| 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. | ||
|
azn_dude1
162 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:38 ch33psh33p wrote: This 2 gate is the exact same as it was before a shitton of other patches, people held it fine. Exactly. Everybody knows now that protoss don't like delaying their warp gates for anything. | ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
apart from that, i think archons to massive makes sense, build time decrease of protoss units.... not so sure about. | ||
|
butchji
Germany1531 Posts
| ||
|
tnud
Sweden2233 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:38 ch33psh33p wrote: This 2 gate is the exact same as it was before a shitton of other patches, people held it fine. The thing about proxy 2 gate is that it's way more risky though, once your opponent has enough forces to break out your gates are done for lol. I like the change. Proxy 2 gate instead of standard 4 gate into expand any day. EDIT: Not disagreeing with you, adding to your point  | ||
|
Tryxtira
Sweden572 Posts
| ||
|
Grildrak
Sweden44 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:02 IPS.Mardow. wrote: "Fixed a bug where players were still able to stack flying units on top of each other." Just read that? What the hell? You aren't able to stuck mutas anymore? wtf, is Blizzard doing x_X I'm ofc not sure but I don't think this will affect mutas but more the vikings flower (the last change they made didnt fix it all) | ||
|
Qzy
Denmark1121 Posts
Try this blizz: Salvage resource return reduced from 100% to 15%. 75% is still way too much. | ||
|
Slyce
United Kingdom173 Posts
As seen with the magic boxing micro thors are really bad against non-stacking units. Does anyone else think this needs looking at? It will make muta defense a little harder for Terran. | ||
|
BeMannerDuPenner
Germany5638 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:36 MacroKing wrote: I don't really think warp gate needed a nerf. It will affect other matchups to much... sorry but the warpgate is a problem in this game for a whole year now and will continue to do so after this change aswell. negating rushdistance and basicly bringing your production right into the enemys face is just flawed from the get go for a early standart tech. i get that people dont want to see their toys get weaker. but if you look at it from a overall balance and design point of view warpgates are a problem in all matchups. On April 26 2011 20:33 Apolo wrote: New radius is aprox 0.85% of old one like shown on the pic. However, So the area is being reduced in almost 30%. How is it not significant? the only significant effect it has on the game is that those "tiny edge of my pylon radius on your highground to warp zealots in your base." moves are now way harder/impossible. and thats a VERY good change esp for PvP. other then that when does it matter at all? | ||
|
Apolo
Portugal1259 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:35 Kokosaft wrote: its +40 seconds but you can spend at least one more chronoboost on warpgate making 20 gameseconds researching 30seconds of warpgate, but still, it look like 4warpgate wont be to huge anymore but earlier gatewayplay will become a matter (not necessarily balancewise) i think - not only 2gating One chronoboost lasts 30 production seconds. So to full chronoboost this 180s you need 6 of them, which means the fastest possible time to get WG will be 180-60=120s since each chrono takes out 10s. Of course this will mean no chronoboost on probes or units. Now the fastest possible time to research WG is around 92s. So it's pretty significant. | ||
|
RogerChillingworth
Chad3080 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:38 ch33psh33p wrote: This 2 gate is the exact same as it was before a shitton of other patches, people held it fine. The 2 gate was actually a big problem with saved chrono. Which is why they changed it.... | ||
|
kuroshiro
United Kingdom378 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:33 Apolo wrote: New radius is aprox 0.85% of old one like shown on the pic. However, So the area is being reduced in almost 30%. How is it not significant? Quite. Don't forget that you need a fair amount of pylon power area on the topside to warp in your units, since you can't warp if you don't have a certain diameter of space for the unit (different for each unit according to size). Looks reasonably significant to me but we won't know for sure until we see it done. | ||
|
ReseT
United States273 Posts
| ||
|
m4dm4n
Croatia17 Posts
On April 26 2011 11:24 Xapti wrote: ROFL WAFL Patch 16: Zealot build time increased from 33 to 38. Patch 17: Zealot build time decreased from 38 to 33. Patch 1.1.0: Zealot build time increased from 33 to 38. Patch 1.3.3: Zealot train time decreased from 38 to 33. WTF M8?  )))))))))))))))))))))) | ||
|
Lurk
Germany359 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:30 ffadicted wrote: Honestly, as a protoss, I hated colossus wars more then 4 gate wars. I'm gonna just 2 gate every game now probably. Also, I think the changes make protoss once again vulnerable to terran timings. It's going to be so hard to get up an early expo with the delayed warp gate tech. And 100 gas ghosts seems really over powered, considering how much more powerful EMP is then Storm. MULEs make the mineral increase negligible honestly. I can see a lot of ghost rushes coming as well. Well, you should be able to get out more units before warpgate tech so you should be fine vs early terran openers. You just need to get the additional gates up maybe a little earlier and actually produce units while you wait for warpgate tech. Remember that terran stim pushes are also delayed by 30s since the latest patch. The reduced gateway training times should make up for the delayed warpgate tech (at least for defensive purposes). On April 26 2011 20:30 ffadicted wrote:In fact, PvP and PvT have just basically been entirely changed. So many new timings to die to terran early game, and late game ghosts are going to be ridiculous to deal with. I don't understand the thought process behind 150 templars, 150 infestors, but 100 ghosts? Not to mention our late game composition is MUCH more gas heavy then terran's, yet they get the gas cheap spellcaster? I don't understand the thought process. Archon and spore change is nice. Templars are 50/150 (=200 total resources), infestors are 100/150 (=250 total resouces), ghosts are 300 total resources (150/150 or 200/100) - so they are the most expensive spellcaster. I'd rather have them 50/150 (like templars) or 100/150 (like infestors) instead. | ||
|
Tabbris
Bangladesh2839 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:40 turdburgler wrote: bunkers were NEVER FREE, they cost atleast 50 minerals in mining time, and having less money now for the same later is a hurt econ. we can debate the cost of bunkers and their sell value, but people really need to stop stating that building a bunker costs nothing. apart from that, i think archons to massive makes sense, build time decrease of protoss units.... not so sure about. A spine must cost an infinite amount of minerals since it cost a drone that could of mined the whole game  | ||
|
syllogism
Finland5948 Posts
| ||
|
Huragius
Lithuania1506 Posts
On April 26 2011 20:41 Qzy wrote: Salvage resource return reduced from 100% to 75%. Try this blizz: Salvage resource return reduced from 100% to 15%. 75% is still way too much. I'm sure you put a lot of work in your examination and observation about bunkers state in the game to give this wise advice to Blizzard. | ||
|
RouaF
France4120 Posts
| ||
|
harkov
10 Posts
Also destroyed bunkers should damage or kill the units inside just like destroying a medivac does. | ||
| ||
|
|
Wardi Open
StarCraft2.fi
Replay Cast
The PondCast
OSC
Demi vs Mixu
Nicoract vs TBD
Babymarine vs MindelVK
ForJumy vs TBD
Shameless vs Percival
Replay Cast
Korean StarCraft League
CranKy Ducklings
SC Evo League
BSL 21
Sziky vs OyAji
Gypsy vs eOnzErG
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/8876/pylonradius.jpg)
