much anything other than 5-second anywhere storm.
Yeah just like an increased run speed does nothing if they have to wait for storm, it only makes storm easier to cast when they are in a battle because they can more in range quickly.
With or without amulet though warp in is still good and it does negate the need for run speed.
|
On March 02 2011 03:49 dark fury wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 03:45 Treemonkeys wrote:
Why would they need a movement speed buff when they can still warp in? People are acting like they are forced to walk across the map simply because they don't have the amulet.
I think it would be better to reduce the nerf and not make amulet give as much starting energy or remove the nerf entirely. Why would you warp it in close to a battle if it cant do anything? You are only gonna put it at risk of getting sniped.
You can warp in close to your army this doesn't necessarily mean next to a battle. Obviously it is safer to warp in with your army than risk running templars across the map.
Or do protoss normally only use warp in if they are going to use the unit instantly? No, it's just a better way to be able to build units.
|
On March 02 2011 02:09 Lythox wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 01:50 dafnay wrote:On March 02 2011 01:44 TimeSpiral wrote:
Continuing the Discussion
====================
PROTOSS BALANCE
The removal of the Amulet & the Protoss late-game
(a) I'm not surprised that this thread is flooded with over-dramatic Protoss reactions to this ostensibly hefty nerf. But I am surprised at the lack of Protoss representation stating the obvious - "We already have the strongest late game army by a very long shot. Maybe this will help the other races contend in late game scenarios."
(b) Protoss players have become very "instant gratification" oriented. When they want something they can have it, anywhere they want (Warpgates). If they want something faster, they can have it twice as fast (C-boost). Now they cannot instantly proxy infinity storms anywhere on the map at any time during a match and they think the unit is now useless? Ha.
Ghosts take 40 seconds to train then have to walk into battle. Even with the Mobius Reactor it is impossible to get an EMP in less than 40 seconds.
I cannot stress that point enough. Even with the mobius reactor, if you're not fighting in your main you have to wait 40 seconds for the unit to build then another 30 seconds for the unit to walk across the map. Zerg is in the same boat with the Infestor. The Raven is even worse in this regard.
The Amulet was removed because of Warpgate and Chronoboost. The Warpgate is front-loaded. Want an HT? Just warp it in. Now you want a Storm? Wait 40 seconds like everyone else. You already get the benefit of c-boost, front-loaded warpgates AND proxy ... You do not need the Amulet.
Conclusion
==========
Even with the respective upgrades both Terran and Zerg have to wait a bare minimum of 40 seconds to cast EMP or Fungal after ordering the respective caster unit. Protoss could literally order an HT (or several) anywhere on the map and Storm almost instantly (~3 seconds). It was wildly imba and that's why they removed it.
Even with the respective upgrades, both Zerg and Terran have to wait significantly longer than Protoss to cast Nueral Parasite or Hunter Seeker Missile. So, can we please end this farce that removing the Amulet is unfair or somehow gimps Protoss in any way? That text of crap only deserves a "cool story bro" Btw youknow there is a cd on warpgate too , but you were too busy to qq that you didnt realise that You're a dumbass and a bad player if you don't see how proxy warping in with a cooldown after the unit is made or getting a unit from said producing building with a waiting for a "cooldown" (build time) first is different.
that was epic , thx i lol'd all the night  )
|
On March 02 2011 04:14 dafnay wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 02:09 Lythox wrote:On March 02 2011 01:50 dafnay wrote:On March 02 2011 01:44 TimeSpiral wrote:
Continuing the Discussion
====================
PROTOSS BALANCE
The removal of the Amulet & the Protoss late-game
(a) I'm not surprised that this thread is flooded with over-dramatic Protoss reactions to this ostensibly hefty nerf. But I am surprised at the lack of Protoss representation stating the obvious - "We already have the strongest late game army by a very long shot. Maybe this will help the other races contend in late game scenarios."
(b) Protoss players have become very "instant gratification" oriented. When they want something they can have it, anywhere they want (Warpgates). If they want something faster, they can have it twice as fast (C-boost). Now they cannot instantly proxy infinity storms anywhere on the map at any time during a match and they think the unit is now useless? Ha.
Ghosts take 40 seconds to train then have to walk into battle. Even with the Mobius Reactor it is impossible to get an EMP in less than 40 seconds.
I cannot stress that point enough. Even with the mobius reactor, if you're not fighting in your main you have to wait 40 seconds for the unit to build then another 30 seconds for the unit to walk across the map. Zerg is in the same boat with the Infestor. The Raven is even worse in this regard.
The Amulet was removed because of Warpgate and Chronoboost. The Warpgate is front-loaded. Want an HT? Just warp it in. Now you want a Storm? Wait 40 seconds like everyone else. You already get the benefit of c-boost, front-loaded warpgates AND proxy ... You do not need the Amulet.
Conclusion
==========
Even with the respective upgrades both Terran and Zerg have to wait a bare minimum of 40 seconds to cast EMP or Fungal after ordering the respective caster unit. Protoss could literally order an HT (or several) anywhere on the map and Storm almost instantly (~3 seconds). It was wildly imba and that's why they removed it.
Even with the respective upgrades, both Zerg and Terran have to wait significantly longer than Protoss to cast Nueral Parasite or Hunter Seeker Missile. So, can we please end this farce that removing the Amulet is unfair or somehow gimps Protoss in any way? That text of crap only deserves a "cool story bro" Btw youknow there is a cd on warpgate too , but you were too busy to qq that you didnt realise that You're a dumbass and a bad player if you don't see how proxy warping in with a cooldown after the unit is made or getting a unit from said producing building with a waiting for a "cooldown" (build time) first is different. that was epic , thx i lol'd all the night )
Ha! I cannot tell if I should be thanking you or virtually slapping you in the face, lol.
It's been an epic struggle after that post for sure though ;P
|
On March 02 2011 03:00 PrinceXizor wrote:
[Storm warp in: 25+65+50+50+50+80+5 assuming no money issues.
total cost: 1075/700 for 1 templar.
which is 320, or 5 minutes 25 seconds of solid building/research time, excluding anything you can do simultaenously.
time to get 1 templar with only starting workers: 320 seconds or 5 minutes, 20 seconds.
In other words you can actually get storm warped in 5 minutes 25 seconds every game, which i find hillarious actually now that i think about it.
i don't know what you calculated there but the reseach times are wrong:
25 (pylon) +65 (gatway)+50 (core)+50(twilight)+50(templar arc) thats the tech for HT
+ Storm research 110
+ Amulet research 110
that makes alot more than your calculation 
|
On March 02 2011 04:23 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On March 02 2011 03:00 PrinceXizor wrote:
[Storm warp in: 25+65+50+50+50+80+5 assuming no money issues.
total cost: 1075/700 for 1 templar.
which is 320, or 5 minutes 25 seconds of solid building/research time, excluding anything you can do simultaenously.
time to get 1 templar with only starting workers: 320 seconds or 5 minutes, 20 seconds.
In other words you can actually get storm warped in 5 minutes 25 seconds every game, which i find hillarious actually now that i think about it. i don't know what you calculated there but the reseach times are wrong: 25 (pylon) +65 (gatway)+50 (core)+50(twilight)+50(templar arc) thats the tech for HT + Storm research + Amulet research that makes alot more than your calculation
i had 80 for storm and amulet due to double archives. and chronoboost, which if "rushing" for warp in templar that is exactly what you would do. though if you want to at 80 seconds for more amulet separately it'd be 400 seconds instead of 320. which is still multiple minutes behind zerg.
|
what a great change.. this will stop the mass turtling storm cannon tactic rampant in high lvl masters..
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
