|
On May 13 2011 20:45 ridonkulous wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 20:39 tdt wrote:On May 13 2011 19:59 Blizzard_torments_me wrote:On May 13 2011 19:55 Zrana wrote:
Out of interest, if you build a thor but dont research 250mm cannons, does the thor still have energy? Yes.It's just funny how all the Terran high tech units can be feedbacked and almost instagibed. Cry me a river. Ghost effect 100% of toss units, not just half, is area effect not single unit, and has longer range. ghosts and good emp hits are necessity if u even want to have half decent chance to win a fight vs toss army, dont make it sound like it was insta win because without it T army will just get rolled over.
Fixed it for you
Colossus or HT and good storms are necessary if you even want to have a half decent chance to win a fight vs Terran army.
|
On May 14 2011 05:18 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:10 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:41 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
no, but it's still a cointoss. just because someone did something the previous game doesn't mean he definitively will or will not do it in this game or future games. Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed. My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense. edited my post to make more sense Well you still aren't making any. The skill of any game is inherently defined by that game, weather it is considered "flawed" or not. The flaws you speak of have nothing to do with SC2 specifically, but they would be "flaws" with ANY rts game that uses fog of war. So play a different game. Lets make a game where you have a limited amount of information, and you can take steps against each other to obtain and/or deny information. Now lets make it possible where in that same game, you can ALWAYS have the information you need to make the correct decision. It is a contradiction that cannot exist in reality.
I have no problem with limited information or some amount of guessing. What I have a problem with is when guessing wrong flat out wins you the game, regardless of skill. If skill at guessing is the only skill there is, then SC2 is pretty much rock paper scissors with pretty graphics and you're right, I should find a new game. But it'll be a sad day when we accept that's the case.
Right now I feel like guessing correctly/incorrectly yields too much advantage or disadvantage. I don't want guessing and limited information removed, I want the impact of it reduced to a point where a player can come back through outplaying his opponent (mechanics, decisionmaking, experience, etc... those skills which aren't guessing)
|
On May 14 2011 05:01 eloist wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 00:10 Iyerbeth wrote:
I'm shocked at how many Terrans are upset that there is now more than one unit that Protoss has that can do anything against them, especially considering how easily that one unit was completely shut down with the Strike Cannons. You are only looking at part of the picture. Protoss not only gained a way to deal with thors but they did it in a way that terrans lost a way to deal with HTs. There is not a whole lot that can properly deal with HTs that terran has. Much like protoss didn't have much to deal with thors. So the way Blizzard went about it certainly warrants some discussion. Not only that but having to get strike cannons to have your thors be less vulnerable to the counter against strike cannons is obviously flawed.
...?
Thors shouldn't be a counter to Templar...Ghosts should be? When there is a unit that is strong enough to just sit in storm and kill your whole army, there is a problem. Battlecruisers and Thors should both have energy for the same reason.
Also, you're wrong about needing to research Strike Cannons to help stop the Templar counter. You just EMP your own Thors like people have been doing since beta. Now that ghosts are easier to get, you might as well use Strike Cannons too and just EMP Templar.
At least it now won't be mindless C CLICK C CLICK C CLICK to victory, and Protoss has a chance to do something about it.
|
The balance is tightening up. Thanks Blizzard.
|
I'm sure this has already been mentioned somewhere, but then I still want to repeat it: We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them.
normal movement speed... do they realize that an infestor is now slower than a fucking ultralisk off creep?! they could at least admit that it's speed is now "slow" and not "normal"
|
On May 14 2011 05:38 iaretehnoob wrote:I'm sure this has already been mentioned somewhere, but then I still want to repeat it: Show nested quote +We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them. normal movement speed... do they realize that an infestor is now slower than a fucking ultralisk off creep?! they could at least admit that it's speed is now "slow" and not "normal"
They are as fast as marine, marauder or zealot.
|
On May 14 2011 05:41 Michaels wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:38 iaretehnoob wrote:I'm sure this has already been mentioned somewhere, but then I still want to repeat it: We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them. normal movement speed... do they realize that an infestor is now slower than a fucking ultralisk off creep?! they could at least admit that it's speed is now "slow" and not "normal" They are as fast as marine, marauder or zealot.
Before Stim, Stim, and Charge.
|
On May 14 2011 05:38 iaretehnoob wrote:I'm sure this has already been mentioned somewhere, but then I still want to repeat it: Show nested quote +We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them. normal movement speed... do they realize that an infestor is now slower than a fucking ultralisk off creep?! they could at least admit that it's speed is now "slow" and not "normal"
2.25 is pretty much the SC2 baseline speed, so yeah, it's normal. On the slow side for Zerg as they generally have very fast units, but overall it's a normal speed. Siege tanks, marines, marauders, hydras, colossi, immortals and probably a bunch more all have 2.25 speed.
