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.
i wonder... whats the real aim of feedback? is it to deplete a casters energy making it rather useless? is it to deal damage in a split second against casters? I think that the energy on a thor will lead to odd situations, as it was mentioned before, like emp'ing your own units to avoid damage. And frankly is blizz's real intention to allow a single feedback (50 energy spell with a max of 4 casts per fully loaded HT) to deal 200 damage on a 400 hp unit that costs 300 minerals and 200 gas and takes a minute to be trained?)
On a different but related aim... you know why almost no one uses battlecruisers? they are so expensive, take so much to train, and are so easily countered (vikings, corruptors, void rays/HT) that they are not worth the risk to be used. And its yamato ability, wich is THE reason why someone would get them, its almost completely shut down by the posibility of getting feedbacked. (losing loads of hp of a very expensive unit)
I wouldnt like THAT to happen to the thor, for it to become a 2nd battlecruiser again.
On May 06 2011 11:13 genopath wrote: Guess who else is not happy about the train buff reversal:
The best Downfall parody I've ever seen. The dialogues are very well made, like if you didn't know anything about Nazi Germany, Hitler, Second World War, this movie and German language, you could actually believe it.
"Fegelein is the best Zerg in the reich" killed me :D Hahaha this is great xD
On May 05 2011 17:14 dogmatix wrote: make feedback do 100 energy max too in my humble opinion
Hey guys, dont skip this post!
Okay I wont skip it. I'll address how stupid it is though. EMP is an AOE, feedback is single target. A better solution if you're afraid of feedback on thors would be to just have their max energy lowered down to like 100 and have the spell cost 75. They can start at 25 energy or something. That way you aren't impacting HT against medivac, infestor, queen, overseer, ghost, thor, BC, sentry, other HT, etc.
Think of it this way, if your emp hits 2 units with over 100 energy, its done more energy drain than the maximum amount a feedback can do. Anything more than that is just bonus. If you wanna make EMP single target or feedback AoE, fine, but at that point we might as well be playing C&C red alert 2, where 99% of the stuff does the same thing
I did immortal/archon on ladder and it was the most amazing thing ever. The zerg tried to baneling bomb me but he kinda clumped up his overlords and the archons killed the overlords insanely fast. When the battle ended I still had my immortals, sentries, 3 archons while the zerg was ~120/90 supply down from 200/200. I can't wait for this patch. Anything to make my favourite unit awesome in all matchups is good by me. Also, when archons have 3/3 they chuckle at everything while killing them in 1-2 shots.
Actually it had to be implemented (Archons i mean) since release of SC2. Don't know what blizz was thinking about so long. The one more thing should they do - make Siege Tank as viable as it should be, and we will be able to see old good battles BW had, and not just MMM vs deathball.
Yea, as much as I hate myself for saying this as a Protoss player. I want the powerful BW seige tanks back :[ So much more fun and exciting to play against mech than mmm.
It's not the tanks that need to be buffed. The lack of Spider mines and the easier unit management make siege tanks worse. if you buff siege tanks, some pushs are almost impossible to hold
Not really. Prior to the massive nerf in beta, people (protoss players at least) were already developing strategies to counter tank-centric armies. Also, it's not necessarily the damage output of the tanks that need changing, imo. But rather supply or resources cost.
I do agree that full mech will probably never make a comeback in SC2. The loss of mines is quite a large setback to full mech play. However, I do believe that there should be some alternate strategy to MMM for Terran. (Yes, Goody has been doing lots of mech play and Jinro has done it too; but for the most part current mech strategies aren't all that consistent in their viability imo)
Elefanto was 100% correct. Also the tank nerf wasn't about TvP as chargelots were already a sufficient answer to them regardless. It was to address certain marine/tank timing attacks against zerg and to allow hellions/marines to actually have a slight impact in TvT. The lack of spider mines is really why tanks arent so popular in TvP. It makes it so tons of tanks are required to dominate the ground, leaving you exposed to air. In BW you also had goliath support as an option and while vikings are good, they dont fill the same role. Its two different games though and SC2 is really pretty balanced. I dont think any terran player should be complaining about anything. Terran is just fine in every matchup, the proof is in the statistics and theres about a half dozen threads recently showing this.
