EPTPatch 1.3.3 PTR - Page 184
| 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. | ||
|
ridonkulous
159 Posts
| ||
|
s3rp
Germany3192 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:21 Yaotzin wrote: Well they certainly aren't the first thing you think of when countering mutas, but it's not incorrect. BCs demolish mutas. Too much armor for the mutas to do anything really. Kinda expensive don't you think ? ^^ Especially considering how easy it is to get Corrupters if you already have Mutas . Theoretically BC's are great against Mutas but thats just theory. | ||
|
Imbu
United States903 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:04 Mobius_1 wrote: Hmmm, good point, I suppose with the Ghost cost change it's possible to get Ghosts + Thor + some Bio, and let Thors roflstomp through anything. Just curious, would seeing a Thor prompt a Protoss to get Immortals? Because forcing them to be reactive would be good (not imba good, just nice to be the active one for once) for a Terran rather than the typical "get vikings then you see a robo bay", then roll over the colossi-less Protoss with ghosts and bio. That said, I think Thors are terrible against an established deathball, though, outranged by colossi, focused down before much damage could be done, and blocks the bioball from unleashing its power and takes away from investing in bio. Assuming equal food numbers, the Terran wouldn't be starting Thors against a Protoss that already had a deathball (read 4-6 Colossus + Warpgate units), nor would many thrown down 5-6 factories to commit a techshift (though its a possibility!). As a Protoss player (and thus possibly my view is a bit biased), when I see thors my two thoughts are either to get Immortals or Void Rays. Since I'm usually already commited to ground with both my upgrades and tech path, its much easier to throw down on additional robo and begin chronoboosing as opposed to starting a new tech tree. However, I don't meet that many high ranking players on ladder (read none), and most of the time, victory is purely dependent on macro issues as opposed to good reads. On May 05 2011 05:07 statikg wrote: Most of this discussion is based around the idea that immortals should counter thors, but why is this a base assumption? Btw by cost of gas, generally the most important resource, immortals still beat thors easily. This is mostly because of the interesting balance between Immortals and Thors, of how a spell changes which ones wins in a 1v1 situation. The assumption main comes from how battles will unfold. Assuming a robo based Protoss, their warpgate units don't deal with thors very well, especially with support, and thus it becomes much more of a battle between the Thors/Mech vs Robo units of Protoss. Of those robo units, the immortal with its faster build time and ultra high damage against armored makes it a more viable response, not counter, to the Thor going Terran. On May 05 2011 05:23 Souljah wrote: pretty ridiculous.. any early stalker pressure is going to be pretty tough to deal with if you ask me. The two things terran can use to defend against stalker pressure just got heavily nerfed. (bunkers and stim) Pretty much forces terran to go early maurader. Don't worry! They removed that buff to Protoss Stalker build time. Probably because the insane pressure that can be put on in the beginning as builds are getting ironed out might be a bit too high. On May 05 2011 05:18 PartyBiscuit wrote: I don't see how people are debating the Thor "change", unless I'm completely misremembering the change is just the reversal of the old patch that removed Thor energy in the first place - I believe the strike cannon cost was 150 energy back then too? The only reason I can see them being reversed back to having energy is to encourage more templar usage. I genuinely don't believe it's because of the the whole immortal discussion since that would have prevented the old patch in the first place to get rid of thor energy. You're right this is actually for the most part a reversion of the previous patch. It's quite possible that they wanted more Templar usage (no doubt there was a big drop once the energy upgrade was gone), but it's undeniable that the current usage of Immortals to fight Thors is a possible concern. In the extremes of theorycrafting, I don't think thors have been fully explored in the TvP matchup, and maybe Blizzard internal testing or a professional found some timing that would make it clearly overpowered? (The void ray nerf comes to mind in this case) | ||
|
RoachyRoach
81 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:20 Mobius_1 wrote: I tried that against a Terran, I got the autokill achievement and HSM'd one of his mineral lines as he rolled over me with his BCs. I lost pretty badly but it was fun. That said, Ravens always felt low on energy and HSM takes so much energy for a spell that never seems to hit. There are much better ways to spend that money (tanks vZ or ghosts vP). Yeah, I've tried to use ravens myself, just to see what all the fuss was about. they are rediculously slow, and HSM only works against some1 whos AFK. I wasnt saying it would be a good strat, im saying that it should be good. As a protoss player who likes spellcasting. I feel bad for terran. But then I think about all the times when I was EMPed Stimmed and 1-a'd to death. Then I dont feel so bad  | ||
|
jaiiiii
United States72 Posts
 .As for protoss changes, i LOVE the archon changes, and the warpgate/build time stuff seems completely legit. I will tell you right now that given two equal players in a PvP, 4gate is going to be significantly more tricky for the aggressor, what with the 20 second increase in research time and the decrease of the sentry build time but constant zealot/stalker build time. This change was very well thought out by blizzard and my compliments to them. | ||
|
ForayeR
Brazil34 Posts
On May 05 2011 04:17 Jermstuddog wrote: The problem with your HT statement is they can't actually kill most of those units without having very specific requirements in place. HT vs banshee, the HT will lose in at least 80% of the engagements. Sure, he will do an instant 100 damage, but with 0 other attacks, it doesn't much matter. HT dont come alone. | ||
|
MrPuppetMan
Scotland2 Posts
I can deal with the 4gate and 2gate nerfs, the fast sentry will be usefull versus unpredicted rushes (if he hides production buildings or denies scouting) Zerg are gonna like the bunker and spore changes, for void ray and marine/bunker rushes. Overall, I am satisfied. Moar awsome pl0x blizz. | ||
