| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Venomous Drone
48 Posts
That reason just doesnt convince me. As for thor unit pathing and size obscuring army...what about ultras? They have a worse time with pathing due to theior melee attack. By the way, most terrans against which I play seem to have excess gas at the end of the game, so i dont quite see the reasoning behind the ghost cost change. It would seem that making them MORE gas intensive and less mineral intensivewould be better. I may be wrong as i dont play terran so just an idea. | ||
|
KaiserJohan
Sweden1808 Posts
Can anyone produce a high-level game TvP where T won with mass thors? | ||
|
fearus
China2164 Posts
On May 14 2011 19:45 KaiserJohan wrote: Thor en masse being imba? Can anyone produce a high-level game TvP where T won with mass thors? + Show Spoiler + Last game of Thorzain vs MC | ||
|
teekesselchen
Germany886 Posts
On May 14 2011 19:39 Venomous Drone wrote: By the way, most terrans against which I play seem to have excess gas at the end of the game, so i dont quite see the reasoning behind the ghost cost change. It would seem that making them MORE gas intensive and less mineral intensivewould be better. I may be wrong as i dont play terran so just an idea. Because it is not about the end of the game, but about seeing them earlier I think. Additionally, this makes Ghosts more viable as a part of Mech builds versus Protoss, which are -in my opinion- a great thing, because they bring back values from broodwar - positioning, map control, other types of harassment, further spread out games, more fun to watch fights. I LOVE the changes they made to Archons. I think DT builds are great fun to watch when they are used in a non-cheesy way, such as the DT-Expand style in TvP. And now this really increases the viabilitiy of DT builds while also adding a couple of cool new styles to TvZ. Finally an alternative to Colossi, while making Zealots more important again, I think this is absolutely cool. Bringing back a certain amount of Broodwar atmosphere, too. At the same time we might see more rather quick HT techs perhaps? Would enable another variant even. My hope is that this produces more harass-heavy, far spreadout games. DT openings are great for that purpose of spreading oneself, and having chargelots enables some cool harass style with units that are easier to throw away than Stalkers, and thus allow more frequent harassment. More spread out could also mean more Warp Prisms in return, and there we are bringing back a lot of underused units. | ||
|
ridonkulous
159 Posts
first nobody said its imba (definatly not blizzard) i see only low league players complaining about thors who are happy terran got nerfed 2nd your sample size of one game is laughable and proves nothing | ||
|
Huragius
Lithuania1506 Posts
| ||
|
FeyFey
Germany10114 Posts
 | ||
|
thesums
Taiwan257 Posts
2) i like the delayed 4gate, so many protoss 4 gate, and vs 2 rax expand it just dont work. So please protoss players do yourselves a favor and stop 4 gating all the time ! It is boring for you and me lol, and it is not going to work unless you actually trick me by maybe hiding the gates and pretending to expand (not very likely) 3) I dont like the fact thors use energy cause of feedback, if they want to nerf terran they should have nerfed the marine; either stutter step or 5 hp (back to SC1 hp) 4) i like the bunker, so now it wont be "free" 5) I get archon being able to resist concussive, but plus 1 range = same range as mutalisk. So with the faster shield regen than in BW, they are pretty much a bit too powerful i think. 6) Zerg spore burrow buff is excellent. 7) slower infestors is nice, so you can actually punish infestors when everything comes in one ctrl group :D 8) no comment about the ghost. vs zerg is nice since composition is gas heavy, but vs protoss sometimes is kinda hard, but we do have mules...so i am nto sure about this (since i pretty much only face 4gates still at plat level) 9) radius on pylon is nice so they cant warp stuff into my base as easily. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On May 14 2011 20:02 Huragius wrote: Well, they removed the mass thor strategy, but now all they will see is bio. I don't think anyone will mix-in thors in their builds against Protoss, better alternative would be to add ghosts and more marauders, lol. And really, why the fuck they haven't done anything about collosus ? Is massing them in every match-up and a-moving is what they intended and thors not ?... it's not "ned moar colosuz". most protoss get like 4-5 colossus then focus on support units and stargate/HT's. when's the last time a terran thought "i think i'll get 4-5 thors and then focus on X" ? :p | ||
|
thesums
Taiwan257 Posts
Have you watched the match carefully? You should notice the plus 2 on thorzain's mech armor, and that makes all the difference. And thorzain just had way more stuff, and unit comp-wise, MC had too many sentries, which are bad vs mech as FF dont work. Plus his hallucinations were seen by thorzain (either raven or scan I forget), so it is matter of outplaying and not imba. | ||
|
ridonkulous
159 Posts
| ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
That is imba, is your opinion. Blizz said it's not. | ||
|
Piledriver
United States1697 Posts
