|
On May 14 2011 06:14 gogatorsfoster wrote:
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.
It would of knocked Fruit Dealer out of GSL1 against oGsTOP on Kulas if ultralisks didn't have nuclear missile splash damage at the time.
It was 15 2-2 thors vs like 10 1-2 ultra without armor upgrade, lol.
|
Am I the only one who doesnt like Blizzard reasoning, not in they way they patch but in the way they think. I was a bit shocked when I read that they didnt want Thors to be a unit can you can mass and that it was rather "this" kind of unit.
It seems to me like they want the game to be played the way they think it should be played without leaving a room for players to come up with new stuff.
|
well massing one single unit is hardly creative and a new way to play.
|
On May 14 2011 06:14 gogatorsfoster wrote:
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.
"Mass" is a relative term, in the context of the post i'd wager they're just referring to thors being the primary bulk of your army.
I've seen first-hand some profoundly strong 2 base thor timings that come with 5-6 thors, marines, and about 15-20 scv's. Even if you play the safest build possible (2g 1r), scout it very early, identify the impending timing rush, and keep up with him in economy while building a "counter" army of gateway units & continuosly chrono'd immortals, if he controls it right the chances of your survival is still low.
If you've never seen it or experienced it, then you probably just haven't played enough protoss on the ladder.
With this change that push will have 2-3 fewer strike cannons, which is all the protoss needs to survive it assuming they'd prepared properly.
|
On May 13 2011 20:05 Zerokaiser wrote:
Lots of whiners looking for things to bitch about Blizzard for.
This situation report is starting to make me optimistic: Blizzard is starting to settle down and the game is starting to be ironed out of its less favourable wrinkles.
Thor change is reasonable. Ghost change is perfectly reasonable. Archon and Warpgate changes are reasonable. Infestor and Spore changes are reasonable.
The game is taking a direction towards having a higher skill ceiling and being less all-inny. How is this a bad thing?
It doesn't matter if it's being ironed out that way if it's being made incredibly boring. Instead of being creative in any way to solve a (not even definitive) issue, they more or less completely removed a strategy because they didn't like the idea of it. It's this kind of crap that will ultimately make SC2 as stagnant and as boring as WC3 was to watch.
Not only that, this sets a precedent of Blizzard saying that they don't like the players making innovations, and they only want us to play the game the way they want it to be played. That is completely counterproductive if you want something to actually succeed as an e-sport.
|
On May 13 2011 20:54 tdt wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 19:30 dust7 wrote:On May 13 2011 19:25 TehForce wrote:Thors could destroy the only unit on p side which is cost effective (immortal) easily on their own. What about Chargelots and Voidrays, or microed Colossi (Range 9 > Range 7)? They all fail to mass thor. Chargelots need ~50 hits to kill a +3 armor thor. Meanwhile Thors are 3 shottting chargelots with thier massive 50DPS not to mention mass hellions burning them up which support. Stalker same pathetic results. VR clump and take massive damage to thor splash not to mention the 12 vikings supporting shooting at them. Colossi get one shotted by SC and can't even do their pathetic 18DPS since they are frozen until they die. Immo's one shotted by SC DT's die because you build a raven and have scans Trust me I've played ~20 custom games vs mass thor and only thing effective is mass carrier with phoenix support both +3 attack.
It takes a zealot 29 hits to kill a thor when thor has +3 armor and the zealot +3weapons.
Nerfing thors this heavily was really uncalled for.
Want to know a few other units which obliterate enemy armies in seconds? Colossi, HTs. Go figure
|
They should just remove the ability -_-. Mass thors are still viable, you just need ghosts to EMP the Thors and Immortals.
Wow just ralize how stupid that sounds. EMP Thors=Special Tactics
|
OMFG you can hide your army behind a thor! Lets nerf it into oblivion!
|
Agreed with most of it, save the Thor comment.
If players want to go mass Thor and they can make it work, let them!
There shouldn't be anything preventing players from coming up with Thor-centric strategies.
The unit has its own weaknesses and strength already.
The Thor as a support unit Blizz? Look at its health, its damage, its cost and its place in the Tech Tree. It is not a support unit, it is basically a huge marine with a lot more hitpoints.