|
On May 14 2011 05:31 MonsieurGrimm wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:18 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:10 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:46 Treemonkeys wrote:
[quote]
Maybe this game isn't for you then, honestly. There are ways to win mind games, but there is no way to guarantee you will win every game of SC2, and that seems to be what you are looking for. The annoying part is people acting like BW wasn't exactly like this. That's why people in BW with 70% win rates are so godly, 100% win rate is not realistically possible. yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed. My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense. edited my post to make more sense Well you still aren't making any. The skill of any game is inherently defined by that game, weather it is considered "flawed" or not. The flaws you speak of have nothing to do with SC2 specifically, but they would be "flaws" with ANY rts game that uses fog of war. So play a different game. Lets make a game where you have a limited amount of information, and you can take steps against each other to obtain and/or deny information. Now lets make it possible where in that same game, you can ALWAYS have the information you need to make the correct decision. It is a contradiction that cannot exist in reality. I have no problem with limited information or some amount of guessing. What I have a problem with is when guessing wrong flat out wins you the game, regardless of skill. If skill at guessing is the only skill there is, then SC2 is pretty much rock paper scissors with pretty graphics and you're right, I should find a new game. But it'll be a sad day when we accept that's the case. Right now I feel like guessing correctly/incorrectly yields too much advantage or disadvantage. I don't want guessing and limited information removed, I want the impact of it reduced to a point where a player can come back through outplaying his opponent (mechanics, decisionmaking, experience, etc... those skills which aren't guessing)
The impact is reduced based on how good you are at decision making, these drastic situations you talk about are already pretty rare at the highest level and will become more and more rare as the game gets figured out - basically as the skill level of game sense gets higher.
4 gate nexus cancel is as nasty as it is new, I'm sure it will get figured out. There is already a decent enough response to it, you can do the 24 drone roach/ling all in to punish if it is 3 gate expand and be ready to defend if it is a 4 gate nexus cancel. This doesn't work on all maps but people will also figure out better ways to deal with it...or worst case every toss abuses the fuck out of 4 gate nexus cancel and then the map pool will change to deal with it.
|
On May 14 2011 05:41 Michaels wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:38 iaretehnoob wrote:I'm sure this has already been mentioned somewhere, but then I still want to repeat it: We decided to give infestors normal movement speed off of creep to make it easier to catch up to them and kill them. normal movement speed... do they realize that an infestor is now slower than a fucking ultralisk off creep?! they could at least admit that it's speed is now "slow" and not "normal" They are as fast as marine, marauder or zealot.
and colossus, their protoss equivalent (although colossus can cliffwalk, but still.)
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
I like all the patch changes bar the Thor Strike Cannon change. Not because it now has energy, I think that will lead to cool micro battles between getting the strike or EMP off before the feedback hits. Combined with the Archon buff I hope we will see more Templar based play.
However, I really don't like how long it takes to get or regain a Strike cannon. It now takes an absolute age, so that kinda makes it completely useless.
|
On May 14 2011 05:43 Treemonkeys wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 05:31 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:18 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:11 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:10 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 05:08 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 05:00 Treemonkeys wrote:On May 14 2011 04:56 MonsieurGrimm wrote:On May 14 2011 04:53 Coriolis wrote:On May 14 2011 04:49 MonsieurGrimm wrote:
[quote]
yeah, but what I'm saying is that a skilled player should be able to come back from a disadvantage, but in SC2 the impact of an incorrect guess is almost insurmountable. if you're playing against someone half as good as you, you should be able to have a 99% win rate.. I don't feel like this is the case in SC2. It isn't this way in brood war either. There are plenty of people who aren't even close to being as good as flash but can snipe him with a cheese or all in build. And yet hes still considered a god with his "mere" 70% win rate. And no, a skilled player shouldn't be able to come back from a disadvantage unless their opponent screws up. That is why its a disadvantage. what I meant was a more skilled player, sorry :S. a player with more skill than his opponent makes fewer mistakes, and therefore can get back into the game, but in SC2 your opponent needs to make so many mistakes to lose the advantage. maybe 99% was an exaggerated figure, but my point still stands, if you're playing against someone half as good as you you should be able to win more than half the time. If you're truly better than your opponent you shouldn't be at a disadvantage anyways, that means you screwed up or they're better than you. if by screwed up you mean guessed wrong, yeah I guess you screwed up. You're point is completely flawed because you have some arbitrary measurement of skill inside your head where winning and losing at SC2 does not apply. The opponent who has "more skill should win" but doesn't - then it is your definition of skill that is flawed, not the game. so if blizzard patched the game tomorrow and zealots had 2000 hp, nestea would be a worse player than my bronze league protoss friend? its your logic which is flawed. My logic is flawed because Blizz could break the game if they wanted to? You aren't making any sense. edited my post to make more sense Well you still aren't making any. The skill of any game is inherently defined by that game, weather it is considered "flawed" or not. The flaws you speak of have nothing to do with SC2 specifically, but they would be "flaws" with ANY rts game that uses fog of war. So play a different game. Lets make a game where you have a limited amount of information, and you can take steps against each other to obtain and/or deny information. Now lets make it possible where in that same game, you can ALWAYS have the information you need to make the correct decision. It is a contradiction that cannot exist in reality. I have no problem with limited information or some amount of guessing. What I have a problem with is when guessing wrong flat out wins you the game, regardless of skill. If skill at guessing is the only skill there is, then SC2 is pretty much rock paper scissors with pretty graphics and you're right, I should find a new game. But it'll be a sad day when we accept that's the case. Right now I feel like guessing correctly/incorrectly yields too much advantage or disadvantage. I don't want guessing and limited information removed, I want the impact of it reduced to a point where a player can come back through outplaying his opponent (mechanics, decisionmaking, experience, etc... those skills which aren't guessing) The impact is reduced based on how good you are at decision making, these drastic situations you talk about are already pretty rare at the highest level and will become more and more rare as the game gets figured out - basically as the skill level of game sense gets higher. 4 gate nexus cancel is as nasty as it is new, I'm sure it will get figured out. There is already a decent enough response to it, you can do the 24 drone roach/ling all in to punish if it is 3 gate expand and be ready to defend if it is a 4 gate nexus cancel. This doesn't work on all maps but people will also figure out better ways to deal with it...or worst case every toss abuses the fuck out of 4 gate nexus cancel and then the map pool will change to deal with it.