I mean, really. I hope that 4-gate alternative build someone linked with 24 second and 26 third gate with same timing as it used to be really works. It just cuts probes big time so its more of an "all-in".
I did immortal/archon on ladder and it was the most amazing thing ever. The zerg tried to baneling bomb me but he kinda clumped up his overlords and the archons killed the overlords insanely fast. When the battle ended I still had my immortals, sentries, 3 archons while the zerg was ~120/90 supply down from 200/200. I can't wait for this patch. Anything to make my favourite unit awesome in all matchups is good by me. Also, when archons have 3/3 they chuckle at everything while killing them in 1-2 shots.
Actually it had to be implemented (Archons i mean) since release of SC2. Don't know what blizz was thinking about so long. The one more thing should they do - make Siege Tank as viable as it should be, and we will be able to see old good battles BW had, and not just MMM vs deathball.
Yea, as much as I hate myself for saying this as a Protoss player. I want the powerful BW seige tanks back :[ So much more fun and exciting to play against mech than mmm.
It's not the tanks that need to be buffed. The lack of Spider mines and the easier unit management make siege tanks worse. if you buff siege tanks, some pushs are almost impossible to hold
Not really. Prior to the massive nerf in beta, people (protoss players at least) were already developing strategies to counter tank-centric armies. Also, it's not necessarily the damage output of the tanks that need changing, imo. But rather supply or resources cost.
I do agree that full mech will probably never make a comeback in SC2. The loss of mines is quite a large setback to full mech play. However, I do believe that there should be some alternate strategy to MMM for Terran. (Yes, Goody has been doing lots of mech play and Jinro has done it too; but for the most part current mech strategies aren't all that consistent in their viability imo)
Elefanto was 100% correct. Also the tank nerf wasn't about TvP as chargelots were already a sufficient answer to them regardless. It was to address certain marine/tank timing attacks against zerg and to allow hellions/marines to actually have a slight impact in TvT. The lack of spider mines is really why tanks arent so popular in TvP. It makes it so tons of tanks are required to dominate the ground, leaving you exposed to air. In BW you also had goliath support as an option and while vikings are good, they dont fill the same role. Its two different games though and SC2 is really pretty balanced. I dont think any terran player should be complaining about anything. Terran is just fine in every matchup, the proof is in the statistics and theres about a half dozen threads recently showing this.
Siege tanks in large numbers are performing too well in all matchups. In the mid- to late-game, siege tanks are too dominant against all ground units. We want a small set of light and unarmored ground units to perform better against siege tanks. With this in mind, we're changing the Siege Mode damage of the siege tank from 50 to 35, +15 vs. armored; to correspond with this, damage upgrades will be changed from +5 to +3, +2 vs. armored. This change reduces the base damage of the siege tank against light and unarmored units, as well as the splash damage.
On May 06 2011 15:38 Darkarza wrote: First it was horrible. Now its semi-horrible.
I mean, really. I hope that 4-gate alternative build someone linked with 24 second and 26 third gate with same timing as it used to be really works. It just cuts probes big time so its more of an "all-in".
But isn't that what it should be? In order for every other race to all-in (on one base), economy has to be sacrificed hardcore. For Zerg, they stop making workers for a HUGE chunk of time in order to reinforce and mass up in the first place. Even then, it's a very noticeable type of play since they aren't expanding or saturating the expansion. For Terran, they bring their workers with them to soak up damage. For Protoss, it was always get to 1 base saturation and stop making workers, but that's at the time of attack. If Protoss gets to the base and discovers they can't win with the push, they've lost 1.5 minutes at worst of worker production (5-8 workers), but while denying any economic exploitation of their failure with a contain.
