|
On June 08 2014 20:36 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2014 00:45 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 06 2014 23:34 TheDwf wrote:On June 06 2014 23:28 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2014 17:39 Foreverkul wrote:On June 06 2014 16:54 Big J wrote:
Sounds more like a topic for the Terran Help Me Thread then, if you are only here to discuss whether you can or cannot rush a Protoss as Terran. My gripe isn't with whether can rush or not, and using any specific game doesn't settle any point (its just one posible example), my problem is the impact of Oracles on PvT. Oracles are a light fast, high DPS unit. How do you stop Oracles? In PvZ, Zerg has Queens which are a natural unit to build. In PvP, Protoss will have Stalkers and/or Phoenix and/or Overcharge, all on a natural build path. In PvT, Terran has Marines. But then there's a problem. Oracles kill workers fast, but whats really similar to a worker in HP? Marines. Meaning that the Terran natural counter is countered by Oracle. You need at least 4 marines at the same place, any less and you're dead. You can't even make more marines because they die so fast they deal 0 damage. Turrets would be ideal, but are not part of the natural build order (hurting economy) and they only protect against oracle, they have no other use in PvT when in the mineral line (except for DTs, but they come out later and are not as devastating). This doesn't account for the fact Terran needs to be applying pressure, so its not likely they will have just 4 marines standing in the mineral line. The idea of the Oracle is good (same with Overcharge), but they didn't just fill a gap in Protoss tech, they created an even bigger gap in Terran tech, thus contributing to the scarcity of Terran at high levels. (Note they aren't the sole cause of the problem, its the combination of lots of small problems.) Don't you wish Oracles had a non-damage harass system that dealt minimal damage but, over time, could weaken enemy economy only through consistent and persistent unit control. Its like Blizzard knew what they were doing until the community asked for more DPS. If you refer to Entomb, it looked fairly terrible. Aye, but interesting. One of the few innovative things the team came up with, even if it wasn't polished. I like what the Oracle wants to be, a good harass unit that allows for lots of player skill to show, but it is implemented poorly and lazy, like so many other things in this game. No. It had no way of differentiating skills. It was a purely shift-click ability.
What are you saying "No" to? It didn't have many ways of differentiating player skill and i din't say it did. It had an original (compared to other stuff in the game) way of doing dmg.
|
On June 09 2014 17:22 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2014 20:36 Hider wrote:On June 07 2014 00:45 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 06 2014 23:34 TheDwf wrote:On June 06 2014 23:28 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2014 17:39 Foreverkul wrote:On June 06 2014 16:54 Big J wrote:
Sounds more like a topic for the Terran Help Me Thread then, if you are only here to discuss whether you can or cannot rush a Protoss as Terran. My gripe isn't with whether can rush or not, and using any specific game doesn't settle any point (its just one posible example), my problem is the impact of Oracles on PvT. Oracles are a light fast, high DPS unit. How do you stop Oracles? In PvZ, Zerg has Queens which are a natural unit to build. In PvP, Protoss will have Stalkers and/or Phoenix and/or Overcharge, all on a natural build path. In PvT, Terran has Marines. But then there's a problem. Oracles kill workers fast, but whats really similar to a worker in HP? Marines. Meaning that the Terran natural counter is countered by Oracle. You need at least 4 marines at the same place, any less and you're dead. You can't even make more marines because they die so fast they deal 0 damage. Turrets would be ideal, but are not part of the natural build order (hurting economy) and they only protect against oracle, they have no other use in PvT when in the mineral line (except for DTs, but they come out later and are not as devastating). This doesn't account for the fact Terran needs to be applying pressure, so its not likely they will have just 4 marines standing in the mineral line. The idea of the Oracle is good (same with Overcharge), but they didn't just fill a gap in Protoss tech, they created an even bigger gap in Terran tech, thus contributing to the scarcity of Terran at high levels. (Note they aren't the sole cause of the problem, its the combination of lots of small problems.) Don't you wish Oracles had a non-damage harass system that dealt minimal damage but, over time, could weaken enemy economy only through consistent and persistent unit control. Its like Blizzard knew what they were doing until the community asked for more DPS. If you refer to Entomb, it looked fairly terrible. Aye, but interesting. One of the few innovative things the team came up with, even if it wasn't polished. I like what the Oracle wants to be, a good harass unit that allows for lots of player skill to show, but it is implemented poorly and lazy, like so many other things in this game. No. It had no way of differentiating skills. It was a purely shift-click ability. What are you saying "No" to? It didn't have many ways of differentiating player skill and i din't say it did. It had an original (compared to other stuff in the game) way of doing dmg.
