|
On March 05 2011 20:19 Apolo wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. Yes, if Protoss could make units from Nexus it would also be as broken. Does that make larva OP? No. If Terran could warp in siege tanks, it would also be as broken. Does that make warp in or siege tanks broken? No. What kind of ridiculous comparison is that? Each race works differently, you can't just say a unit or mechanic would be OP in another race, and use it as proof that it's OP in the race where it's from.
HTs and banelings have a similar role. Protoss have been lamenting to no end that their HTs are "Useless" for 30 seconds after being warped in - yet other races contend with much longer build times for reinforcing their armies, after losing them. I'm not sure how you can make the argument that Protoss are uniquely eligible for immediate reinforcement of an excellent AoE spellcaster, at any base on the map.
|
On March 05 2011 20:24 abominable wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 18:54 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. If that were a 150/150 upgrade at the top of the zerg tech tree, I think that would be an awesome addition. I'd rather they do that than remove the amulet. you're just being silly. having to deal with wave after wave of HT's perma-storm is rubbish. the correct response is to remove it on the PTR and then we can see whether protoss needs buffing in other areas to compensate.
I'm quite serious. Zerg has the so-called "300 food army"; protoss has warp-in storms. Or had, I should say. "Wave after wave" is a word that most people associate more with zerg than with terran or protoss.
Also keep in mind that templar are one of the slowest units in the game. You can't exactly bring your templar from one base to another when it's under siege the way you can run infestors around on the creep.
|
On March 05 2011 18:24 dump wrote:
I liked it when the game was a little less balanced and a lot more open-ended. They just reduce reduce reduce.
Once in a while you get a change that opens new play styles -- phoenix build time buff, massive units killing force fields etc. -- but the rest of the changes really just get rid of things that they can't figure out -- flux vanes, time warp, reaper harass, frenzy, medivac speed...
Sure some of this stuff was agreeably abusive and reduced the number of things that the opponent could do, but if they'd buff the counter more often than they remove the culprit, it'd ensure that the game is a lot more diverse.
I agree, I don't like this nerf/remove philosophy, it's very short sighted. It might balance things but it also makes the game more homogenous and less fun to play and watch. If they think something's imbalanced I'd rather they made something in the weaker race stronger (in this case zerg or terran top tier units)
|
On March 05 2011 20:32 dump wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 20:24 abominable wrote:On March 05 2011 18:54 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. If that were a 150/150 upgrade at the top of the zerg tech tree, I think that would be an awesome addition. I'd rather they do that than remove the amulet. you're just being silly. having to deal with wave after wave of HT's perma-storm is rubbish. the correct response is to remove it on the PTR and then we can see whether protoss needs buffing in other areas to compensate. I'm quite serious. Zerg has the so-called "300 food army"; protoss has warp-in storms. Or had, I should say. "Wave after wave" is a word that most people associate more with zerg than with terran or protoss. Also keep in mind that templar are one of the slowest units in the game. You can't exactly bring your templar from one base to another when it's under siege the way you can run infestors around on the creep.
That 300 food army is the only way that Zerg can win end-game engagements. Protoss deathballs are more then capable of winning 200/200 fights on their own. Getting greeted by storms as you try to push an expansion after killing the deathball is too much.
By the time an infester hatches, and makes its way to the relevant base, a high templar would typically regen enough energy to storm.
|
Is the PTR working? It says "Invalid version" for me.
|
Same here, "You are trying to login using a client version not recognized by the battle.net service." and I was trying to get back to shape after a month and a half of not playing 
|
On the US forum it says that the PTR is down due to more fixes and such, and that they thank everyone for having tested it for now... And that it will come up at a later time again.
|
On March 05 2011 21:08 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 20:32 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 20:24 abominable wrote:On March 05 2011 18:54 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. If that were a 150/150 upgrade at the top of the zerg tech tree, I think that would be an awesome addition. I'd rather they do that than remove the amulet. you're just being silly. having to deal with wave after wave of HT's perma-storm is rubbish. the correct response is to remove it on the PTR and then we can see whether protoss needs buffing in other areas to compensate. I'm quite serious. Zerg has the so-called "300 food army"; protoss has warp-in storms. Or had, I should say. "Wave after wave" is a word that most people associate more with zerg than with terran or protoss. Also keep in mind that templar are one of the slowest units in the game. You can't exactly bring your templar from one base to another when it's under siege the way you can run infestors around on the creep. That 300 food army is the only way that Zerg can win end-game engagements. Protoss deathballs are more then capable of winning 200/200 fights on their own. Getting greeted by storms as you try to push an expansion after killing the deathball is too much. By the time an infester hatches, and makes its way to the relevant base, a high templar would typically regen enough energy to storm.
it takes 44 sec for the storm to be ready without amulet. Thats more than enough time for a zerg unit to cross maps in the map pool.
