Patch 1.3.3 PTR - Page 195

On May 05 2011 23:36 ridonkulous wrote:
probably know mechanics better than you, ultralisk is immune and the only massive unit it would be worth using is colossus but u wont be able to do that since u should never be in range, also everybody who read few last pages sees how biased toward toss you are, few pages ago u tried to convince us how thors are unstoppable in pvt where its definately not the case,
Now u changed the tune and try to convince us the change doesnt affect thors at all where this also definately isnt true, seriously how blind u have to be to not recognize how thors without this skill would be better that with current strike cannon "upgrade"

On May 05 2011 23:41 aeyr wrote:
Maybe fungal should do less damage (say 15%) to armored units. Kind of like storm is less effective against roaches and marauders.

Love,

Diamond Zerg player

On May 05 2011 23:38 Yaotzin wrote:

It's sort of sad how unwilling people are to just admit to making a mistake.

Thors without strike cannon are trash. Maybe they're less trashy than Thors with 250mm + energy, maybe not. Doesn't really matter.

On May 05 2011 22:34 harhar! wrote:





dude its pretty stupid to compare feedback and emp. both casters have one singletarget and one aoespell so why do you compare them like that?

On May 05 2011 23:43 s3rp wrote:



Well they did do it to Buff Infestors in the first place . I think it should deal less damage to Air units . Its kinda hard to Counter Infestor Broodlord now since you Vikings will die pretty easy to fungals.

On May 06 2011 00:05 magha wrote:


Ghosts, EMP the infestors and snipe the Broodlords.

On May 06 2011 00:02 Zhou wrote:
The comparison of the yamato cannon and the 250mm strike cannons isn't favoring anything.

The yamato cannon does cost less energy, deals 300 damage straight up within 2 seconds and because the battlecruiser is a flying unit, a bit more mobile than the thor. They both have the same moving speed. It's research time is 60 seconds, but it takes longer to get to in terms of teching up and having enough battlecruisers out (90 seconds each) and having a larger dump of econ into them.

The 250mm cannon takes a lot longer to research, but is lower than the yamato cannon tier, and thors are a just a tad bit cheaper. Again, it can also still stun and take out any ground unit within its time. I also believe this counts the ultralisk (Never seen it, because its not great in TvZ in my own opinion).

The other thing to consider is that the battlecruiser has a second upgrade that gives it an initial 25 energy once it hits the playfield and costs the same amount as the yamato cannon, taking 60 seconds less. Teching to a battlecruiser is far more time consuming, and economically consuming than a thor would be.

Both of them serve different purposes for certain matchups. A thor I think still is that tank unit blizzard intended it to be. It's immobile serve purpose would primarily be anti-air, but does very well as a ground unit too. A battlecruiser is that other supportive unit that won't let that one target get away by shooting a giant energy beam at it. On ladder games I watch, I see that it's also mostly used to take down important buildings.

I think they both have a similar role, but different ways of going about it. Also consider what is better in certain matchups. It is funny though, a battlecruiser is supposed to counter a thor. :O

A bit off from what I was discussing before, I think it's weird not many people are talking about the 4gate change since that would change the most disappointing matchup. Now that sentries are the only unit that has a decreased time, perhaps people won't be so afraid that the patch will cause 2gate pushes in the beginning specifically against playing zerg?

On May 05 2011 23:35 TRG wrote:

Ironic considering most options in dealing with units and abilities rely on tactics and strategy. If you want to ignore the fact that an AOE ability relies on the opponent not splitting his army, then continue QQing about fungal growth. Zerg had to learn to micro/split banelings just as efficiently as Terran did with mass marine. If you'd like to go down unit for unit comparison, it's obvious Zerg has the least viable units. Meanwhile Terran sits on one of the most powerful units in the game which just happens to be available at tier 1. And let's not forget Zerg relies on the ability to surround an army, but the many chokes and lack of open area in SC2 tends to negate this option. As for the Infestor, wrong again. Blizzard was trying to find a purpsoe/function for it and its abilities. It wasn't powerful enough to replace banelings, and infested terran failed to be effective anti air. They've finally given Zerg an option other than mutalisks for dealing with air units and map control. It's awesome how Terran and Protoss sit back and mock Zergs over complaining, but with one unit change, all the sudden you cry Zerg OP.

