Massive units are not affected by concussive shells. If you think they are, you are wrong. It's SPORE crawlers that are being changed, not SPINE. Please read carefully.
This video is help ONLY IF it shows upgrades and such things Otherwise, it is invalid For all I know, it could be toss 3/3 vs terran 0/0
Come on now lets not try the upgrade advantage argument. Surely the guy who made this video is a little smarter than that (maybe not looking at the content). The only thing noteworthy of this argument is that mech gains more benefit from upgrades than toss does.
WTF? Siege tank dps buff? Are you kidding me? Thor speed? Baneling speed nerf?
*facepalm*
i am toss player... i am not terran but simply sige tanks seems not cost efective vs toss...eaven if toss army is not spreed around...
look at this video :
also one more thing i noticed....
i whatched some T v Z and i noticed that zerg almoust made faster and ultralisc then terran replace his sige tanks after sufering defith... simply sige tanks dont do enaph dps...
when you nyudus terran simply ultralisc devestate mecha unites when they are out of positione and sige tanks are so hard to replace...
also i agree that stim pack simply do to much dps when is in game...but this is yust my opinion and we are all hire to shere i hope sry for my ENG...
i would like to add one more thing i noticed : mid game late game PvT simply terran cant (agenst High templars Ts and ball of Colloss ) play only with bio ball protoss destroy them after and i think the solution is to svich to mecha play... and only way is by buffing sige tanks in my opininon..
I really hate to inform you but most of the toss battles it was not the gateway force killing the tanks it was the splash damage from the collosus. Would you say it is fair to say that because terran players build banshees that zealots can't attack back that it makes the zealot useless in the MU? I would hope not. Likewise with the collosus I would you use a similar argument. Instead of looking at the collosus as a ground unit that can be attacked by air. Think of it this way.. the collosus is an air unit that can't go over water and can be hit by ground attacks. Once a toss gets to the money number of collosus (and if you are meching he is going to get the collosus before you have sufficient tanks... collosus are just more mobile thats all there is to it) Even if one or 2 of them evaporate instantly to your tanks during the siege tanks cooldown time the rest of the collosus can obliterate most of your tanks. So if you think of the collosus as an air unit then you will realize that vikings are most since marines will die too fast. Also in the case of mass zealot if the meching terran is intelligent in anyway shape or form blue flame hellions will be harassing acting as meatshields in the battle and sitting behind your tanks to vaporize any zealots that get too close. If you realize that your AA is going to be vikings you won't need to mineral dump into marines thus hellions would be your best choice.
I have meched since the days of beta and gotten into high diamond. I frankly don't mind if people like the guy in this video insist that the tank needs something it makes my job easier I already win about80% of tvp's. And before anyone says so yes the players I play whether they are friend clan or ladder opponent usually know how to deal with a meching terran it does require a protoss to operate differently if they know that the terran player who is meching knows what he is doing. 1.) Expand like zergs. 2.) Harass/ and don't hesitate to build static d to defend harass 3.) Realize you can remax faster 4.) Keep the majority of your army close to the terran at all times (this decreases his mobility across the map.) Even with these I still manage to beat good protoss with siege tanks.
Maybe I'm wrong maybe not regardless I would not mind a tank buff.
On topic I am kinda of disappointed in the (buff/nerf) reallocation of the resources needed to build a ghost. Previously in all my tvp's I mech eventually as the toss begins to add more HT/immortals/archons to the army I add more ghosts to have sufficient emps. As a meching terran having good harassment is important to your success. I start out with hellions and continue with them throughout the match. However there are some things that reapers just do better. They can kill buildings in a timely manner they can move around without the need for a medivac to get them to high places. I ususally after I start building ghosts through down and additionaly 2 raxes (for a total of 3) so I am either building a ghost out of 1 rax to help out with my army or 1 reaper out of each rax. Building 3 reapers similtaneously brings the production time and cost to the same as a ghost now with the reallocation of resources I will be able to afford more tanks/vikings/ghosts but will be able to afford less hellions. This is of course a very minor problem because once you max out your resources stockpile. So I guess it is more an annoyance than an actual problem.
excited to see how players adapat to the new changes. Whether or not they are good or bad its fun to see how pros get creative. Time for some pre-warpgate rushes old school style!