It wasn't interesting, and had no potential regardless of refinment IMO.
Blizzard should simply rewatch Lalush's vidoe on depht of micro. All the Oracle ever needed to get was a proper moving shot, which allowed players to micro it. As a compensation it could have got a much lower damage. Then it could actually reward micro and be useful later on in the game instead of rewarding build-order luck.
It never needed any fancy abilities and clicking on a mineral path is just never gonna be fun.
I also disagree that Blizzards aren't innovative. They added a lot of unique ideas to Sc2. The oracle, however, never needed to be innovative. It just needed to be fun.
|
Hooray!!!! 1000 pages of balance whine! How many threads on TL can claim that?
I kind of wish Entomb had been a channel ability – and maybe a "block building" instead of "block minerals." Then it would have non-mineral-blocking applications, and the mining harass would only apply while the oracle was around. If I recall they were testing giving it a banish building, but it was a lot stronger – for instance you could banish a spawning pool and Zerg couldn't build zerglings. Just blocking a building would only really apply to blocking mining or defensive structures (or, I suppose, blocking unit producing structures, but if no one uses overseers for that they won't use oracles either).
That said, there's not really anything wrong with a worker-killing harass flyer for Protoss. In general the threat of flying worker harass to force defensive positioning is a pretty good mechanic in SC2, much as it makes TvP frustrating.
|
On June 09 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:
Well, the point was that many spells arent shift-click abilities. You need accuracy and beeing able to forsee his next movement.
Anyway.
Ye. I to believe entomb could work out in the end with tweaks.
Or atleast, become alot better than it was.
Hider pointed out that it would be a pure shift-click ability, which i dont think would be true if the unit and spell got tweaked. Just as you say, the idea was sound but purely implemented. I feel Blizzard do this all the time nowadays.
The oracle could receive less health. The spell could last a shorter duration likey you pointed out.
2-3 sec, or 4-5 sec.
And also make it like forcefield, not destroyable. Like you said.
A 4-5 sec duration on the mineralfields would be, idk, like 100income lose on 8fields?
If you cast it in sequences, it adds up. Again, as you pointed out.
I think i like this now already on paper.
Shift-clicking into 3-4marines=death
Shift-clicking into 2stalkers=death
Shift-clicking into 1turret, cannon, spore=death
Before hitting his spell.
I agree Entomb is much more Protoss-like than this laser thing. Should have just made crystals form that last 20 seconds but also entombs workers as well. Then increase the HP of oracles slightly for survivability. In any case, both Terran and Zerg economic harass strats rely on killing workers, so it would have been nice if Protoss had gotten something that was different.
On June 09 2014 03:32 Foxxan wrote:The oracle would in the end try and sneak past the enemy defence or lure the defence away.
Huge apm needed here for protoss.
Dropping 4zealots, soak up damage from the defence and then cast entomb.
This in turn would make it possible to make him receive more utility spells also.
Yea, that would be so unfair for Protoss if they had to micro one unit like a Terran! 
PS: Yay 1000 pages of "balance discussion" :D
|
On June 06 2014 23:39 Ben... wrote:
That's the thing. There was nothing wrong with the old, pre-buff oracle. It was defendable and only people who were actually good with them could make them worthwhile because losing them was so easy since you could catch them with a couple of stalkers or a small group of marines.
