EPTPatch 1.3.3 PTR - Page 171
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
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. | ||
|
RoachyRoach
81 Posts
| ||
|
theqat
United States2856 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:19 PantsB wrote: As a Protoss player, I'd prefer the natural evolution of the game have a chance to figure out how to deal with mass Thors rather than get it patched away. That's how the game matures. In the same vein, I don't think 4 gate is a problem. Zergs learned how to deal with it. Protoss are learning how to deal with it without 4 gating themselves. And Ts can deal with it. The natural flow of the metagame is addressing the narrowness of PvP. The archon changes make sense but feel like they are unnecessary. I'm not sure how serious people are when they say the infestor changes are actually a buff but doesn't bother me one way or another. I know I'd much rather they work on things like cross-region play or more community/clan features than tinkering with balance. Tyler has been addressing your Thor point consistently by saying that he's "not seeing a solution," so the +2 armor Thor build in particular may have been getting out of hand. On the other hand, I think he'd agree with you about 4gate | ||
|
Raygun
348 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:20 Edu wrote: Thor + Ghost fast expand against toss is really good. You'll get many minerals accumulated which you can spend on blueflame hellions. Thors are so powerful it's insane, especially when you have EMP. Thor plus Ghost tech and those units with a fast expand? That seems dubious to me. Is there a testing server replay that supports that? I'm not sure how you can survive doing that. | ||
|
TheResidentEvil
United States991 Posts
| ||
|
Rojato
Nicaragua23 Posts
| ||
|
mprs
Canada2933 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:18 Maynarde wrote: I second this. I mean, saw Jinro beat MC in that one game with strike cannons on the immortals but yeah. Hellion + siege seems like a better thing to make against Protoss if you really wanna go mech against em. Anyway, I love the changes so far. GJ Blizz. thozain vs MC? anyway this is a cool change | ||
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:24 shaman6ix wrote: I read so many people saying "Well Thors werent used much, so why nerf them anyways??" Emm.. sorry to break the news for you but 'not being used much' does not mean 'not good'. In SC2, players are just not willing to explore the possibilities of their race, so they whine and whine instead of using the right units. Thors are very strong in TvP, with their massive armour, attack rate and especially their ability which essentially insta-kills their "counter" immortal. Having said that, i think giving Thors energy is the right choice but at the same time i would also suggest removing the 150/150 upgrade since they have to gain 100 energy anyways since they spawn in order to use strike-cannons. Not using Thors in TvP mid to late game is like Zerg players not making enough queens. You have nothing to lose but a whole lot to gain as a Z player with 4 early game queens, but because 'pros' dont do it often, no one does it (players like spanishiwa are bright examples of people using their race to their full potential). And dont tell me Thors dont have mobility in order to use them in TvP cause thats not what youre looking for in a late game army composition. Very strong however doesn't mean overpowered. I agree Thors are great and as P they scare the living crap out of me, but i feel like it's too early to tell wether they are too good or not, as thor heavy builds have only recently started coming out. I think they should have just waited...it's definitely a good change to tune thors down, but it's too early to tell wether it's needed or not imo. | ||
|
Nizzy
United States839 Posts
| ||
|
gulden
Germany205 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:24 shaman6ix wrote: I read so many people saying "Well Thors werent used much, so why nerf them anyways??" Emm.. sorry to break the news for you but 'not being used much' does not mean 'not good'. In SC2, players are just not willing to explore the possibilities of their race, so they whine and whine instead of using the right units. Thors are very strong in TvP, with their massive armour, attack rate and especially their ability which essentially insta-kills their "counter" immortal. Having said that, i think giving Thors energy is the right choice but at the same time i would also suggest removing the 150/150 upgrade since they have to gain 100 energy anyways since they spawn in order to use strike-cannons. Not using Thors in TvP mid to late game is like Zerg players not making enough queens. You have nothing to lose but a whole lot to gain as a Z player with 4 early game queens, but because 'pros' dont do it often, no one does it (players like spanishiwa are bright examples of people using their race to their full potential). And dont tell me Thors dont have mobility in order to use them in TvP cause thats not what youre looking for in a late game army composition. Totally agree! Thors one.shooting immortals seems ridiculous to me! | ||