@terranghost You simply watched the video, and you assumed that colossi were the main reason for the terran mm + tank death right? I think that it's kind of biased in that you have no idea what is going on around the map, how many bases each player has, and the current situation in the game. In some of the videos, I saw colossi numbers matching or even exceeding tank count, which obviously could be an indicating factor of the seemingly useless tanks in the matchup. I might not be correct, but that would be my input. >_>
On April 28 2011 13:27 Flameling wrote: @terranghost You simply watched the video, and you assumed that colossi were the main reason for the terran mm + tank death right? I think that it's kind of biased in that you have no idea what is going on around the map, how many bases each player has, and the current situation in the game. In some of the videos, I saw colossi numbers matching or even exceeding tank count, which obviously could be an indicating factor of the seemingly useless tanks in the matchup. I might not be correct, but that would be my input. >_>
Well yes but I addressed this in my post (not directly)
On April 28 2011 13:14 terranghost wrote: Think of it this way.. the collosus is an air unit that can't go over water and can be hit by ground attacks. Once a toss gets to the money number of collosus (and if you are meching he is going to get the collosus before you have sufficient tanks... collosus are just more mobile thats all there is to it) Even if one or 2 of them evaporate instantly to your tanks during the siege tanks cooldown time the rest of the collosus can obliterate most of your tanks.
On April 28 2011 13:14 terranghost wrote: And before anyone says so yes the players I play whether they are friend clan or ladder opponent usually know how to deal with a meching terran it does require a protoss to operate differently if they know that the terran player who is meching knows what he is doing. 1.) Expand like zergs. 2.) Harass/ and don't hesitate to build static d to defend harass 3.) Realize you can remax faster 4.) Keep the majority of your army close to the terran at all times (this decreases his mobility across the map.) Even with these I still manage to beat good protoss with siege tanks.
That is the simple fact of mech the protoss is going to max out first mech is slow. It was that way in BW too. You have to use harassment like hellions/vultures to deter the protoss from moving out and to make his extra bases that he is taking advantage of end up costing him more than it helps him. And I'm sorry in some of those battles if the toss had 6 collosus (I recall that having at least once) and the terran is on 2 bases and hasn't managed to at least get some vikings into the battle then the terran is playing it wrong.
Also from my post I said it was not only a problem of not getting vikings for the collosus but also not having sufficient hellions to deal with the zealots. I don't recall one pvt fight where I saw enough hellions. I could make post and explain every single battle and why the side that won.. won. But I won't if you really want me too I can PM it to you. Like I said maybe I'm wrong maybe I'm not regardless a buff to the tank would not bother me as there is no way it could hurt me.
On April 28 2011 03:51 RoachyRoach wrote: IMO Salvage should return 100% of the mineral cost, but should take an scv to dismantle it.
The fact that they can just implode thier buildings and get cash is kinda weird. With an SCV salvaging it would make more sense, and would fix alot of the QQ abount bunkers. Make it take like 10seconds for the SCV to dismantle.
The purpose of salvage should not be "Oh Shit my bunker is going to die, SALVAGE!" it should be "well I dont need this anymore, Im going to recycle these minerals."
Offensive SCVless salvaging is just silly.
I actually consider this a brilliant idea for the salvage mechanic. Considering that they implemented it for defensive purposes (at least I assume so), then this would literally have no real downside other than being slightly vulnerable to harrasment. But this is barely even the case, it is not like you wont have any units around it (defensively speaking).
So if the Terran wants to bunker rush a Zerg or even a Protoss, he would have to commit his 100 minerals per bunker based on his SCV control / guarding-ability of that SCV.
All in all, it would make the game slightly more skilled, as the Terran cant mindlessly retreat after the damage has been done or the damage does not justify the repair cost anymore (spine crawlers go up in position, or roaches are popping, etc.... you get the idea).
The only problem with this is that Blizzard does NOT want the offensive bunker to be a commitment, based on what we see thus far. In case they do want it to be one, then this should probably be forwarded to their forums, as it is actually one of the very few good points for this game - plus I HIGHLY doubt that the bunker rushes would disappear because of such a change. It would definitely make Terrans think twice before attempting one, instead of seeing it as a mandatory - also if they do, it would need more finess of execution.
Either way I'd love to see this going at least into a test phase on the PTR.
On April 28 2011 14:11 Coldspyros wrote: Can someone explain to me exactly why they nerfed the pylon radius?
In order to warp a stalker from low ground to high ground the pylon must be in range of enemy stalkers. Its a pvp change. With a side effect of slowing down cannon rushes.
On April 28 2011 14:11 Coldspyros wrote: Can someone explain to me exactly why they nerfed the pylon radius?
In order to warp a stalker from low ground to high ground the pylon must be in range of enemy stalkers. Its a pvp change. With a side effect of slowing down cannon rushes.