In the end, it's a really low cost risk compared to the 10-20 workers a Terran will sacrifice with a push or the 1-3 rounds of workers Zerg gives up to attempt their respective all ins.
On May 06 2011 04:50 tdt wrote: Good changes. Thor reversion was totally needed since Carriers was only thing that could counter mass thor and his accompany units and we all know how hard carriers are to tech to.
I really don't like it when people think like this. It's not necessary to be able to take on any composition head on. The same thing can be said of siege tanks, when you get 25+, ground units, even, zealots, immortals, and archons are useless. This does not mean that Thors and siege tanks are imbalanced however. They are both are horribly immobile and ridiculously expensive. As a result Protoss can abuse their superior mobility to attack a meching Terran's economy, and production in order to prevent the Terran player from quickly reaching a critical mass of Thors or other mech units. The Protoss player can also take more bases than Terran and reinforce their army much quicker with the aid of warp gates' front loaded cool down.
The community has adopted a very toxic and selfish attitude toward balance imo. Nobody seems to care about real balance of match ups they just seem to want their race to be the strongest and easiest to play. Many people seem to have the idea that all units must have a hard counter, that is both easy to produce and use. This is a ridiculous idea and terrible for the game. It scares that blizzard seems to be taking many of these individuals complaints seriously, and as a result we are seeing a downward power creep. Unit power is reduced, and races become more homogenized. This results in a much less fun game.
It now seems like Blizzard was lying when they said that they would take balance slowly and allow for the metagame to adapt to strong strategy. Its also quite troubling that Blizzard is also balancing for low level play. If Blizzard continues on this path I worry that Starcraft 2 will never evolve into something special, we will never see someone like Flash or Bisu.
Problem with what you're saying is while 25 siege tanks may beat mass zealots, archons etc they won't beat 25 immorals. OTOH the supposed counter to thor, and twice as many, 16 immortals won't beat 8 +3 defense Thor. Load up any unit tester, you'll instantly kill off 8 immortals with SC and kill the rest with regular attack.
16 Immortal is more supply, more money, Blizz's supposed counter, fails. Yeah that's IMBA.
Blizz knew this and had energy for that reason, and the whining you complain about removed a necessary energy bar. Thankfully Blizz came back to their senses.
On May 06 2011 14:07 Hantak wrote: i wonder... whats the real aim of feedback? is it to deplete a casters energy making it rather useless? is it to deal damage in a split second against casters? I think that the energy on a thor will lead to odd situations, as it was mentioned before, like emp'ing your own units to avoid damage. And frankly is blizz's real intention to allow a single feedback (50 energy spell with a max of 4 casts per fully loaded HT) to deal 200 damage on a 400 hp unit that costs 300 minerals and 200 gas and takes a minute to be trained?)
On a different but related aim... you know why almost no one uses battlecruisers? they are so expensive, take so much to train, and are so easily countered (vikings, corruptors, void rays/HT) that they are not worth the risk to be used. And its yamato ability, wich is THE reason why someone would get them, its almost completely shut down by the posibility of getting feedbacked. (losing loads of hp of a very expensive unit)
I wouldnt like THAT to happen to the thor, for it to become a 2nd battlecruiser again.
BC's are used 100x more than Carriers. I don't hear you crying about that.
On May 05 2011 17:14 dogmatix wrote: make feedback do 100 energy max too in my humble opinion
Hey guys, dont skip this post!
Okay I wont skip it. I'll address how stupid it is though. EMP is an AOE, feedback is single target. A better solution if you're afraid of feedback on thors would be to just have their max energy lowered down to like 100 and have the spell cost 75. They can start at 25 energy or something. That way you aren't impacting HT against medivac, infestor, queen, overseer, ghost, thor, BC, sentry, other HT, etc.
Think of it this way, if your emp hits 2 units with over 100 energy, its done more energy drain than the maximum amount a feedback can do. Anything more than that is just bonus. If you wanna make EMP single target or feedback AoE, fine, but at that point we might as well be playing C&C red alert 2, where 99% of the stuff does the same thing
On May 06 2011 04:50 tdt wrote: Good changes. Thor reversion was totally needed since Carriers was only thing that could counter mass thor and his accompany units and we all know how hard carriers are to tech to.