Zerg

Fungal Growth stun duration decreased from 8 to 4 seconds.
Fungal Growth damage increased by +30% vs. armored units.

Both of the Fungal Growth changes were mainly made to address a ZvZ issue with mutalisk vs. infestor, and to make infestors more useful vs. protoss. For mutalisks, we found they were just not useful enough in ZvZ due to the Fungal Growth stun duration being too long. So, the duration was reduced to make them a bit more viable in the ZvZ matchup. This reduction in stun duration means the damage goes in faster. However, we realized that mutalisks suffer mostly due to stuns combined with hydralisks shooting from below. As for infestors themselves, we found they weren’t that useful vs. protoss. We wanted to solve both of these issues while keeping infestors as powerful as they are vs. terran. Fungal Growth’s damage itself wasn’t as big of a problem as the stun, so we decided to go with this change so that the stun duration reduction is somewhat countered by the damage buff.


The +30% armored damage change was more strictly targeted towards stalker-based protoss armies, as well as marauder-based terran armies. We wanted infestors to be more of a core unit in the ZvP matchup while keeping them just as useful vs. terran. The stun duration reduction change by itself didn’t allow these two things, so we had to make this damage change as well in order to arrive at the right place for the infestor.

~http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/2566610#blog

On May 05 2011 23:52 ridonkulous wrote:
*inane insults*

FYI they work very well vs zerg and nobody ever upgrades strike cannon, vs protoss almost nobody used them so its hard to say but 150 mana cost and alot bigger vulnerability against ht doesnt make for strike cannon which you probably wont be able to cast because of time u need to build mana .(or if u do, they will get feedbacked anyway)

On May 06 2011 00:02 Zhou wrote:
The comparison of the yamato cannon and the 250mm strike cannons isn't favoring anything.

The yamato cannon does cost less energy, deals 300 damage straight up within 2 seconds and because the battlecruiser is a flying unit, a bit more mobile than the thor. They both have the same moving speed. It's research time is 60 seconds, but it takes longer to get to in terms of teching up and having enough battlecruisers out (90 seconds each) and having a larger dump of econ into them.

The 250mm cannon takes a lot longer to research, but is lower than the yamato cannon tier, and thors are a just a tad bit cheaper. Again, it can also still stun and take out any ground unit within its time. I also believe this counts the ultralisk (Never seen it, because its not great in TvZ in my own opinion).

The other thing to consider is that the battlecruiser has a second upgrade that gives it an initial 25 energy once it hits the playfield and costs the same amount as the yamato cannon, taking 60 seconds less. Teching to a battlecruiser is far more time consuming, and economically consuming than a thor would be.

Both of them serve different purposes for certain matchups. A thor I think still is that tank unit blizzard intended it to be. It's immobile serve purpose would primarily be anti-air, but does very well as a ground unit too. A battlecruiser is that other supportive unit that won't let that one target get away by shooting a giant energy beam at it. On ladder games I watch, I see that it's also mostly used to take down important buildings.

I think they both have a similar role, but different ways of going about it. Also consider what is better in certain matchups. It is funny though, a battlecruiser is supposed to counter a thor. :O

A bit off from what I was discussing before, I think it's weird not many people are talking about the 4gate change since that would change the most disappointing matchup. Now that sentries are the only unit that has a decreased time, perhaps people won't be so afraid that the patch will cause 2gate pushes in the beginning specifically against playing zerg?

On May 06 2011 00:37 Resistentialism wrote:
I think we're maybe hitting on the point that a unit with 400 hp that can be auto-repaired by 7 scvs at once and that does more damage than a thor's strike cannons against any armour type just by auto-attacking at above average range, is maybe poorly designed.

On May 06 2011 00:37 Resistentialism wrote:
I think we're maybe hitting on the point that a unit with 400 hp that can be auto-repaired by 7 scvs at once and that does more damage than a thor's strike cannons against any armour type just by auto-attacking at above average range, is maybe poorly designed.