Think you mean Zealots...If you want to Warp Stalkers (as it is currently) then the Pylon has to be in range of other 6 range units
I know thats what I said with the change the pylon must be in range of enemy stalkers. However if you only want to warp in zealots then you can technically still keep it out of range of enemy stalkers. Or so I hear.
That is actually a video about why immortals are awesome against tanks, and why terrans should focus fire units instead of allowing the tanks to auto-target the immortals
That is literally it, that is the one biggest thing that is stopping the terran from rolling over the armies
Oh, that and you actually need a comparable army size to protoss. No use having a 40 supply army vs a 100 supply army
the warpgate build time seems pretty intelligent though in other matchups it might be much more difficult to put early pressure on protoss as they will probably have an extra unit at some of those early timing windows (think 2 rax and roach rushes). i think this will in turn buff P vs. Z. as for spore crawlers dig time or whatever who cares? how often do zergs actually move their spore crawlers and when would you need to do it in a hurry? i guess why not buff em.
+1 on good patch blizz, not exactly groundbreaking but nice.
I think that this patch is also a buff to protoss scouting, which much like zerg scouting (which hasn't been improved unfortunately) is at a severe disadvantage against terrans in the early game. This is a buff because ordinarily the toss would have to research warp gates ASAP, otherwise they would soon fall behind in army count. Now, since gateways have the same production rate as warp gates for the early tech units, hallucination can be researched instead, which is a highly effective tier 1.5 scout, which for scouting purposes is arguably better than the terran scan in terms of both cost and information gained.
On April 28 2011 15:11 hitman133295 wrote: I think they should nerf infestor again They're just too good now.
I think they should stop patching the game altogether at least until august if we really need it.
As much as I scream INFESTOR OP or as much I'd like to, I agree, give more time to gauge the state of the game, you can't say that the game can ever be perfectly balanced but I'd say all 3 races are fairly competitive. So give more time between tests during test for better accurate data
On April 28 2011 15:11 hitman133295 wrote: I think they should nerf infestor again They're just too good now.
I think they should stop patching the game altogether at least until august if we really need it.
Tbh until the protoss-expansion is out, I don't think there's any reason why they shouldn't release regular patches - maybe it's just my pessimistic nature, but I've never considered SC2 vanilla to be the "final" game, until the last expansion is out, all we are doing is playing in a giant beta-version of a hopefully great game once finished.
The expansions will change the game significantly (otherwise they could hardly expect people to spend money on it), at least more significantly than single patches. Therefore I think there's nothing wrong with experimenting with changes now. The learning-effect that's the result of patches for developers is huge. Personally I prefer playing some crappy-patches for a while if Blizz can learn from that and see what works and what doesn't regarding possibly-added new units.
On April 28 2011 15:11 hitman133295 wrote: I think they should nerf infestor again They're just too good now.
I think they should stop patching the game altogether at least until august if we really need it.
As much as I scream INFESTOR OP or as much I'd like to, I agree, give more time to gauge the state of the game, you can't say that the game can ever be perfectly balanced but I'd say all 3 races are fairly competitive. So give more time between tests during test for better accurate data
I actually created this account just now to refute the idea that Infestors are OP and somehow need a nerf. They've really balanced some of the matchups, if you look at it objectively. It's forced Protoss to consider something other than a heavy-stalker deathball, as the majority of the deathball MELTS to the combination of Infestor + Ultra/Ling. As for ZvT, it does melt mech heavy play to death, but that's good. It acts as a cost-efficient way to counter heavy mech other than the ultra-lategame Ultralisks and Broodlords. The buff in damage to armored has really benefited Zerg play and allowed for serious changes in the Zerg metagame.
Now, on to why they're good, but not OP. I'm watching LiquidHayprO stream as I type this. He literally just had a game where infestors were prevalent (As is the norm now). The protoss responded in a wise way, instead of shifting right in to the deathball, he sent some phoenixes to lift and kill the infestors. This is micro intensive, but it fixed the problem. Additionally, Ghosts can cloak, find the infestors and simply remove their energy, another cost-efficient solution to the same problem in the TvZ matchup.
I suppose what I'm saying is, the infestor change has led to a great, sweeping change in the metagame. It's not imbalanced at all, its entirely stoppable. It simply requires more thought and focus than the previous A-move, win mentality, which is good. People should be happy that the casters are finding more use, and micro is becoming more valuable (Which is exactly what the change caused).
EPT
i am not terran but simply sige tanks seems not cost efective vs toss...eaven if toss army is not spreed around...
sry for my ENG...
They're just too good now.