I really don't like it when people think like this. It's not necessary to be able to take on any composition head on. The same thing can be said of siege tanks, when you get 25+, ground units, even, zealots, immortals, and archons are useless. This does not mean that Thors and siege tanks are imbalanced however. They are both are horribly immobile and ridiculously expensive. As a result Protoss can abuse their superior mobility to attack a meching Terran's economy, and production in order to prevent the Terran player from quickly reaching a critical mass of Thors or other mech units. The Protoss player can also take more bases than Terran and reinforce their army much quicker with the aid of warp gates' front loaded cool down.
The community has adopted a very toxic and selfish attitude toward balance imo. Nobody seems to care about real balance of match ups they just seem to want their race to be the strongest and easiest to play. Many people seem to have the idea that all units must have a hard counter, that is both easy to produce and use. This is a ridiculous idea and terrible for the game. It scares that blizzard seems to be taking many of these individuals complaints seriously, and as a result we are seeing a downward power creep. Unit power is reduced, and races become more homogenized. This results in a much less fun game.
It now seems like Blizzard was lying when they said that they would take balance slowly and allow for the metagame to adapt to strong strategy. Its also quite troubling that Blizzard is also balancing for low level play. If Blizzard continues on this path I worry that Starcraft 2 will never evolve into something special, we will never see someone like Flash or Bisu.
Problem with what you're saying is while 25 siege tanks may beat mass zealots, archons etc they won't beat 25 immorals. OTOH the supposed counter to thor, and twice as many, 16 immortals won't beat 8 +3 defense Thor. Load up any unit tester, you'll instantly kill off 8 immortals with SC and kill the rest with regular attack.
16 Immortal is more supply, more money, Blizz's supposed counter, fails. Yeah that's IMBA.
Blizz knew this and had energy for that reason, and the whining you complain about removed a necessary energy bar. Thankfully Blizz came back to their senses.
Problem with what you're saying is while 25 siege tanks may beat mass zealots, archons etc they won't beat 25 immorals. OTOH the supposed counter to marines, 50 banelings won't beat 50 +3 attack marines. Watch MKP/Mvp play, they'll kill off half the banelings before they reach the marines then the other half after that with marine splitting.
50 banelings is more supply, more money, Blizz's supposed counter, fails. Yeah that's IMBA.
Blizz knew this and had made stim give +0 movement for a reason, and the whining you complain about removed a necessary weakness. Thankfully Blizz came back to their senses.
Oh wait, that NEVER HAPPENED. Because there's more to Starcraft than 'my Prima strategy guide says immortals counter thors derp'.
On May 06 2011 14:07 Hantak wrote: i wonder... whats the real aim of feedback? is it to deplete a casters energy making it rather useless? is it to deal damage in a split second against casters? I think that the energy on a thor will lead to odd situations, as it was mentioned before, like emp'ing your own units to avoid damage. And frankly is blizz's real intention to allow a single feedback (50 energy spell with a max of 4 casts per fully loaded HT) to deal 200 damage on a 400 hp unit that costs 300 minerals and 200 gas and takes a minute to be trained?)
On a different but related aim... you know why almost no one uses battlecruisers? they are so expensive, take so much to train, and are so easily countered (vikings, corruptors, void rays/HT) that they are not worth the risk to be used. And its yamato ability, wich is THE reason why someone would get them, its almost completely shut down by the posibility of getting feedbacked. (losing loads of hp of a very expensive unit)
I wouldnt like THAT to happen to the thor, for it to become a 2nd battlecruiser again.
BC's are used 100x more than Carriers. I don't hear you crying about that.
And neither is he saying it's a good thing. You don't have to mention every balance issue in every post you ever make to be aware of them and consider them to be problems.