If you kill a deathball and only have a few units remaining, you just don't push an expansion. U need to have a significant force left to finish off the opponent because 1 warpin cycle of like 11 warpgates will clean you up.
|
I do not play terran, thus my macro sucks with them, but has any good terran ever tried a BC rush in PTR?
Back a while ago in GSL I think, a terran BC rushed IdrA, but IdrA was able to run around kiting it with a queen. BC is now fast enough to kill queens on creep if the queen stops to attack... so maybe this rush is viable again?
|
If HT are so slow... USE WARP PRISMS TO MOVE THEM AROUND.
Reavers were slow as sin yet BW players got around that for the past 15 years.
Does no one have any creativity anymore?
|
On March 05 2011 21:08 Nightfall.589 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 20:32 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 20:24 abominable wrote:On March 05 2011 18:54 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. If that were a 150/150 upgrade at the top of the zerg tech tree, I think that would be an awesome addition. I'd rather they do that than remove the amulet. you're just being silly. having to deal with wave after wave of HT's perma-storm is rubbish. the correct response is to remove it on the PTR and then we can see whether protoss needs buffing in other areas to compensate. I'm quite serious. Zerg has the so-called "300 food army"; protoss has warp-in storms. Or had, I should say. "Wave after wave" is a word that most people associate more with zerg than with terran or protoss. Also keep in mind that templar are one of the slowest units in the game. You can't exactly bring your templar from one base to another when it's under siege the way you can run infestors around on the creep. That 300 food army is the only way that Zerg can win end-game engagements. Protoss deathballs are more then capable of winning 200/200 fights on their own. Getting greeted by storms as you try to push an expansion after killing the deathball is too much. By the time an infester hatches, and makes its way to the relevant base, a high templar would typically regen enough energy to storm.
If all armies were intended to be equal in efficiency, the game would be hella boring. The recovery difference is part of the diversity.
On March 06 2011 04:03 Stiver wrote:
If HT are so slow... USE WARP PRISMS TO MOVE THEM AROUND.
Reavers were slow as sin yet BW players got around that for the past 15 years.
Does no one have any creativity anymore?
Reavers weren't exactly the best way to defend bases from drops in brood war. You certainly didn't shuttle them around to defend bases as far as I can remember.
|
On March 05 2011 20:26 Whitewing wrote:
Can you attack the banelings in the 5 seconds they are morphing in, and they start out at 1 hp and slowly max it out over the course of 5 seconds (with their armor, no eggs)? Does doing so require a 150/150 resource research from hive tech at the baneling nest?
If the answer to both these questions is yes, I would have literally no problem with that change, although I don't think it'll help balance the game.
If they can also deal their damage from long range once they're done building.
Oh, and not die after they do.
