|
Chill: I will now be moderating this thread heavily. Some of the ways people are talking down to each other in here are completely unacceptable. |
On March 12 2011 08:32 Xecutor wrote:
Hide nested quote -
So honestly with the change on EMP to only remove 100 energy might actually make it very ballanced.
That nerf changes nothing to the EMP spell behavior on casters since the timing of EMP is a full 160 seconds (including Ghost and Moebius Reactor build time) before the timing of getting Templar tech which in itself takes 320 seconds+ 5 second warp-in for HT (including Twilight Council, Templar Archives, Storm and KA) on the current patch.
And since when did you see a High Templar having more than 100 energy in SC2? the most they will have is 80-90 when KA is not upgraded, before a battle happens, and 1 EMP shuts that down making the HT useless.
I like how you said 1 emp shuts that down. You must be one of those guys that clump all their ht in one grouping... Really biased opinions on here. I'm sorry if it appears biased, but you are mistaken.
What I meant was:
Any number of EMP cast from within an army of bio will drain shields and energy from any Templar targeted, as well as all the shields from surrounding units. Draining 100 energy or all energy still makes no difference to the removal of KA. Any HT lucky enough to reach 75 energy will be immediately downed to 0 energy in a fraction of a game second. And, that is with spreading the HT as well as making them bring up the rear.
How is that balanced?
So, Protoss tech to Twilight Council > Templar Archives > Psi Storm for 210 seconds then waits 5 seconds per HT and an additional 44.4 seconds per HT to charge up to 75 energy, then gets no chance to cast ANY psi-storm because Ghosts have been out with +25 energy upgrade from the Moebius reactor and a free EMP cast since 160 seconds, which is about a minute BEFORE a High Templar can cast a single storm. Plus, during that 50 seconds, Terran can research Ghost Cloak, and Protoss has to deal with EMP from cloaked Ghosts at about the time they have enough energy for 1 Psi-Storm cast, while Ghosts have 75+ energy in store for 1-2 EMPs, plus cloak energy.
And, how am I biased?
|
|
|
Don't forget the standard to make your ghost with Moebius reactor at ~30/80 so that your ghosts pop out just after the reactor completes!!
(i think that's the upgrade time? That's what it is for infestors, sorry I don't pay as close attention to terran.)
Also don't forget that moebius reactor is 100/100 and ghosts don't need EMP to be researched at all, and that Ghosts are the lowest tiered of the high-end casters...
I really just don't like how this is going to shoehorn all the Protoss back into 4 months ago with Colossi being the only viable top-tiered tech. (Crashburn's annoying pic is kinda right -.-
+20 energy Khaydarin amulet maybe? +15? Sure. I like those ideas. 0? No. Even in BW they popped out with 62 energy after you got the max energy upgrade. They also felt much easier to protect (not entirely sure why. Vultures were a pain but they seem easier to keep away from your shit than marauders.)
|
I think the bigger issue with this change isn't the fact that HT's are weaker, but now T and Z will be able to more safely prepare with less scouting knowledge... essentially making collosi less powerfull as the opponent can cut more corners to prepare specifically for them.
I think we can all agree that regardless of whether or not this change is good or bad, we're going to see more Collosi. I'm not saying EVERYONE will go Collosi, but in general it's what we're going to see. And if I was a T or Z player that would be the real reason I am happy about this, not the fact that HT's got nerfed specifically.
Alas, we'll see.
|
On March 12 2011 15:11 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 14:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:45 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:02 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 12:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. KA isn't a MASSIVE problem when there are only HT, it's when you go Colossus first then get HT; at least, that's the opinion I have. I think it needs a nerf no matter what, but the San game didn't exactly highlight the issue that most people have problems with. Why because Terran make too many vikings when they see col and cbf to land them to attack or harass with them after transition? Terran should have ghost out long before HT have KA so I'm really failing to see your reasoning. Using 50 energy is hard guys nerf protoss instead. Jesus, really? For fucks sake, really? What's with the responses in this thread? "Oh it's because T played 2 bad lawls." Stop mentioning irrelevant shit. No, it has nothign to do with "overproducing vikings." Guess what, if you overproduce vikings, they won't have colossus then the Colossus/HT combo ISN'T A PROBLEM. No it's called learning timings which your argument clearly lacks, again. It's easier to just say fuck it and nerf I guess, right? Timings? What the hell are you talking about timings? Please, enlighten me on what the fuck timings you're talking about, when I never referenced a friggin' timing. The timing between the col and the first ht so you know what build is coming so you make something besides mmm so you don't get rolled anymore. Or is the entire point here that regardless of what happens it should be viable to keep the same army comp and it be a reasonable expectation to 1a move into every storm to victory like our hero sc was trying to do?
