• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 00:16
CEST 06:16
KST 13:16
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall9HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy6
Community News
Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL54Weekly Cups (June 23-29): Reynor in world title form?12FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event16Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster16Weekly Cups (June 16-22): Clem strikes back1
StarCraft 2
General
The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Statistics for vetoed/disliked maps How does the number of casters affect your enjoyment of esports? Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster
Tourneys
Korean Starcraft League Week 77 Master Swan Open (Global Bronze-Master 2) RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Semi Finals & Finals $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo)
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame Mutation # 479 Worn Out Welcome Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady
Brood War
General
Player “Jedi” cheat on CSL Flash Announces Hiatus From ASL BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Unit and Spell Similarities Help: rep cant save
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Grand Finals - Sunday 20:00 CET Small VOD Thread 2.0 [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games? Beyond All Reason
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Trading/Investing Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [Manga] One Piece [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread NBA General Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Blogs
Culture Clash in Video Games…
TrAiDoS
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Blog #2
tankgirl
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 616 users

Situation report Patch 1.3.3

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
1 2 3 4 5 25 26 27 Next All
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
May 13 2011 09:58 GMT
#1
Blizzard has explained its reasoning for the recent patch changes. This is always an interesting read and everyone should check it out!

http://sea.battle.net/sc2/en/blog/140933#blog

Straight from the bridge of the Hyperion we bring you the latest situation report for StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty. In this edition, we'll be discussing some of the most notable changes in the recently released patch 1.3.3 and shedding some more light on our design philosophy and the thinking behind this update.

Archons

After receiving and reviewing a lot of solid feedback about the archon from the StarCraft II community, we came to the agreement that having archons break Force Fields would increase strategic variety in protoss-vs.-protoss matchups. We were slightly worried that strategies such as mass Charge zealots plus archons would be too difficult to stop with only ground units, but in testing this on the PTR, we found that the relationship between the zealot- and archon-based strategies vs. the more standard robo-tech builds were proving to be fun.

Archons have generally been a slightly weak unit for their cost. This was a conscious design decision that we made since we wanted Morph to Archon to be a "recycle" ability. However, due to the size of the archon, we felt an increase in attack range was necessary so that the unit can get attacks in more easily, especially on the defensive.


Warpgate research, sentry build time, pylon radius

These three changes were made specifically to address the 4-gateway issue. The slight increase in Warp Gate research time should only really affect early-game strategies such as the 4-gate all-in. It was a challenge to find a research time high enough to achieve this goal without affecting other, non-early game strategies, but we eventually settled on 160. Regarding the sentry, it's the only tier-1 unit that's rarely used on the offensive in PvP 4-gate all-ins. However, they're almost always used on the defensive, so buffing this unit was the way to go in order to make defending easier.

The pylon power radius reduction will help the defending player take them out easier from above ramps, as well as make it so there are limited spots below cliffs where the opponent can build them in order to offensively warp in above. On the flip side, because protoss bases generally have plenty of pylon power, we’re not too worried about this affecting the defensive side too much -- though players might need to pay more attention to their base layouts.

On top of these changes, we're also looking into slightly changing how vision works on ramps so that if you use Force Field on your ramp just right, the opposing protoss player will not be able to spawn above your ramp or Blink stalkers up past a perfectly positioned Force Field. We will continue to monitor how the changes we made in 1.3.3 are working out before making the final call.
We hope these changes will resolve the 4-gate issue in PvP.


Bunker Salvage Rebate Reduction

This change was one of the most frequently requested by the community, and players made a lot of valid arguments as to why this change was necessary. We've seen too many bunker rushes vs. zerg, and we felt that adjusting the salvage return rate would be a positive change. Players will also have to think about mineral loss before constructing multiple bunkers on the defensive, which also feels right.