If you want it more as a support unit Blizz, up the range on the ground weapons or let the air attack hit Colossi.
Currently Thors are generally always up front.
Just because blizz "doesn't like mass Thor" is no reason to discourage players doing it.
Mass Ultralisk and mass Colossus is fine, what's wrong with mass Thor.
I can think of dozens of ways Protoss and Zerg could deal with it, old strike cannons or not.
Also, hostile EMP in TvT against Thors Blizz...hah!
I'd LOVE to see mass Thor in TvT, if it ever happened.
And even then, what on earth would you possible want to use the strike cannons on?
Note to few posts above: Chargelots eat Thors alive, +3 armor or not, Thors just get surrounded by massive amounts of Chargelots and once that happens the Thor dies very very quickly.
Zealots are only 100 minerals compared to the 300/200 of a single Thor, it's pretty easy to mass them against mass Thor.
|
I can't believe all you Terran players are whining so much about the Thor nerf. Thor's are ridiculously strong even without Strike Cannons. I would bet that at least half of you having a whinge don't even research Strike Cannons. You're just having a fucking cry cause your race got a nerf, regardless of whether it affects your play or not.
Fully upgraded Thor DPS: (61)
Fully upgraded Immortal DPS vs Armoured: (45)
Fully upgraded Hydralisk DPS: (18.1) x 4 = 72.4
It has 33% more damage than an Immortal which we all know does INSANE damage vs Armoured. And almost as much damage as four Hydralisks. Not to mention it can be mass repaired.
Do you people even realise what the change does? It simply means you can't rush Thors and have Strike Cannons available immediately. All of you complaining probably sit in your base and turtle to 200/200 anyways.
Stop fucking whining when something gets changed for a valid reason for once.
Edit: read the stats off Liquipedia wrong.
|
On May 14 2011 08:44 foxmeep wrote:
I can't believe all you Terran players are whining so much about the Thor nerf. Thor's are ridiculously strong even without Strike Cannons. I would bet that at least half of you having a whinge don't even research Strike Cannons. You're just having a fucking cry cause your race got a nerf, regardless of whether it affects your play or not.
You are missing the big point which is that Thors without strike cannons have been nerfed much more by this than Thors with strike cannons.
On May 14 2011 08:44 foxmeep wrote:Do you people even realise what the change does? It simply means you can't rush Thors and have Strike Cannons available immediately.
This is wrong. Thors can get Fedbacked and lose half their health even if you don't have strike cannons. This is a nerf that has nothing to do with the ability itself.
|
On May 14 2011 08:44 foxmeep wrote:
I can't believe all you Terran players are whining so much about the Thor nerf. Thor's are ridiculously strong even without Strike Cannons. I would bet that at least half of you having a whinge don't even research Strike Cannons. You're just having a fucking cry cause your race got a nerf, regardless of whether it affects your play or not.
Fully upgraded Thor DPS: (61)
Fully upgraded Immortal DPS vs Armoured: (44.7) x 2 = 89.4
Fully upgraded Hydralisk DPS: (18.1) x 4 = 72.4
It nearly has as much DPS as two Immortals vs Armoured and four Hydralisks.
Do you people even realise what the change does? It simply means you can't rush Thors and have Strike Cannons available immediately. All of you complaining probably sit in your base and turtle to 200/200 anyways.
Stop fucking whining when something gets changed for a valid reason for once.
Edit: read the stats off Liquipedia wrong.
Try actually using the Thor instead of coming up with nonsense critics and insults.
The Thor's raw DPS isn't the issue, it's applying it optimally and actually getting to Thors.
Actually going Thors and being able to take full advantage of them is incredibly hard.
Against Protoss the range 9 on the Colossus and Chargelot surrounds make it extremely difficult for Thors to be useful. They generally just get stuck in a Chargelot surround trying to hit something. Void Rays deal with them very effectively as well.
Against Zerg, the Thor is so immobile it is basically nothing more than a more immobile Colossus with less range and no splash damage.
Sure, it would decimate any kind of upfront gateway or roach army (as would MMM), but who throws that against a Thor army?