Nice and dandy you're talking about some timing that I didn't even have a problem with as Terran, but that's not even what I was talking about. Thanks for coming in and being a complete dick to someone who wasn't talking to you, btw.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On March 12 2011 15:14 Crashburn wrote:![[image loading]](http://img854.imageshack.us/img854/3/htbug.jpg)
roflmao. One of the better things coming out of this thread, awesomely hilarious yet... it holds some truth.
|
On March 12 2011 15:36 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 15:11 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 14:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:45 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:02 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 12:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. KA isn't a MASSIVE problem when there are only HT, it's when you go Colossus first then get HT; at least, that's the opinion I have. I think it needs a nerf no matter what, but the San game didn't exactly highlight the issue that most people have problems with. Why because Terran make too many vikings when they see col and cbf to land them to attack or harass with them after transition? Terran should have ghost out long before HT have KA so I'm really failing to see your reasoning. Using 50 energy is hard guys nerf protoss instead. Jesus, really? For fucks sake, really? What's with the responses in this thread? "Oh it's because T played 2 bad lawls." Stop mentioning irrelevant shit. No, it has nothign to do with "overproducing vikings." Guess what, if you overproduce vikings, they won't have colossus then the Colossus/HT combo ISN'T A PROBLEM. No it's called learning timings which your argument clearly lacks, again. It's easier to just say fuck it and nerf I guess, right? Timings? What the hell are you talking about timings? Please, enlighten me on what the fuck timings you're talking about, when I never referenced a friggin' timing. The timing between the col and the first ht so you know what build is coming so you make something besides mmm so you don't get rolled anymore. Or is the entire point here that regardless of what happens it should be viable to keep the same army comp and it be a reasonable expectation to 1a move into every storm to victory like our hero sc was trying to do? Nice and dandy you're talking about some timing that I didn't even have a problem with as Terran, but that's not even what I was talking about. Thanks for coming in and being a complete dick to someone who wasn't talking to you, btw.
Sure it isn't. 
If you knew the protoss was making HT and still producing col then why'd you lose then?
|
On March 12 2011 15:43 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 15:36 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 15:11 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 14:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:45 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:02 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 12:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. KA isn't a MASSIVE problem when there are only HT, it's when you go Colossus first then get HT; at least, that's the opinion I have. I think it needs a nerf no matter what, but the San game didn't exactly highlight the issue that most people have problems with. Why because Terran make too many vikings when they see col and cbf to land them to attack or harass with them after transition? Terran should have ghost out long before HT have KA so I'm really failing to see your reasoning. Using 50 energy is hard guys nerf protoss instead. Jesus, really? For fucks sake, really? What's with the responses in this thread? "Oh it's because T played 2 bad lawls." Stop mentioning irrelevant shit. No, it has nothign to do with "overproducing vikings." Guess what, if you overproduce vikings, they won't have colossus then the Colossus/HT combo ISN'T A PROBLEM. No it's called learning timings which your argument clearly lacks, again. It's easier to just say fuck it and nerf I guess, right? Timings? What the hell are you talking about timings? Please, enlighten me on what the fuck timings you're talking about, when I never referenced a friggin' timing. The timing between the col and the first ht so you know what build is coming so you make something besides mmm so you don't get rolled anymore. Or is the entire point here that regardless of what happens it should be viable to keep the same army comp and it be a reasonable expectation to 1a move into every storm to victory like our hero sc was trying to do? Nice and dandy you're talking about some timing that I didn't even have a problem with as Terran, but that's not even what I was talking about. Thanks for coming in and being a complete dick to someone who wasn't talking to you, btw. Sure it isn't. If you knew the protoss was making HT and still producing col then why'd you lose then?