But then that stupid buff happened and changed everything. I doubt you would be able to find very many players, Protoss included, who would defend the oracle buff. It made no sense. When it happened there were many Protoss calling it the dumbest balance change since the queen buff, myself included. It seemed completely arbitrary (not to mention it took PvP, which was finally starting to stabilize, back into a state if stupidity because there were so many people proxying oracles every single game). There was no imbalance at the time that the oracle buff was being used to fix, the only reasoning given behind it was that they wanted to make the unit more microable. But even in that regard, the buff failed. There was no hidden amount of microability unlocked by making the oracle faster. If anything they made it so you could be less careful and precise with it because it can escape basically any anti-air unit on the ground now as long as you move before the units are too close (and even then you can usually escape with a few health).
Well put; especially about the part where I think the speed buff made the unit even less "microable" and more of a BO win.
|
On June 06 2014 17:39 Foreverkul wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 16:54 Big J wrote:
Sounds more like a topic for the Terran Help Me Thread then, if you are only here to discuss whether you can or cannot rush a Protoss as Terran. My gripe isn't with whether can rush or not, and using any specific game doesn't settle any point (its just one posible example), my problem is the impact of Oracles on PvT. Oracles are a light fast, high DPS unit. How do you stop Oracles? In PvZ, Zerg has Queens which are a natural unit to build. In PvP, Protoss will have Stalkers and/or Phoenix and/or Overcharge, all on a natural build path. In PvT, Terran has Marines. But then there's a problem. Oracles kill workers fast, but whats really similar to a worker in HP? Marines. Meaning that the Terran natural counter is countered by Oracle. You need at least 4 marines at the same place, any less and you're dead. You can't even make more marines because they die so fast they deal 0 damage. Turrets would be ideal, but are not part of the natural build order (hurting economy) and they only protect against oracle, they have no other use in PvT when in the mineral line (except for DTs, but they come out later and are not as devastating). This doesn't account for the fact Terran needs to be applying pressure, so its not likely they will have just 4 marines standing in the mineral line. The idea of the Oracle is good (same with Overcharge), but they didn't just fill a gap in Protoss tech, they created an even bigger gap in Terran tech, thus contributing to the scarcity of Terran at high levels. (Note they aren't the sole cause of the problem, its the combination of lots of small problems.)
And, just a point of clarity, you need 5 marines (not 4 marines) to stop an Oracle in your mineral line. And now you have my blessing to rip your keyboard out of your computer and break it over your knee
|
On June 10 2014 06:50 SirPinky wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2014 17:39 Foreverkul wrote:On June 06 2014 16:54 Big J wrote:
Sounds more like a topic for the Terran Help Me Thread then, if you are only here to discuss whether you can or cannot rush a Protoss as Terran. My gripe isn't with whether can rush or not, and using any specific game doesn't settle any point (its just one posible example), my problem is the impact of Oracles on PvT. Oracles are a light fast, high DPS unit. How do you stop Oracles? In PvZ, Zerg has Queens which are a natural unit to build. In PvP, Protoss will have Stalkers and/or Phoenix and/or Overcharge, all on a natural build path. In PvT, Terran has Marines. But then there's a problem. Oracles kill workers fast, but whats really similar to a worker in HP? Marines. Meaning that the Terran natural counter is countered by Oracle. You need at least 4 marines at the same place, any less and you're dead. You can't even make more marines because they die so fast they deal 0 damage. Turrets would be ideal, but are not part of the natural build order (hurting economy) and they only protect against oracle, they have no other use in PvT when in the mineral line (except for DTs, but they come out later and are not as devastating). This doesn't account for the fact Terran needs to be applying pressure, so its not likely they will have just 4 marines standing in the mineral line. The idea of the Oracle is good (same with Overcharge), but they didn't just fill a gap in Protoss tech, they created an even bigger gap in Terran tech, thus contributing to the scarcity of Terran at high levels. (Note they aren't the sole cause of the problem, its the combination of lots of small problems.) And, just a point of clarity, you need 5 marines (not 4 marines) to stop an Oracle in your mineral line. And now you have my blessing to rip your keyboard out of your computer and break it over your knee