The Thor is a good unit, no doubt, but it is hardly the omg unit that needed a nerf.
Just can't just look at the raw DPS and health and state how strong it is.
Actually try and use it ingame and you'll find out how hard it is to make Thors work.
|
On May 14 2011 08:56 Thezzy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 08:44 foxmeep wrote:
I can't believe all you Terran players are whining so much about the Thor nerf. Thor's are ridiculously strong even without Strike Cannons. I would bet that at least half of you having a whinge don't even research Strike Cannons. You're just having a fucking cry cause your race got a nerf, regardless of whether it affects your play or not.
Fully upgraded Thor DPS: (61)
Fully upgraded Immortal DPS vs Armoured: (44.7) x 2 = 89.4
Fully upgraded Hydralisk DPS: (18.1) x 4 = 72.4
It nearly has as much DPS as two Immortals vs Armoured and four Hydralisks.
Do you people even realise what the change does? It simply means you can't rush Thors and have Strike Cannons available immediately. All of you complaining probably sit in your base and turtle to 200/200 anyways.
Stop fucking whining when something gets changed for a valid reason for once.
Edit: read the stats off Liquipedia wrong. Try actually using the Thor instead of coming up with nonsense critics and insults. The Thor's raw DPS isn't the issue, it's applying it optimally and actually getting to Thors. Actually going Thors and being able to take full advantage of them is incredibly hard. Against Protoss the range 9 on the Colossus and Chargelot surrounds make it extremely difficult for Thors to be useful. They generally just get stuck in a Chargelot surround trying to hit something. Void Rays deal with them very effectively as well. Against Zerg, the Thor is so immobile it is basically nothing more than a more immobile Colossus with less range and no splash damage. Sure, it would decimate any kind of upfront gateway or roach army (as would MMM), but who throws that against a Thor army? The Thor is a good unit, no doubt, but it is hardly the omg unit that needed a nerf. Just can't just look at the raw DPS and health and state how strong it is. Actually try and use it ingame and you'll find out how hard it is to make Thors work.
You're basically telling me that because Thors are difficult to use effectively, it doesn't warrant ANY form of nerf on them. Well sorry, that's not how things work. They hard countered immortals with Strike Cannons, which were designed to be a counter to units like Thors. They decided to change this.
I'll give you a tip to vastly increase the effectiveness of your Thors. Go look at Broodwar Reaver/Shuttle micro, and apply that to your Thor. In fact, I daresay it would fully address all the issues you just mentioned.
|
Yeah Reaver Shuttle Micro against Stalkers with Blinks what a great idea. And since Strike Cannon are not autocast and Thor don't do anykind of Aoe it's completely different. So you tell me i have to fly in my Thors into the opponent army ( which could be killed easily if i do that ) land all of them seperately and then use strike Cannons on Colossi . Yeah that sounds reasonable.
|
On May 14 2011 09:57 s3rp wrote:
Yeah Reaver Shuttle Micro against Stalkers with Blinks what a great idea. And since Strike Cannon are not autocast and Thor don't do anykind of Aoe it's completely different. So you tell me i have to fly in my Thors into the opponent army ( which could be killed easily if i do that ) land all of them seperately and then use strike Cannons on Colossi . Yeah that sounds reasonable.
Who says you have to fly INTO their army? Thor has 7 range, more than any gateway/Zerg unit. You should have tanks/vikings to deal with Colo anyways, that's not what Thors are for. Who flies Reavers directly into an enemy army?
If he blinks to kill your Medivac, not only should you be able to drop the Thor before he kills it, he will lose every single one of those stalkers to the rest of your army.
Again, all I hear is "I can't A-move and win with it, so it shouldn't be nerfed.". This mentality has plagued SC2.
|
On May 14 2011 10:14 foxmeep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 09:57 s3rp wrote:
Yeah Reaver Shuttle Micro against Stalkers with Blinks what a great idea. And since Strike Cannon are not autocast and Thor don't do anykind of Aoe it's completely different. So you tell me i have to fly in my Thors into the opponent army ( which could be killed easily if i do that ) land all of them seperately and then use strike Cannons on Colossi . Yeah that sounds reasonable. Who says you have to fly INTO their army? Thor has 7 range, more than any gateway/Zerg unit. You should have tanks/vikings to deal with Colo anyways, that's not what Thors are for. Who flies Reavers directly into an enemy army? If he blinks to kill your Medivac, not only should you be able to drop the Thor before he kills it, he will lose every single one of those stalkers to the rest of your army. Again, all I hear is "I can't A-move and win with it, so it shouldn't be nerfed.". This mentality has plagued SC2.