Why'd I lose? What are you talking about? Are you just trying to troll this topic?
|
On March 12 2011 16:16 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 15:43 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 15:36 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 15:11 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 14:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:45 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:02 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 12:45 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:
[quote]
You agree that San outplayed SC.
San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'.
From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat.
So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed?
He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. KA isn't a MASSIVE problem when there are only HT, it's when you go Colossus first then get HT; at least, that's the opinion I have. I think it needs a nerf no matter what, but the San game didn't exactly highlight the issue that most people have problems with. Why because Terran make too many vikings when they see col and cbf to land them to attack or harass with them after transition? Terran should have ghost out long before HT have KA so I'm really failing to see your reasoning. Using 50 energy is hard guys nerf protoss instead. Jesus, really? For fucks sake, really? What's with the responses in this thread? "Oh it's because T played 2 bad lawls." Stop mentioning irrelevant shit. No, it has nothign to do with "overproducing vikings." Guess what, if you overproduce vikings, they won't have colossus then the Colossus/HT combo ISN'T A PROBLEM. No it's called learning timings which your argument clearly lacks, again. It's easier to just say fuck it and nerf I guess, right? Timings? What the hell are you talking about timings? Please, enlighten me on what the fuck timings you're talking about, when I never referenced a friggin' timing. The timing between the col and the first ht so you know what build is coming so you make something besides mmm so you don't get rolled anymore. Or is the entire point here that regardless of what happens it should be viable to keep the same army comp and it be a reasonable expectation to 1a move into every storm to victory like our hero sc was trying to do? Nice and dandy you're talking about some timing that I didn't even have a problem with as Terran, but that's not even what I was talking about. Thanks for coming in and being a complete dick to someone who wasn't talking to you, btw. Sure it isn't. If you knew the protoss was making HT and still producing col then why'd you lose then? Why'd I lose? What are you talking about? Are you just trying to troll this topic?
No I'm just trying to trying to determine if you actually have/had a problem against a build with HT that was researching KA or not? You still haven't come up with a decent retort discussing the game yet in the past few hours of back and forth posts. I give up now and will move on since it's obvious you just, for no real reason, want KA removed from the game.
|
On March 12 2011 16:25 Baarn wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 16:16 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 15:43 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 15:36 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 15:11 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 14:56 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:45 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 13:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On March 12 2011 13:02 Baarn wrote:On March 12 2011 12:45 FabledIntegral wrote:
[quote]
KA isn't a MASSIVE problem when there are only HT, it's when you go Colossus first then get HT; at least, that's the opinion I have. I think it needs a nerf no matter what, but the San game didn't exactly highlight the issue that most people have problems with. Why because Terran make too many vikings when they see col and cbf to land them to attack or harass with them after transition? Terran should have ghost out long before HT have KA so I'm really failing to see your reasoning. Using 50 energy is hard guys nerf protoss instead. Jesus, really? For fucks sake, really? What's with the responses in this thread? "Oh it's because T played 2 bad lawls." Stop mentioning irrelevant shit. No, it has nothign to do with "overproducing vikings." Guess what, if you overproduce vikings, they won't have colossus then the Colossus/HT combo ISN'T A PROBLEM. No it's called learning timings which your argument clearly lacks, again. It's easier to just say fuck it and nerf I guess, right? Timings? What the hell are you talking about timings? Please, enlighten me on what the fuck timings you're talking about, when I never referenced a friggin' timing. The timing between the col and the first ht so you know what build is coming so you make something besides mmm so you don't get rolled anymore. Or is the entire point here that regardless of what happens it should be viable to keep the same army comp and it be a reasonable expectation to 1a move into every storm to victory like our hero sc was trying to do? Nice and dandy you're talking about some timing that I didn't even have a problem with as Terran, but that's not even what I was talking about. Thanks for coming in and being a complete dick to someone who wasn't talking to you, btw. Sure it isn't. If you knew the protoss was making HT and still producing col then why'd you lose then? Why'd I lose? What are you talking about? Are you just trying to troll this topic? No I'm just trying to trying to determine if you actually have/had a problem against a build with HT that was researching KA or not? You still haven't come up with a decent retort discussing the game yet in the past few hours of back and forth posts. I give up now and will move on since it's obvious you just, for no real reason, want KA removed from the game.