|
Aequos
Canada606 Posts
| ||
|
latan
740 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:25 theqat wrote: Tyler has been addressing your Thor point consistently by saying that he's "not seeing a solution," so the +2 armor Thor build in particular may have been getting out of hand. On the other hand, I think he'd agree with you about 4gate So the zerg who can't seems to be able to come out with a decent standard strategy in ZvP since 3-4 month should try to open doors, while there is "no solution" to Thor after what 3 weeks ? "You're a funny guy" say Ned Stark... | ||
|
Teoita
Italy12248 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:29 Aequos wrote: Honestly, the energy on Thors is probably put in so they can't instantgib Blizzards new, buffed Archon. That actually makes a lot of sense, hadn't thought about it. | ||
|
ch4ppi
Germany802 Posts
The new WG change is easier and doesnt influence the game that much. I appreciate it, but I think it doesnt change enough in PVP now. I love the range increase of the Archon, I feel like they can be very viable now  THor-Nerf: WTF?!?!?!? why? I dont get it. In PvZ they were fine and StrikeCannons very rarely viable. TvT same. TvP Thors are hard to use they are only viable because of the strike cannon when they get counterd by immortals...but now feedback trololol Infestor: I can see why but I dont like it since im Zerg  | ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:29 gulden wrote: Totally agree! Thors one.shooting immortals seems ridiculous to me! Strike cannons will still "oneshot" immortals, not that its even that relevant. Yamato oneshots VR's who are supposed to be their hard counter as well, yet I dont hear people complain? Probably because the "counter" unit in both cases is much cheaper as well as less supply, so you'll have greater numbers to overwhelm them. Thors have a plethora of counters, the standard deathball with robo units already does a good job against thors. Giving them yet another counter means they will be absolutely terrible once its lategame and the protoss can afford both templar and robo tech. And we all know how much protoss endgame needs buffing. | ||
|
RoachyRoach
81 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:31 WhiteDog wrote: So the zerg who can't seems to be able to come out with a decent standard strategy in ZvP since 3-4 month should try to open doors, while there is "no solution" to Thor after what 3 weeks ? "You're a funny guy" say Ned Stark... dude....how many times does it need to be stated taht infestors zerglings and banelings ROFLSTOMP a collosus heavy ball. | ||
|
eviltomahawk
United States11135 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:19 PantsB wrote: As a Protoss player, I'd prefer the natural evolution of the game have a chance to figure out how to deal with mass Thors rather than get it patched away. That's how the game matures. In the same vein, I don't think 4 gate is a problem. Zergs learned how to deal with it. Protoss are learning how to deal with it without 4 gating themselves. And Ts can deal with it. The natural flow of the metagame is addressing the narrowness of PvP. The archon changes make sense but feel like they are unnecessary. I'm not sure how serious people are when they say the infestor changes are actually a buff but doesn't bother me one way or another. I know I'd much rather they work on things like cross-region play or more community/clan features than tinkering with balance. They probably have a completely different team working on the B.net 2.0 side of things. I have a feeling that Browder, David Kim, and the rest of the gameplay staff have minimal influence on the development of new B.net features by the B.net team. | ||
|
Sbrubbles
Brazil5776 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
But i guess they feared the tech snipe on zerg buildings that was funny since i didn't have to wait for energy to pull that off, just fly in bomb it down fly out. I think feedback slowly pushing out the storm ability from the templars and with the emp nerf, feedback is already terrible strong as you can't stop it with emps. But its a way to bring back the templars. but strangely ghosts are really bad against templars all of a sudden. can't stop feedback (well 2 snipes do but its still hard to stop a successful feedback) and archons need 3 emps xD. Well they are not really good without shield upgrades, but the range upgrade was needed. But imo we will soon see the colossi less often and that is what people wanted, now pay the price *g* | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On May 05 2011 00:38 Sbrubbles wrote: Dang ... it's gona be much harder to hold off an archon tech switch when going muta/ling vs protoss (microing mutas vs archons was hard but not impossible) ... I guess I'll have to have prepare to switch preemtively (admittedly, not a problem with Zerg). oh right, now Mutas and Archons have the same range, and Archons rape Mutas like Thors | ||
| ||