|
Jandos
Czech Republic928 Posts
| ||
|
Ruyguy
Canada988 Posts
| ||
|
shinosai
United States1577 Posts
| ||
|
Souljah
United States423 Posts
| ||
|
Deadlyfish
Denmark1980 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:40 Jandos wrote: So thor,banshee,raven,marine,SCV allin will may be finaly stoppable in PvT ...... Because you have templars when that hits? I dont get it. Yea the thors will have less energy, but unless you have more than 3-4 immortals it wont matter at all. Thors are nerfed late game when templars come out, i dont see it having the big effect early game. | ||
|
RoachyRoach
81 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:45 Souljah wrote: so 20 second increase in warpgate is what.. 10 seconds when chrono boosted? While stim gets a 30 second increase.. wtg blizzard. They should of added the timing to the actual gateway to warpgate change. (not sure what its called since I don't do toss) Theres only so much chronoboost dude. Its not like mules or spawn larva where the ability ends right as the next one is ready. | ||
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:45 Souljah wrote: so 20 second increase in warpgate is what.. 10 seconds when chrono boosted? While stim gets a 30 second increase.. wtg blizzard. They should of added the timing to the actual gateway to warpgate change. (not sure what its called since I don't do toss) Chrono boost is a 50% speed increase, not 100%. Assuming chrono boost, it's a 13.66 second increase in the research time. | ||
|
Whitewing
United States7483 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:46 Deadlyfish wrote: Because you have templars when that hits? I dont get it. Yea the thors will have less energy, but unless you have more than 3-4 immortals it wont matter at all. Thors are nerfed late game when templars come out, i dont see it having the big effect early game. It's to stop the thors from spawning with strike cannon, and having it for a really absurd timing when protoss only has one immortal out or something. | ||
|
Mobius_1
United Kingdom2763 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:29 RoachyRoach wrote: Yeah, I've tried to use ravens myself, just to see what all the fuss was about. they are rediculously slow, and HSM only works against some1 whos AFK. I wasnt saying it would be a good strat, im saying that it should be good. As a protoss player who likes spellcasting. I feel bad for terran. But then I think about all the times when I was EMPed Stimmed and 1-a'd to death. Then I dont feel so bad Haha, very true. I'd love to HSM you to death but EMP is just so much easier! :D | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On May 05 2011 04:45 shinosai wrote: This change is kind of odd. As someone that enjoys doing mech a lot I'm kind of surprised to see this change. It's kind of a double whammy since it makes immortals highly effective vs thors and also high templar. My problem with this is that any thor centric army is already countered pretty well by colossi and void rays. Thors move so slowly that they are easily kited by colossi and obviously take extra damage from vrays. Protoss now have four different units that counter thors (and mech in general) as opposed to two. Feels like heavy bio with vikings is once again the smartest choice to go. At this point it almost feels like the existence of the upgrade is more of a hindrance than a help. If the upgrade didn't exist at least we wouldn't have to worry about feedback. Mr. David Kim does not like mech. If God forbid terran players find a way to play without mass marauders, Tanks get nerfed, BCs get nerfed, Thors get back to their beta status. In all seriousness, i'd love to see a replay pack from the balancing team, to see what their idea of every MU is. The Marauder is the worst thing that has happened to SC2 along with the Colossus. 1a units that the entire game gravitates around. Rant over :p | ||
|
Blasterion
China10272 Posts
On May 05 2011 06:00 Sapphire.lux wrote: Mr. David Kim does not like mech. If God forbid terran players find a way to play without mass marauders, Tanks get nerfed, BCs get nerfed, Thors get back to their beta status. In all seriousness, i'd love to see a replay pack from the balancing team, to see what their idea of every MU is. The Marauder is the worst thing that has happened to SC2 along with the Colossus. 1a units that the entire game gravitates around. Rant over :p Nah Marauder you have to kite, hence concussive, If marauders were 1a units then u wouldn't need concussive. | ||
|
Sv1
United States204 Posts
If anything I think it limits terran, as others have pointed out, to go back to more bio heavy builds. I think though that in the time that the thor change had originally been made and now rechanged, protoss has developed a good number of builds to deal with bio. I don't want to say it's a "sure thing" but if a protoss doesn't scout an armory, regardless of whether they see a thor or not they will still be encouraged to make colossus and high templar. The thor is still a good unit, but in the case where immortals had to be overbuilt for a chance at victory vs thors, after the patch, should protoss continue to overbuild immortals, victory may almost be a certainty. This is kind of one of the issues I take with it. The game went how many months with thors having difficulty because of templar. Not to mention I think it also buys enough time for protoss to continue to develop their ground army (charge/blink) to really give thors a hard time. In this case I think terran might need to find a way to buy enough time to survive vs the colossus based strategies to maybe later on be able to later on produce thors from 3 or 4 bases. A friend pointed out to me, and I have to agree with him, that I would rather them remove strike cannon entirely, than be subject to feedback, in a sense, the feedback is doing almost what the strike cannon does. Which is a direct damage 1v1 counter to a unit, while it may not kill it, it still will do heavy damage. | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On May 05 2011 05:49 Whitewing wrote: Chrono boost is a 50% speed increase, not 100%. Assuming chrono boost, it's a 13.66 second increase in the research time. There is no chronoboost available anyway, at least for a 4gate. You already bank 100 energy then blow it all on warpgate tech. So this pretty much slows it down by the full 20. | ||
| ||