Show me the post where I've advocated the removal of KA. You're just shitting out responses now.
|
On March 12 2011 13:47 Sek-Kuar wrote:
Warp-in changes one of core mechanics, so Protoss requires 5 sec of planning in situations where T/Z require 1-2 min.
Stim changes attack/move speed. Thats only balance question. And you should not compare balance and mechanics.
so you approve the removal of detection from Terran Scans?
Cause a Terran needs 0 mins of preparation against Cloak.
While both other races have to put ressources&time (2-3 mins) into teching for static defense to open up detection routes.
Terran can just scan,
that takes no preparation and is a nooby mechanic that takes skill away.
A Terran should have the same fear of cloaked/burrowed units as other races do.
By your logic you should agree right?
|
On March 12 2011 15:12 Xecutor wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 08:32 Xecutor wrote:
Hide nested quote -
So honestly with the change on EMP to only remove 100 energy might actually make it very ballanced.
That nerf changes nothing to the EMP spell behavior on casters since the timing of EMP is a full 160 seconds (including Ghost and Moebius Reactor build time) before the timing of getting Templar tech which in itself takes 320 seconds+ 5 second warp-in for HT (including Twilight Council, Templar Archives, Storm and KA) on the current patch.
And since when did you see a High Templar having more than 100 energy in SC2? the most they will have is 80-90 when KA is not upgraded, before a battle happens, and 1 EMP shuts that down making the HT useless.
I like how you said 1 emp shuts that down. You must be one of those guys that clump all their ht in one grouping... Really biased opinions on here. I'm sorry if it appears biased, but you are mistaken. What I meant was: Any number of EMP cast from within an army of bio will drain shields and energy from any Templar targeted, as well as all the shields from surrounding units. Draining 100 energy or all energy still makes no difference to the removal of KA. Any HT lucky enough to reach 75 energy will be immediately downed to 0 energy in a fraction of a game second. And, that is with spreading the HT as well as making them bring up the rear. How is that balanced? So, Protoss tech to Twilight Council > Templar Archives > Psi Storm for 210 seconds then waits 5 seconds per HT and an additional 44.4 seconds per HT to charge up to 75 energy, then gets no chance to cast ANY psi-storm because Ghosts have been out with +25 energy upgrade from the Moebius reactor and a free EMP cast since 160 seconds, which is about a minute BEFORE a High Templar can cast a single storm. Plus, during that 50 seconds, Terran can research Ghost Cloak, and Protoss has to deal with EMP from cloaked Ghosts at about the time they have enough energy for 1 Psi-Storm cast, while Ghosts have 75+ energy in store for 1-2 EMPs, plus cloak energy. And, how am I biased?
Don't be ridiculous, of course Terran should just be able to completely nullify hundreds of gas worth of teching and research with 1 area of effect ability that comes stock standard with the cheaper to yeh to ghost. I mean it's not like toss even needs the AoE against Terran bio, right?
And I can't believe Terran even bring up the whole 'maybe you should feedback ghosts' like it's am attractive option for Toss. 1-EMP has longer range, 2-EMP is AoE and Templar are much slower/easy to spot than ghosts. And 3-terrans seem to forgot toss need their tech 3 AoE against Terran. So what, our Templar now spawn with 50 energy, and we burn through all that feedbacking ghosts, as now what? We have not enough energy for storm which toss NEEDS against Terran to stay on par.