On May 06 2011 04:50 tdt wrote: Good changes. Thor reversion was totally needed since Carriers was only thing that could counter mass thor and his accompany units and we all know how hard carriers are to tech to.
I really don't like it when people think like this. It's not necessary to be able to take on any composition head on. The same thing can be said of siege tanks, when you get 25+, ground units, even, zealots, immortals, and archons are useless. This does not mean that Thors and siege tanks are imbalanced however. They are both are horribly immobile and ridiculously expensive. As a result Protoss can abuse their superior mobility to attack a meching Terran's economy, and production in order to prevent the Terran player from quickly reaching a critical mass of Thors or other mech units. The Protoss player can also take more bases than Terran and reinforce their army much quicker with the aid of warp gates' front loaded cool down.
The community has adopted a very toxic and selfish attitude toward balance imo. Nobody seems to care about real balance of match ups they just seem to want their race to be the strongest and easiest to play. Many people seem to have the idea that all units must have a hard counter, that is both easy to produce and use. This is a ridiculous idea and terrible for the game. It scares that blizzard seems to be taking many of these individuals complaints seriously, and as a result we are seeing a downward power creep. Unit power is reduced, and races become more homogenized. This results in a much less fun game.
It now seems like Blizzard was lying when they said that they would take balance slowly and allow for the metagame to adapt to strong strategy. Its also quite troubling that Blizzard is also balancing for low level play. If Blizzard continues on this path I worry that Starcraft 2 will never evolve into something special, we will never see someone like Flash or Bisu.
Problem with what you're saying is while 25 siege tanks may beat mass zealots, archons etc they won't beat 25 immorals. OTOH the supposed counter to thor, and twice as many, 16 immortals won't beat 8 +3 defense Thor. Load up any unit tester, you'll instantly kill off 8 immortals with SC and kill the rest with regular attack.
16 Immortal is more supply, more money, Blizz's supposed counter, fails. Yeah that's IMBA.
Blizz knew this and had energy for that reason, and the whining you complain about removed a necessary energy bar. Thankfully Blizz came back to their senses.
Problem with what you're saying is while 25 siege tanks may beat mass zealots, archons etc they won't beat 25 immorals. OTOH the supposed counter to marines, 50 banelings won't beat 50 +3 attack marines. Watch MKP/Mvp play, they'll kill off half the banelings before they reach the marines then the other half after that with marine splitting.
50 banelings is more supply, more money, Blizz's supposed counter, fails. Yeah that's IMBA.
Blizz knew this and had made stim give +0 movement for a reason, and the whining you complain about removed a necessary weakness. Thankfully Blizz came back to their senses.
Oh wait, that NEVER HAPPENED. Because there's more to Starcraft than 'my Prima strategy guide says immortals counter thors derp'.
On May 06 2011 14:07 Hantak wrote: i wonder... whats the real aim of feedback? is it to deplete a casters energy making it rather useless? is it to deal damage in a split second against casters? I think that the energy on a thor will lead to odd situations, as it was mentioned before, like emp'ing your own units to avoid damage. And frankly is blizz's real intention to allow a single feedback (50 energy spell with a max of 4 casts per fully loaded HT) to deal 200 damage on a 400 hp unit that costs 300 minerals and 200 gas and takes a minute to be trained?)
On a different but related aim... you know why almost no one uses battlecruisers? they are so expensive, take so much to train, and are so easily countered (vikings, corruptors, void rays/HT) that they are not worth the risk to be used. And its yamato ability, wich is THE reason why someone would get them, its almost completely shut down by the posibility of getting feedbacked. (losing loads of hp of a very expensive unit)
I wouldnt like THAT to happen to the thor, for it to become a 2nd battlecruiser again.
BC's are used 100x more than Carriers. I don't hear you crying about that.
And neither is he saying it's a good thing. You don't have to mention every balance issue in every post you ever make to be aware of them and consider them to be problems.
There is lots of ways to deal with 50 marines fungel, banelings, lots of roach, broods. There is only 1 way for toss to deal with mass thor right now. Hence the change.
EPT