|
On March 06 2011 04:20 dump wrote:Show nested quote +On March 05 2011 21:08 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 20:32 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 20:24 abominable wrote:On March 05 2011 18:54 dump wrote:On March 05 2011 18:44 Nightfall.589 wrote:On March 05 2011 13:53 Karthane wrote:On March 05 2011 13:04 Nemireck wrote:On March 05 2011 03:35 Kyuki wrote:
Way too much ranting going on imho. Both when it comes to amulet and fungal. People will adapt, and soon enough we'll look back and say stuff like "wasnt that silly!" like we do today when we talk about the roach for example. Honestly. I mean, you don't see Terrans crying about their mega-nerf to one of their favourite builds. Do you even REALIZE how long an extra 5 seconds on a bunker really is!? Stop the QQ Z and P. Be like Terran. It negates one of the dozen or so openings T can utilize. The amulet nerf negates an entire late-game tech tree. The removal of amulet makes HT far from unusable. They are still fantastic additions to your army. You just can no longer storm 5 seconds after starting a warp-in. Hell, if Zerg could spawn banelings immediately out of a hatchery, in the span of 5 seconds, that would be about as broken as the current state of amulet. If that were a 150/150 upgrade at the top of the zerg tech tree, I think that would be an awesome addition. I'd rather they do that than remove the amulet. you're just being silly. having to deal with wave after wave of HT's perma-storm is rubbish. the correct response is to remove it on the PTR and then we can see whether protoss needs buffing in other areas to compensate. I'm quite serious. Zerg has the so-called "300 food army"; protoss has warp-in storms. Or had, I should say. "Wave after wave" is a word that most people associate more with zerg than with terran or protoss. Also keep in mind that templar are one of the slowest units in the game. You can't exactly bring your templar from one base to another when it's under siege the way you can run infestors around on the creep. That 300 food army is the only way that Zerg can win end-game engagements. Protoss deathballs are more then capable of winning 200/200 fights on their own. Getting greeted by storms as you try to push an expansion after killing the deathball is too much. By the time an infester hatches, and makes its way to the relevant base, a high templar would typically regen enough energy to storm. If all armies were intended to be equal in efficiency, the game would be hella boring. The recovery difference is part of the diversity. Show nested quote +On March 06 2011 04:03 Stiver wrote:
If HT are so slow... USE WARP PRISMS TO MOVE THEM AROUND.
Reavers were slow as sin yet BW players got around that for the past 15 years.
Does no one have any creativity anymore? Reavers weren't exactly the best way to defend bases from drops in brood war.
And neither are high templar. The best defense is being proactive with good scouting on the map. This hasn't changed one bit since BW, but for some reason, protoss players are crying one of the best support/defense units in the game is becoming more manageable for the other races.
|
The difference was that in BW, it was possible to defend drops with small amounts of zealot/dragoon. Currently, you need way more than the drops cost in stalker/zealot to hold off marine/marauder.
High Templar is simply a way to kill a drop when our army must be somewhere else.
|
Personally, my number 1 complaint is that if this HT change goes through, I'll just be using colossi exclusively from now on. It will be boring, but at least it will work.
|
On March 06 2011 04:37 Aequos wrote:
The difference was that in BW, it was possible to defend drops with small amounts of zealot/dragoon. Currently, you need way more than the drops cost in stalker/zealot to hold off marine/marauder.
High Templar is simply a way to kill a drop when our army must be somewhere else.
this is exactly the case. Protoss core units are much crappier then their broodwar counterparts thus we NEED these seeming overpowered units to make up for the super low dps core units. Defending any drop will be pretty impossible if this patch goes thru unless our army is sitting there waiting for it
|
3-5 storms are needed to kill marauders or roaches. And the only way to have those storms is the amulet. I dont see how it can be overpowered.
If the gateway units are buffed to be on pair with MM/Roach-Hydra, then yes, please nerf the shit out of toss T3. But since toss have the crappiest T1&2 units, I can only say "WTF Blizz!?"
|
On March 06 2011 04:37 Aequos wrote:
The difference was that in BW, it was possible to defend drops with small amounts of zealot/dragoon. Currently, you need way more than the drops cost in stalker/zealot to hold off marine/marauder.
High Templar is simply a way to kill a drop when our army must be somewhere else.
Actually in virtually all high level PvZs I saw in BW days Protoss players deposited one or two HTs at each of their expansions as the games went on as a safety valve to crush the zergling waves. Zealots and dragoons didn't do too well compared to HT at expo defending. I don't understand why leaving one or two behind isn't viable in PvT these days (in PvZ, storm just doesn't cut the mustard as well as it did in BW, so I understand that).
|
On March 06 2011 05:40 IVN wrote:
3-5 storms are needed to kill marauders or roaches. And the only way to have those storms is the amulet. I dont see how it can be overpowered.
If the gateway units are buffed to be on pair with MM/Roach-Hydra, then yes, please nerf the shit out of toss T3. But since toss have the crappiest T1&2 units, I can only say "WTF Blizz!?"
I asure you if P had the crappiest T1&2 units, the 4 gate builds would not have gotten so popular, neither would mass blink stalkers, or the 2 base 5 gate all in.
|
HTs can handle drops still with 50 energy, feedback + zealot stalker means zealot stalker can wreck drops because no healing is happening. also the medivac could just die sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