I wish they would compromise and just give +20 energy or something, since collusi are boring as hell and I really don't want to be forced to go them any more than I have to.
|
On March 12 2011 13:47 Sek-Kuar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 13:30 Aequos wrote:On March 12 2011 12:52 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. Lets make new mechanic, that in every game players randomly win each with 50% chance. This is not based on skills or anything, simply 50% that red player wins, 50% that blue player wins. It is perfectly balanced - with 50% win ratio for everyone. Is it worth changing? Should red be nerfed? Should blue be nerfed? Why to change it if it is already balanced? Perhaps because it is wrong mechanic? + Show Spoiler +It is irelevant whether current HT is balanced or not, KA has to go. Thats not even close to a reasonable argument for removing it. I could just as easily say + Show Spoiler +It is irrelevant whether current marine is balanced or not, stim has to go. and people would argue because it has no basis in fact. The point of the game is to essentially make it so that players of equal skill, even if they play different races, have essentially a 50% win ratio. You are arguing that removing every decision from the game is the exact same thing as having KA in the game, which is a bit absurd. Warp-in changes one of core mechanics, so Protoss requires 5 sec of planning in situations where T/Z require 1-2 min. Stim changes attack/move speed. Thats only balance question. And you should not compare balance and mechanics.
I feel obligated to point out that every second your warpgates aren't on cooldown is like seconds you aren't producing out of your factory or rax. You don't get that time back. The benefit of warpgates is really picking warpin location, but people seem under the impression that they are always off cd. If your protoss opponent is playing a style that involves not using his unit producing structures and you are still losing then I'm afraid you have bigger issues than KA
|
On March 13 2011 01:14 Jayrod wrote:Show nested quote +On March 12 2011 13:47 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 13:30 Aequos wrote:On March 12 2011 12:52 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. Lets make new mechanic, that in every game players randomly win each with 50% chance. This is not based on skills or anything, simply 50% that red player wins, 50% that blue player wins. It is perfectly balanced - with 50% win ratio for everyone. Is it worth changing? Should red be nerfed? Should blue be nerfed? Why to change it if it is already balanced? Perhaps because it is wrong mechanic? + Show Spoiler +It is irelevant whether current HT is balanced or not, KA has to go. Thats not even close to a reasonable argument for removing it. I could just as easily say + Show Spoiler +It is irrelevant whether current marine is balanced or not, stim has to go. and people would argue because it has no basis in fact. The point of the game is to essentially make it so that players of equal skill, even if they play different races, have essentially a 50% win ratio. You are arguing that removing every decision from the game is the exact same thing as having KA in the game, which is a bit absurd. Warp-in changes one of core mechanics, so Protoss requires 5 sec of planning in situations where T/Z require 1-2 min. Stim changes attack/move speed. Thats only balance question. And you should not compare balance and mechanics. I feel obligated to point out that every second your warpgates aren't on cooldown is like seconds you aren't producing out of your factory or rax. You don't get that time back. The benefit of warpgates is really picking warpin location, but people seem under the impression that they are always off cd. If your protoss opponent is playing a style that involves not using his unit producing structures and you are still losing then I'm afraid you have bigger issues than KA
Warpgates off cooldown isn't at all like a factory not producing. There are a number of very reasonable game decisions that could lead to having warpgates off cooldown, especially in the late game. There's also chrono boost which can change the dynamic of choosing to build tech/bases/probes vs. building units (and using chrono to catch up on that 'lost' production).