well, yeah, all we can do is wait and see what happens... but I'm not convinced yet.
I think we should leave it at that, though. this discussion has nowhere else to go and I think we fleshed out the argument nicely :D
|
WTF, so Blizzard made thor useless in TvP (thor rush no longer viable, and now countered by templar in late game) because they are physically too large? Just make it smaller for christs sake. Colossus stack ON TOP of a toss army, why the hell isn't that a problem? Get three or four and I can't see what the hell kind of tech you have under there.
"I can't see you army cuz your thor is in the way so lets just make it so people don't use thors and we won't have this problem." Worst balance logic I've ever heard.
The secondary argument of strike cannons being too good is also laughable. Strike cannons do very close to the same dps as normal thor attack, plus it makes the thor immobile and makes other units' pathing wonk out so they can't attack. There are only 2 situations where strike cannons are useful: killing immos in an early thor rush (in large thor numbers, one cannot get a concave worth crap and the immos win easy due to smaller size, and the infantry pathing getting messed) and halting retreating colossus. The second of which should never happen unless the toss player has terribad micro.
I don't want to go MMM every single damn game, especially since it is hard countered by toss in late game.
I'd rather have NO strike cannons and no energy than useless strike cannons and a giant vulnerability to templar.
/rage
|
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.
I agree that I think this patch is ridiculous as it makes Thors exceedingly weak in the TvP match-up. I guess now before big battles you have to EMP your own Thors just to make them less susceptible to Feedback so that they don't start off the fight with half hitpoints.
I'm usually behind Blizzard's patches, but then there are some (the two that come to mind are this and the Nitro Pack nerf) that I think that take a prominent strategy and rather than nerf it make it completely impossible to do. For example, a better way to change the mass Reaper TvZ that had emerged would be to increase the cost of Nitro Packs (perhaps make it cost 100/100) so that early game it would be harder to execute, but it wouldn't completely remove the strategy.
Of course, instead all it really did was completely remove Reapers from the TvZ match-up. There are better ways that they could have executed this patch too, for instance: they could have increased the CD of the Thor cannons and make them start with the CD active. Or, they simply could just reduce the energy cost to use Thor Cannons, so that they are still weak to Feedback, but the cannons are also usable earlier in the game.
|
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.
not if you are the opponent.
|
i completely dissagre with the mass thor resoning. If were talking bronze leage turtle untill 200/200 thors sure its overpowered but i dont think ive seen a game in sc2, professionally with MASS thors.
|
I personally think that if they went with giving the Thor energy again, they'd at least give it 150 starting energy or an upgrade for it. The good thing about the non-Energy Strike Cannon is that Thor came out with the ability to use them right out of the gate.
|
Russian Federation325 Posts
Hmmmm I've seen all GSL games and plenty of TSL/NASL/MLG etc and I don't remember a single thor in TvP except thorzain vs tyler on xelnaga caverns. "We don't like thors en masse", huh?
|
I feel the thor nerf was overreaction from Blizzard. Like "omg, Thorzain beat Tyler and MC using a thor build ! Let's nerf it !" I mean, those 2 games are the 2 only competitive usage of thor centric play in TvP, so no one really had time trying to counter it, and now they nerf it.
I can understand part of the reasoning, but it's more game "modeling" than game balancing if I understand correctly.
|
Are you guys serious about Thor not longer being viable?
Feedback: Damage = Mana pool depleted.
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Feedback
Thor: 400 hp, starts with 50 mana, and max 200 mana. Strike Cannon uses 150 energy, so only Thors who have been around for a while will be affected badly and by that time they can use Strike cannons\be emp'd.
Its still a nerf, but its not like the optimal way to counter thors will be Mass feedbacking(and I still prefer them wasting a feedback on a Thor than on a banshee\medevac/thor ) Ltes just wait and see. I don't think the Thorzain build is really affected that badly by this
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
