EPT
Patch 1.3.3 PTR - Page 92
| 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. | ||
|
Popsiclestik
United States45 Posts
| ||
|
CHOdan
United States9 Posts
| ||
|
turdburgler
England6749 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:58 DrunkApple wrote: free /frē/ Verb: Make free, in particular. Adverb: Without cost or payment: "ladies were admitted free". 100% refund --> free 75% refund --> not free True that building bunkers delay tech, but that is called "Opportunity Cost", building bunker instead of teching up It's like you are saying scanning costs mineral i was going to link you the dictionary entry for stupid but im not sure its worth the effort | ||
|
KimJongChill
United States6429 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:53 Jayrod wrote: Burrow, ultras, air units, keeping sentry energy low through applying pressure, engaging in more open areas. There I gave you 5+ ways and I didnt even have to patch the game god i hate when people say ultras to deal with ff's, | ||
|
theSkareqro
Singapore102 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:51 FabledIntegral wrote: This is intentional - Blizzard has stated they never really wanted to have gateways in the game, only warpgates, but warpgates were too powerful early game. After you change to a warpgate, Blizzard doesn't want you using gateways anymore. There is a "Revert to Gateways" for a reason issit not? I guess not.. They should just delete it like what they did to Ultralisk with the headbutt animation? lol | ||
|
Yaotzin
South Africa4280 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:59 dave333 wrote: Where did they say they didn't want gateways? Having a diff between gates and warpgates is way cooler Dunno, they've mentioned it a bunch. They started out in alpha with just warpgates, but obviously they realised you can do disgusting cheeses with that, so they needed a way to slow down warp tech. And thus the warpgate tech was born. Same deal with conc shells. These 50/50 techs are in the game solely so Blizzard can fiddle with the timings to make sure they aren't overpowering early game. The likely reason they don't want it to be a choice is that it would be hellish to balance two different sets of unit production timings. (they don't balance them now, one is just straight up worse) Speaking of alpha I want my dark pylons back :D | ||
|
no.Stats
Sweden99 Posts
| ||
|
Rashia
Sweden68 Posts
 | ||
|
CrUnCh559
United States22 Posts
 . | ||
|
Ryrmidon
Canada371 Posts
I am a zerg by the way and though there is a bunch of other things I complain about like protoss lategame I think this is a massive step into the right direct. Without the extremely powerful early gate pressure caused by bunker rushes or fast warpgating zerg is free to take more risks and macro up more with will mean they will hit 200/200 must faster than the protoss. Use this advantage correctly and you will prob see a 50:50 win ratio | ||
|
Matthias Meys
13 Posts
Oh well, what do I know ^^. | ||
|
XXXSmOke
United States1333 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:59 CHOdan wrote: it seems like each patch has contained a nerf for protoss and a buff for zerg... i blame idra and his complaining...but i see where they are coming from because pvp was too generic... i just think they went about it completely wrong... they should have made wg tech 2 upgrades instead of just 1... the first is normal wg where u can warp on low ground and the second will allow u to warp on high ground...this can still allow 4gates to occur, but it wont be to the point where they are warping in on your ramp and in your base And then by the time you get to use the upgrade the chance to cheese with the pylon is gone. Theres been so many ideas in this thread like warp in the nexus only, darker rings to the pylon for warp in, and multiple WG upgrades. All of these would kill the race man, way to complex for a small gain. Blizz's approach is smart just delay the time so the power of WG's comes a bit later just like T with stim. WG's is a good interesting design for the game, getting too crazy and wierd with upgrades and big restrictions is just to much. You want players to be able to do crazy things with WGs like cliffing and proxy and other stuff, but what you dont want is the power of all inning that protss has had since release. Espcially Escpcially now that the maps are largely differant and the art of the protoss all in negates the distance these maps provide. Also, whats with the two gate thoughts in this thread? Ive read like 30 pages of this thread and theres like 4 or 5 mentions of two gate on every page. What people arent realizing is that the maps are completely differant... What maps do you expect to proxy me on? Tal Darim? Shattered? Back Gulch?. THe only map you could pull it off on would be on Xel, but you also have to realize now that with reduced pylon range you cant do the pylon on low/gateway on high ground. I honestly dont understand the hype about it. Not to mention with roach range and builds like spanishwas this would be likely to be easily countered. | ||
|
plated.rawr
Norway1676 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:58 DrunkApple wrote: free /frē/ Verb: Make free, in particular. Adverb: Without cost or payment: "ladies were admitted free". 100% refund --> free 75% refund --> not free True that building bunkers delay tech, but that is called "Opportunity Cost", building bunker instead of teching up It's like you are saying scanning costs mineral in·fla·tion [in-fley-shuhn] Show IPA –noun 1. Economics . a persistent, substantial rise in the general level of prices related to an increase in the volume of money and resulting in the loss of value of currency ( opposed to deflation). 2. the act of inflating. 3. the state of being inflated. 1. Economics . a persistent, substantial rise in the general level of prices related to an increase in the volume of money and resulting in the loss of value of currency ( opposed to deflation). and resulting in the loss of value of currency loss of value of currency Time = inflation = minerals less worth per unit = price payed. | ||
|
Taryssa
United States1628 Posts
| ||
|
Beef Noodles
United States937 Posts
On April 27 2011 04:01 turdburgler wrote: i was going to link you the dictionary entry for stupid but im not sure its worth the effort manner up! | ||
|
Delta9-THC
Germany13 Posts
But this guy got a great idea -> http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/2416196872 I like the Bunker and Ghost changes tho, but i think it should be 50% instead of 75%. The Spore Crawler buff is simply awesome, because Z gets his first anti-air relatively late and when the enemy got atleast a bit micro, when he is fast teching for air, then the Z is in a shitload of trouble, because you can outmaneuver the spores. (also it's great about invisible units when you're low on gas :>) | ||
|
LeatherGracket
Sweden52 Posts
| ||
|
no.Stats
Sweden99 Posts
| ||
|
Striding Strider
United Kingdom787 Posts
On April 27 2011 03:59 dave333 wrote: Where did they say they didn't want gateways? Having a diff between gates and warpgates is way cooler Agreed. | ||
|
Jayrod
1820 Posts
On April 27 2011 04:02 KimJongChill wrote: god i hate when people say ultras to deal with ff's, How are ultras not one of the many ways I listed to deal with forcefields? Or are you another one of those zergs that doesn't care about balance or appreciate the fact that without forcefields Protoss would never be able to compete. | ||
| ||