|
On March 13 2011 04:44 Magni wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2011 01:14 Jayrod wrote:On March 12 2011 13:47 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 13:30 Aequos wrote:On March 12 2011 12:52 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. Lets make new mechanic, that in every game players randomly win each with 50% chance. This is not based on skills or anything, simply 50% that red player wins, 50% that blue player wins. It is perfectly balanced - with 50% win ratio for everyone. Is it worth changing? Should red be nerfed? Should blue be nerfed? Why to change it if it is already balanced? Perhaps because it is wrong mechanic? + Show Spoiler +It is irelevant whether current HT is balanced or not, KA has to go. Thats not even close to a reasonable argument for removing it. I could just as easily say + Show Spoiler +It is irrelevant whether current marine is balanced or not, stim has to go. and people would argue because it has no basis in fact. The point of the game is to essentially make it so that players of equal skill, even if they play different races, have essentially a 50% win ratio. You are arguing that removing every decision from the game is the exact same thing as having KA in the game, which is a bit absurd. Warp-in changes one of core mechanics, so Protoss requires 5 sec of planning in situations where T/Z require 1-2 min. Stim changes attack/move speed. Thats only balance question. And you should not compare balance and mechanics. I feel obligated to point out that every second your warpgates aren't on cooldown is like seconds you aren't producing out of your factory or rax. You don't get that time back. The benefit of warpgates is really picking warpin location, but people seem under the impression that they are always off cd. If your protoss opponent is playing a style that involves not using his unit producing structures and you are still losing then I'm afraid you have bigger issues than KA Warpgates off cooldown isn't at all like a factory not producing. There are a number of very reasonable game decisions that could lead to having warpgates off cooldown, especially in the late game. There's also chrono boost which can change the dynamic of choosing to build tech/bases/probes vs. building units (and using chrono to catch up on that 'lost' production).
I don't think you get what he's saying. The benefit of standard production is that you get to cancel your unit and start something else so there's no reason not to be producing constantly. Protoss has a "no take-backs" system so you might have to forgo production efficiency for flexibility. It's a trade-off, you see.
Also, many of the protoss units are balanced with chronoboost in mind. Immortals gained 10 seconds to their build time because of a chronoboost based timing attack, Carriers have equal production time to battlecruisers only if you constantly boost it, engineering bay takes 10 seconds less to build etc. It's just like how marines had their build time nerfed because of reactors.
|
On March 13 2011 05:00 Novembermike wrote:Show nested quote +On March 13 2011 04:44 Magni wrote:On March 13 2011 01:14 Jayrod wrote:On March 12 2011 13:47 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 13:30 Aequos wrote:On March 12 2011 12:52 Sek-Kuar wrote:On March 12 2011 12:43 STenSatsu wrote:On March 12 2011 10:37 HighQuality wrote:
You're putting words in my mouth I never said; you're right that SC was outplayed for most of the games, and I agree that he deserved to lose the series. However, San basically used a strategy that abused sc2 mechanics to the point of absurdity. You say that San NEEDED the base because it allowed him to support the HT, but that's exactly the point i'm arguing. He KNEW that the ONLY things he needed to defend those bases were a couple of cannons and instant storms. Repeat: he constantly warded off armies that were +40 food in size because he had 10 HT in every engagement: 5 at the start, 5 warp ins later. In a more balanced situation, San should never have been able to defend those bases as well as he did. You agree that San outplayed SC. San barely held on in games 3 and 4 (the only games SC attempted to macro) with a huge eco advantage and 'op' KA 'abuse'. From this a terran of equal skill would have beat San easily if he attempted this strat. So if a decent terran could beat this 'absurd abuse' of KA regularly, is KA worthy of being nerfed? He also never would have been able to hold against those 40+ food armies if SC hadn't just a-moved his army and let it sit in full time storms every engagement. Lets make new mechanic, that in every game players randomly win each with 50% chance. This is not based on skills or anything, simply 50% that red player wins, 50% that blue player wins. It is perfectly balanced - with 50% win ratio for everyone. Is it worth changing? Should red be nerfed? Should blue be nerfed? Why to change it if it is already balanced? Perhaps because it is wrong mechanic? + Show Spoiler +It is irelevant whether current HT is balanced or not, KA has to go. Thats not even close to a reasonable argument for removing it. I could just as easily say + Show Spoiler +It is irrelevant whether current marine is balanced or not, stim has to go. and people would argue because it has no basis in fact. The point of the game is to essentially make it so that players of equal skill, even if they play different races, have essentially a 50% win ratio. You are arguing that removing every decision from the game is the exact same thing as having KA in the game, which is a bit absurd. Warp-in changes one of core mechanics, so Protoss requires 5 sec of planning in situations where T/Z require 1-2 min. Stim changes attack/move speed. Thats only balance question. And you should not compare balance and mechanics. I feel obligated to point out that every second your warpgates aren't on cooldown is like seconds you aren't producing out of your factory or rax. You don't get that time back. The benefit of warpgates is really picking warpin location, but people seem under the impression that they are always off cd. If your protoss opponent is playing a style that involves not using his unit producing structures and you are still losing then I'm afraid you have bigger issues than KA Warpgates off cooldown isn't at all like a factory not producing. There are a number of very reasonable game decisions that could lead to having warpgates off cooldown, especially in the late game. There's also chrono boost which can change the dynamic of choosing to build tech/bases/probes vs. building units (and using chrono to catch up on that 'lost' production). I don't think you get what he's saying. The benefit of standard production is that you get to cancel your unit and start something else so there's no reason not to be producing constantly. Protoss has a "no take-backs" system so you might have to forgo production efficiency for flexibility. It's a trade-off, you see. Also, many of the protoss units are balanced with chronoboost in mind. Immortals gained 10 seconds to their build time because of a chronoboost based timing attack, Carriers have equal production time to battlecruisers only if you constantly boost it, engineering bay takes 10 seconds less to build etc. It's just like how marines had their build time nerfed because of reactors.