On May 14 2011 19:59 ridonkulous wrote: first nobody said its imba (definatly not blizzard) i see only low league players complaining about thors who are happy terran got nerfed 2nd your sample size of one game is laughable and proves nothing What a stupid post. The first poster (KaiserJohan) asked for a high level TvP game where T won with mass thors and the second poster (fearus) posted an example. He didnt say that Thors were imba, simply a game where Thors won the game outright for Terran. I think you are just a butthurt terran looking to vent your frustration on a random forum poster. Edit: Oh wow, a bunch of posters follow it up with similarly retarded posts. Well done. | ||
|
Sapphire.lux
Romania2620 Posts
On May 14 2011 20:29 Piledriver wrote: What a stupid post. The first poster (KaiserJohan) asked for a high level TvP game where T won with mass thors and the second poster (fearus) posted an example. He didnt say that Thors were imba, simply a game where Thors won the game outright for Terran. I think you are just a butthurt terran looking to vent your frustration on a random forum poster. Edit: Oh wow, a bunch of posters follow it up with similarly retarded posts. Well done. Not sure if you included me there but the my replay was to "fearus " for showing that example as a response to mass Thor being imba. | ||
|
Piledriver
United States1697 Posts
On May 14 2011 20:10 thesums wrote: 5) I get archon being able to resist concussive, but plus 1 range = same range as mutalisk. So with the faster shield regen than in BW, they are pretty much a bit too powerful i think. The faster shield regen is immaterial in actual combat because shields only regenerate when a unit hasn't been attacked for a set amount of time. IIRC in BW shields regenerated slowly even in combat.. Plus with their previous 2 range, they were literally kited by every possible unit that wasnt a zergling. Now atleast they have an opportunity to get some shots off before they evaporate due to being in the front lines. | ||
|
Cyber_Cheese
Australia3615 Posts
"Hi, we've made this unit, but we don't like it when people use it" | ||
|
s3rp
Germany3192 Posts
| ||
|
ridonkulous
159 Posts
On May 14 2011 20:29 Piledriver wrote: What a stupid post. The first poster (KaiserJohan) asked for a high level TvP game where T won with mass thors and the second poster (fearus) posted an example. He didnt say that Thors were imba, simply a game where Thors won the game outright for Terran. I think you are just a butthurt terran looking to vent your frustration on a random forum poster. Edit: Oh wow, a bunch of posters follow it up with similarly retarded posts. Well done. sorry to disappoint you im not butthurt nor terran player (nice try tho), Im just tired of reading bullcrap some low league players produce in here,.i used thors several times and failed my winrate with bio was much higher i might not care about the unit but i support variety of strategies for the health of the game and blizzard just killed few new ones with a shitty explanation before they even started being used. Its true i misread quoted post (sorry fearus ) but in my defense I can find plenty of posts in this topic which apply to what i said. | ||
|
shizna
United Kingdom803 Posts
On May 14 2011 20:58 s3rp wrote: Well they wanna have Thors in a Supporting role . Problem is they don't support anything other then by standing in the way and fire against clumped Mutas. For anything else Thors are pretty bad. essentially not true. thor ground dps per supply is higher than any other terran unit except marine against non-armoured, and is only slightly worse than marine, marauder and tank against armoured. but thor comes good when you factor in the extra high hp, which means that the dps is maintained fully until 400 hp has been depleted... 6 marines have a combined 270 hp, with no armour, and dps drops by 1/6th every 45 hp lost - even more inefficient against splash damage. ergo - thor has the highest average dps per supply out of every terran unit. the air attack is very weak, but at 10 range it makes it very difficult for air to do anything if the thor supported by marines or turrets. the weird thing is that thor can't use anti-air to shoot colossus, the 10 range weak-ass dps might be favourable to 7 range imba dps. queen uses air attack versus colossus, but thor can not. | ||
|
Sueco
Sweden283 Posts
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. The community has been saying this since launch. NOW they've reached that conclusion? What? 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. Sensible. Still only a half-measure to fix the broken warpgate/gateway mechanic. 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. Same thing. Almost a year to figure this out? What? 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. This makes sense. I never understood why ghosts were a semi-caster with the cost of a real caster. 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. Yet another half-baked change to fix the fundamentally broken decision of changing the T1 hydra before Beta began. | ||
| ||
StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
WardiTV Korean Royale
LAN Event
ByuN vs Zoun
TBD vs TriGGeR
Clem vs TBD
IPSL
JDConan vs WIZARD
WolFix vs Cross
BSL 21
spx vs rasowy
HBO vs KameZerg
Cross vs Razz
dxtr13 vs ZZZero
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
WardiTV Korean Royale
Replay Cast
Kung Fu Cup
Classic vs Solar
herO vs Cure
Reynor vs GuMiho
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