Ghost Build Cost

This cost change was a strategic, high-level change. We wanted ghosts to have a place in as many of the existing unit compositions out there as possible. For example: we wanted at least a few ghosts to come into play with the standard armies we currently see in each matchup. We feel ghost EMP is a vital tool at the highest skill levels, and we didn’t like how players had to choose between ghosts or something else. Therefore, we decided to keep the total costs the same while decreasing the gas cost so that they can more easily be added to whichever army terran players are currently using.
We realize having to manage so many units (including the ghost) can be difficult for many players, but at the same time we felt ghosts are only really vital at the highest skill levels because their counter-units are also micro-intensive.


Thor Strike Cannon is no longer cooldown-based

We generally haven’t reverted changes in the past, but at the same time, we’re not afraid to revert changes when we feel that we’ve made a mistake. Some rare strategies involve mass numbers of Thors using 250mm Strike Cannons to lock down protoss, leaving them with few options for response. While these situations are rare, and the strategies aren’t necessarily overpowered, there were still a few things we didn’t like.

First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.

Second, we felt counter relationships were turning too heavily. The nature of lockdown abilities in general is that they have the potential to heavily turn the tide of battle against armies that would otherwise counter your units. Most of these abilities, especially for an ability as strong as this one, have to be fairly difficult to bring out and easier to counter. We feel that having the additional counters of EMP/Feedback to the Strike Cannons ability is better so that we don’t get into degenerating situations where the opponent is stuck without recourse.

Infestor Speed Decrease

We like how infestors have been functioning across the board since the last patch. We feel the previous infestor buffs heavily contributed to making matchups solid, especially at the higher skill levels.

However, it was slightly problematic in some scenarios where infestors were getting away too easily. Even when it was off of creep, the infestor was slightly faster than normal units -- and on creep, it was considerably faster. We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them.


Spore Crawler Root Time

Air-based strategies vs. zerg are common due to zerg anti-air units coming out later than other races. Because of this, it actually makes sense for spore crawlers to be more flexible than other races' anti-air structures. If a zerg player is totally unprepared, we don't mind them just outright losing the game. However, what we didn't like was when zerg players still suffered considerable damage from void rays, phoenixes, and banshees, despite being prepared with spore crawlers that were slightly out of position. We decided to make this change so that it's somewhat easier to fend off these attacks, especially when you already have some spore crawlers in play.

As a side note, we don't feel the same way about spine crawlers, as there are being plenty of other anti-ground units zerg players can use along with the spine crawlers from the beginning of the game.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
curreh
Profile Joined September 2010
Australia265 Posts
May 13 2011 10:00 GMT
#2
wow we posted this at the exact same time mot ahaha, you can delete mine lol <3
I understand the thor energy reasoning a lot more now, I think they had good grounds to do it on
I think 4 gating still needs a few changes, it seems to remain quite strong but the archon changes were a good step forwards!
SlayerS Hwaiting! : )
Ezekyle
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Australia607 Posts
May 13 2011 10:02 GMT
#3
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.
motbob
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
United States12546 Posts
May 13 2011 10:04 GMT
#4
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.

If that's what you took out of what you read, I feel like you perhaps did not read closely enough.
ModeratorGood content always wins.
Dommk
Profile Joined May 2010
Australia4865 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-13 10:05:04
May 13 2011 10:04 GMT
#5
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.

Two reasons. One was that they didn't like it on a visual standpoint, and the other was that it was bad design for Strike cannons to work as well as it did
MetalSlug
Profile Joined February 2010
Germany443 Posts
May 13 2011 10:05 GMT
#6
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.


the wording "we don't like this" makes it even worse... im at a loss of words about this. Im actually not against the Thor nerv but the reasoning behind it is so retarded...
MKP | Maru | Nada | Boxer | Supernova | Keen
curreh
Profile Joined September 2010
Australia265 Posts
May 13 2011 10:06 GMT
#7
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.