Ok i misunderstood i thought you wanted me to flank with Medivacs carrieng thors to kill Thors . But if thats no what you want me to do why exactly should Thors be in Dropsships ? Theres no reason to Drop and Pick them Up all the time .
|
On May 13 2011 19:17 Bagi wrote:
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?
Pretty sure that the changes were made in mind for gold league and below. Massing thors are never quite viable above those leagues, but when you have two players turtling it out and not scouting it can become quite a unbeatable army composition.
|
On May 14 2011 10:32 Meteora.GB wrote:Show nested quote +On May 13 2011 19:17 Bagi wrote:
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? Pretty sure that the changes were made in mind for gold league and below. Massing thors are never quite viable above those leagues, but when you have two players turtling it out and not scouting it can become quite a unbeatable army composition.
think mass bc are 10x times better than thors for low league turtlers, should we expect a nerf soon?
|
I've tried to read a lot of this thread, but hopefully I didn't miss this. I see quite a bit about the Thor change, and how it nerfs Thors without strike cannon. So, why not just make Thors have no energy until Strike Cannon is researched at which point all Thors that have already been produced get their energy bar and an instant 50 energy?
|
On May 14 2011 09:47 foxmeep wrote:Show nested quote +On May 14 2011 08:56 Thezzy wrote:On May 14 2011 08:44 foxmeep wrote:
I can't believe all you Terran players are whining so much about the Thor nerf. Thor's are ridiculously strong even without Strike Cannons. I would bet that at least half of you having a whinge don't even research Strike Cannons. You're just having a fucking cry cause your race got a nerf, regardless of whether it affects your play or not.
Fully upgraded Thor DPS: (61)
Fully upgraded Immortal DPS vs Armoured: (44.7) x 2 = 89.4
Fully upgraded Hydralisk DPS: (18.1) x 4 = 72.4
It nearly has as much DPS as two Immortals vs Armoured and four Hydralisks.
Do you people even realise what the change does? It simply means you can't rush Thors and have Strike Cannons available immediately. All of you complaining probably sit in your base and turtle to 200/200 anyways.
Stop fucking whining when something gets changed for a valid reason for once.
Edit: read the stats off Liquipedia wrong. Try actually using the Thor instead of coming up with nonsense critics and insults. The Thor's raw DPS isn't the issue, it's applying it optimally and actually getting to Thors. Actually going Thors and being able to take full advantage of them is incredibly hard. Against Protoss the range 9 on the Colossus and Chargelot surrounds make it extremely difficult for Thors to be useful. They generally just get stuck in a Chargelot surround trying to hit something. Void Rays deal with them very effectively as well. Against Zerg, the Thor is so immobile it is basically nothing more than a more immobile Colossus with less range and no splash damage. Sure, it would decimate any kind of upfront gateway or roach army (as would MMM), but who throws that against a Thor army? The Thor is a good unit, no doubt, but it is hardly the omg unit that needed a nerf. Just can't just look at the raw DPS and health and state how strong it is. Actually try and use it ingame and you'll find out how hard it is to make Thors work. You're basically telling me that because Thors are difficult to use effectively, it doesn't warrant ANY form of nerf on them. Well sorry, that's not how things work. They hard countered immortals with Strike Cannons, which were designed to be a counter to units like Thors. They decided to change this. I'll give you a tip to vastly increase the effectiveness of your Thors. Go look at Broodwar Reaver/Shuttle micro, and apply that to your Thor. In fact, I daresay it would fully address all the issues you just mentioned.
So you are just completely ignoring my point that thors without cannons got nefed even more and for basically no reason? I don't think anyone really cares all that much that strike cannons is a little less good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