6
|
On June 05 2014 19:25 FaultyReDD wrote:
im talkin all around spell casters man, Zerg can use festor/viper/queens in every game/mu. They work and are well rounded. Same for protoss in sentry/ht/moco
terran has ghosts which if u dont die before hand are only viable in tvp. Ravens are nice i cant complain there but they are hardly game changers in a realistic game.the seeker missle needs a buff maybe cause lets be honest, any and mostly every unit runs away before the seeker goes if, it requires just a little micro and the energy is wasted and no dmg is done. still i think the raven is a good unit and i <3 em, just feel like they need some more oomph, to make them a core unit rather then marine/rauder/medi all the time lol
I play zerg and I agree muta buffs was a wrong step. Then again, why did they think it needed to happen? What ruins muta play enough to require those buffs? Afaik, mutas are designed to harass. If they're going to be only good for killing lightly or undefended spots or harassing workers in large flocks, then their supply needs to drop, along with DPS or something. making them super strong is invoking power creep. Anyone else watching HSC might remember the BW match ZvP where balls of maxed armies thrown against each other in instant nukes to one side or the other for a loss wasn't even a thing. It was plenty of back and forth. I think what necessitated that style of play was single geysers limiting Power Units like templar, archons, lurkers, etc. You HAD to rely on basic units forming the core of your playstyle with limited Power Unit backup. This opens up multi-engagement and back and forth non-bally type strategies because a big basic army and a high tech army were different but equal because of limited resources for fielding them.
As for seeker missiles, I don't really think we've seen them used properly. All Power Units and spells should have their place in providing a good supplement with diminishing returns, but there's exponential returns to WoL festor and mass raven, among other things.
HSM is a threat ability. The point is to force the enemy to retreat or take damage. Any terran that manages to set up outside a zerg base with tanks and gets ready to push in should have one raven with seeker missile. You could nuke a baneling bunch going for your marines, or force the enemy to retreat and give up ground. Obviously this requires using it on ground units and not air units, which can easily be grabbed and pulled away leaving the missile to harmlessly sail past. Seeker Missiles are essentially "Attack By Fire" as in Sun Tzu or Sirlin.net usage. Force the enemy into making worse choices with a single ability.
|
Northern Ireland25634 Posts
I'd always felt regarding Oracles they are the worst kind, either doing horrific damage or very little depending on your opponent being prepared. Protoss already had a cool, well-designed air harass unit in the Phoenix IMO, didn't see the need. I love their utility in the later game, clearing creep vs Z and keeping tags on army movements is pretty cool
|
Wombat, that essentially defines Cheese.. It feels kind of like zerg 7 pools now, I guess. Protoss has an early game cheese option relative to a zerg cheese.
|
On June 10 2014 07:29 Socup wrote:
Wombat, that essentially defines Cheese.. It feels kind of like zerg 7 pools now, I guess. Protoss has an early game cheese option relative to a zerg cheese.
Yaeh but if you scout a 7 pools and you are prepared, it's almost autowin, against Oracle it's in no way autowin after scouting it.
|
That's a good point, but then again if they wen't tech for early game cheese and you have a larger economy, it should be the slippery slope you need to end up crushing them. I dislike the fact they can see invis from a zerg standpoint though. Makes burrow harder to use. Detection needs to be a premium in order for racial cloaks to be effective.