Yeah I think your eyes are blinded by nerf rage ;P
Seriously I think they had very good reasoning for it, and I have no idea how you got that from what was in the post
SlayerS Hwaiting! : )
recklessfire
Profile Joined September 2010
United States373 Posts
May 13 2011 10:08 GMT
#8
We will never know if the thor strategies were imbalanced or not, but the strike cannons were NEGATING the counter units that protoss would make. In that regard, yea its reasonable why blizzard wasn't happy with an ability that powerful.
JuuMeijin
Profile Joined December 2009
Sweden164 Posts
May 13 2011 10:08 GMT
#9
Mass Thor being unstoppable vs. Protoss was a good thing according to you then?
y_y
Dommk
Profile Joined May 2010
Australia4865 Posts
May 13 2011 10:08 GMT
#10
On May 13 2011 19:05 MetalSlug wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.


the wording "we don't like this" makes it even worse... im at a loss of words about this. Im actually not against the Thor nerv but the reasoning behind it is so retarded...

Really?


Second, we felt counter relationships were turning too heavily. The nature of lockdown abilities in general is that they have the potential to heavily turn the tide of battle against armies that would otherwise counter your units. Most of these abilities, especially for an ability as strong as this one, have to be fairly difficult to bring out and easier to counter. We feel that having the additional counters of EMP/Feedback to the Strike Cannons ability is better so that we don’t get into degenerating situations where the opponent is stuck without recourse.


You found that "retarded"?
darmousseh
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States3437 Posts
May 13 2011 10:09 GMT
#11
This is, imo, the best patch blizzard has released yet. Every change makes perfect sense without affecting the overall balance of the game too much in anyone's favor. Essentially this patch makes pvp SOOOO much more flexible especially the sentry build time reduction and the massive + range of archons.

Developer for http://mtgfiddle.com
AndAgain
Profile Joined November 2010
United States2621 Posts
May 13 2011 10:11 GMT
#12
+ Show Spoiler +
"First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible."


That's an interesting view they have. It's the same reason why they got rid of the viking flower- because it made it difficult to see how many vikings there are.

I don't understand it given you can select all the units and look at the UI to count the number.
All your teeth should fall out and hair should grow in their place!
ridonkulous
Profile Joined May 2011
159 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-13 10:19:48
May 13 2011 10:14 GMT
#13
yes because mass marauders and vikings are so much more appealing to watch than thors
give us some t3 options vs retarded strong late game toss army otherwise terrans will just keep all ining or 2 base pushing and keep losing in normal macro games.

ps. just noticed they dont like mass spine crawlers too .... LOL
Ruscour
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
5233 Posts
May 13 2011 10:14 GMT
#14
"As a side note, we don't feel the same way about spine crawlers, as there are being plenty of other anti-ground units zerg players can use along with the spine crawlers from the beginning of the game."

Completely missing the point...I think Blizzard should have an internal discussion about IdrA's paradigm, races need either a method of scouting or a reactionary defense. This is saying that Zerg shouldn't be allowed to get the economic advantage they need to win...
TehForce
Profile Joined July 2010
1072 Posts
May 13 2011 10:15 GMT
#15
Blizzard is saying that
A) Mass Thors with uncounterable Strike Cannon Ability turns out to be very difficult to deal with and you get easily into a situation where you are in an unwinnable situation
B) Massing Thors as an available option is just stupid because it produces boring and not enjoyable games.

So why exactly is blizzards reasoning bad?
NesTea <3
sleepingdog
Profile Joined August 2008
Austria6145 Posts
May 13 2011 10:15 GMT
#16
On May 13 2011 19:02 Ezekyle wrote:
So it's now official that the thor was nerfed purely because Blizzard doesn't want people to use strategies that don't have their official seal of approval?

I don't even know how to describe this. Adjectives fail me.


Yeah, god forbid that Blizz patches the game so it is played how they intend it to...

Even though I disagree that mass-thors are really viable, I completely understand their reasoning. They obviously refer to the problem that mass-thors with strike-cannons hard-counter immortals as long as your thor-count is high enough to take out the "first row" of immortals. Strike cannon is as hard as a counter as it gets because it reduces the DPS of the attacked unit to....yes....zero.
This is a much harder counter than gravitron beam, because the unit is also DESTROYED not only immobilized.