What? This is not a disadvantage for the protoss by any means. For example, you think "I want a High Templar!" You go to your warpgates, and cooldown still has 50% left. You have to wait for half the cooldown point from when you get your high templar and when you actually get it (plus 5 seconds). With a Ghost, or really any other unit, you think "I want a Ghost!" You go to your rax, see a Marauder 50% done, and either have to wait for the Marauder to finish and then build the Ghost, OR you can cancel the Marauder (making your production highly inefficient), build the Ghost, and wait the FULL buildtime for the ghost to finish, unlike only 50% for the HT.
As you say, cancelling your unit and starting something immediately does not mean that there was not an inefficient situation, it's actually incredibly more efficient than standard production. Cancelling your unit means the entire buildtime of the unit you made was, in short, wasted on absolutely nothing, there's no difference if you simply had left your rax idle. Warpgates bypass this feature.
|
On March 12 2011 17:48 freetgy wrote:
so you approve the removal of detection from Terran Scans?
Cause a Terran needs 0 mins of preparation against Cloak.
They need a preemptive x time to know when to save up their scan for cloak, and not use the available energy on mules.
That's planning...
|
What this topic should be pointing out is that storm is not even comparable to EMP.
Storm
Range 9, Radius 1.5, 80 damage over 4s, 3s cd, long amount of time to start, unit ms 1.875
EMP
Range 10, Radius 2, up to 100 damage instantly, no cd, moderate time to start using, unit ms 2.25, oh lets not forget it reveals cloaked units, works on buildings, and drains energy
Of 10 different ways to compare them the only two things storm is better at is being usable vs other races and speed of use once amulet and warp gate are researched.
|
On March 13 2011 08:35 KillerPenguin wrote:
What this topic should be pointing out is that storm is not even comparable to EMP.
Storm
Range 9, Radius 1.5, 80 damage over 4s, 3s cd, long amount of time to start, unit ms 1.875
EMP
Range 10, Radius 2, up to 100 damage instantly, no cd, moderate time to start using, unit ms 2.25, oh lets not forget it reveals cloaked units, works on buildings, and drains energy
Of 10 different ways to compare them the only two things storm is better at is being usable vs other races and speed of use once amulet and warp gate are researched.
Don't forget that EMP only deals shield damage, and that you can stack storms whereas one EMP is the same as 20 on the same group of units.
|
On March 13 2011 08:35 KillerPenguin wrote:
What this topic should be pointing out is that storm is not even comparable to EMP.
Storm
Range 9, Radius 1.5, 80 damage over 4s, 3s cd, long amount of time to start, unit ms 1.875
EMP
Range 10, Radius 2, up to 100 damage instantly, no cd, moderate time to start using, unit ms 2.25, oh lets not forget it reveals cloaked units, works on buildings, and drains energy
Of 10 different ways to compare them the only two things storm is better at is being usable vs other races and speed of use once amulet and warp gate are researched.
EMP doen'st have a cooldown? :o
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