My conclusion is, that Blizz wants immortals/templar being able to battle against thors - and that terrans who like to use high(er) numbers of thors have to implement ghosts in their play to take out templars before using strike cannons. Which, basicly, makes sense to me.
"You see....YOU SEE..." © 2010 Sen
papaz
Profile Joined December 2009
Sweden4149 Posts
May 13 2011 10:16 GMT
#17
It sure sounds like a good patch. Not that it doesn't make any difference for most of us.

However i found the Thor explanation be a bit too much "we don't want you to use Thor in X way so we changed it".

I expected more "Thor is so damn op so we nerfed it" argument.

Anyways, David Kim sure knows what he is doing being one of the highest (if not the highest) ranked randoms in the world so I'm not gonna even try to argue from my gold league point of view.
eviltomahawk
Profile Blog Joined August 2010
United States11135 Posts
May 13 2011 10:17 GMT
#18
On May 13 2011 19:11 AndAgain wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
"First, we definitely don’t like seeing Thors en masse. Due to the visual size of the unit, as well as a small pathing radius, Thors can obscure the other units in your army too easily. This can be problematic because it's important to know roughly how many units an opponent has when scouting. We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible."


That's an interesting view they have. It's the same reason why they got rid of the viking flower- because it made it difficult to see how many vikings there are.

I don't understand it given you can select all the units and look at the UI to count the number.

Hmmm... I don't think multiple unit/building selection works with enemy units unless observing.

Nevertheless, I do agree with Blizzard not wanting the Thor to become the "core" of an army. They were designed to be basically the ground equivalent of a capital ship like the Battlecruiser or Carrier, so it would be overpowered if massing too many of the unit gives too much of an un-counter-able advantage.
ㅇㅅㅌㅅ
Bagi
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany6799 Posts
May 13 2011 10:17 GMT
#19
I don't really understand this reasoning for the thor nerf.

They say they want the thor to be a support unit, but its not really designed to be one. The siege tank is a support unit - just having a few of them can turn the tide of battle with their splash damage, but they don't really work on their own. The colossus is the same, having a few of them can be hugely advantageous but they're not designed to be your main army.

Thors? They're not a strategic support unit, they're a 6 supply marauder. A few thors don't do anything special besides forcing mutas to go magic box. Is that what Blizzard wants their sole purpose to be?
Tppz!
Profile Joined October 2010
Germany1449 Posts
May 13 2011 10:21 GMT
#20
We want the Thor to be the type of unit that you add to your main army, and we definitely don’t want them to be the core of your army to the point where you strive to build as many as possible.


I'd like to ask Blizzard why Terran Pplayers should add the Thor t an Army if he has no function anymore but killing stacked mutas. There is no way you can add a Thor to an army as a support unit. Its 6 Supply each walking slower than anyrthing else so it can absorb the damage when you push.
1 2 3 4 5 25 26 27 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Korean StarCraft League
03:00
Week 77
davetesta95
EnkiAlexander 86
HKG_Chickenman67
IntoTheiNu 47
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nina 249
PiLiPiLi 14
StarCraft: Brood War
Sea 4826
NaDa 98
Dota 2
monkeys_forever599
NeuroSwarm130
febbydoto18
LuMiX1
League of Legends
JimRising 909
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor44
Other Games
summit1g11866
WinterStarcraft500
Livibee153
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV52
StarCraft: Brood War
UltimateBattle 6
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH282
• Hupsaiya 96
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
League of Legends
• Doublelift4876
• Lourlo999
• Stunt358
• masondota2206
Upcoming Events
CranKy Ducklings
5h 45m
RSL Revival
5h 45m
ByuN vs Cham
herO vs Reynor
FEL
11h 45m
RSL Revival
1d 5h
Clem vs Classic
SHIN vs Cure
FEL
1d 7h
BSL: ProLeague
1d 13h
Dewalt vs Bonyth
Replay Cast
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL 2v2 Season 3
HSC XXVII
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
Championship of Russia 2025
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025

Upcoming

2025 ACS Season 2: Qualifier
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
2025 ACS Season 2
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
FEL Cracov 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.