I wish zerg still had scourge to wipe out observers quickly. Burrow in front of a deathball is pretty ineffective.
|
On June 09 2014 22:41 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2014 17:22 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 08 2014 20:36 Hider wrote:On June 07 2014 00:45 Sapphire.lux wrote:On June 06 2014 23:34 TheDwf wrote:On June 06 2014 23:28 Thieving Magpie wrote:On June 06 2014 17:39 Foreverkul wrote:On June 06 2014 16:54 Big J wrote:
Sounds more like a topic for the Terran Help Me Thread then, if you are only here to discuss whether you can or cannot rush a Protoss as Terran. My gripe isn't with whether can rush or not, and using any specific game doesn't settle any point (its just one posible example), my problem is the impact of Oracles on PvT. Oracles are a light fast, high DPS unit. How do you stop Oracles? In PvZ, Zerg has Queens which are a natural unit to build. In PvP, Protoss will have Stalkers and/or Phoenix and/or Overcharge, all on a natural build path. In PvT, Terran has Marines. But then there's a problem. Oracles kill workers fast, but whats really similar to a worker in HP? Marines. Meaning that the Terran natural counter is countered by Oracle. You need at least 4 marines at the same place, any less and you're dead. You can't even make more marines because they die so fast they deal 0 damage. Turrets would be ideal, but are not part of the natural build order (hurting economy) and they only protect against oracle, they have no other use in PvT when in the mineral line (except for DTs, but they come out later and are not as devastating). This doesn't account for the fact Terran needs to be applying pressure, so its not likely they will have just 4 marines standing in the mineral line. The idea of the Oracle is good (same with Overcharge), but they didn't just fill a gap in Protoss tech, they created an even bigger gap in Terran tech, thus contributing to the scarcity of Terran at high levels. (Note they aren't the sole cause of the problem, its the combination of lots of small problems.) Don't you wish Oracles had a non-damage harass system that dealt minimal damage but, over time, could weaken enemy economy only through consistent and persistent unit control. Its like Blizzard knew what they were doing until the community asked for more DPS. If you refer to Entomb, it looked fairly terrible. Aye, but interesting. One of the few innovative things the team came up with, even if it wasn't polished. I like what the Oracle wants to be, a good harass unit that allows for lots of player skill to show, but it is implemented poorly and lazy, like so many other things in this game. No. It had no way of differentiating skills. It was a purely shift-click ability. What are you saying "No" to? It didn't have many ways of differentiating player skill and i din't say it did. It had an original (compared to other stuff in the game) way of doing dmg. It wasn't interesting, and had no potential regardless of refinment IMO. Blizzard should simply rewatch Lalush's vidoe on depht of micro. All the Oracle ever needed to get was a proper moving shot, which allowed players to micro it. As a compensation it could have got a much lower damage. Then it could actually reward micro and be useful later on in the game instead of rewarding build-order luck. It never needed any fancy abilities and clicking on a mineral path is just never gonna be fun. I also disagree that Blizzards aren't innovative. They added a lot of unique ideas to Sc2. The oracle, however, never needed to be innovative. It just needed to be fun.
About move shot on oracle... it's very significant that the best way to do dmg with oracle is putting it on hold position over a mineral line.
|
On June 04 2014 07:08 CrayonSc2 wrote:
reguarding Z's anti-air. Do you think a curruptor change of curruption to reducing 20% damage of the unit is well help out compared to taking 20% more damage.IMO the problem with the anti-air is that it just dies to quickly to make it cost effective.
I loved +20% corruption damage. The change was likely to reduce colossus damage or tank damage, but I really found the best uses for it vs T mech/bio or immos/archon. Roaches, hydra, ultra all significantly improve. I play 15-16 minute hive morph 4-5 base games with +2 nearly done most of the time that the other side doesn't try to be aggressive, and I find that 6-8 corruptors can be pretty useful vs T or P. Immos and Archons get burned down even faster and 12-14 corruptors that you've been pumping armor upgrades into can clean up any early air without upgrades and colossus with impunity. I've done crazy stuff with ling/hydra/corruptor vs stalker coloss before, and it's pretty deadly. I'll usually supplement with roach and bling if there's zlot/archon in the mix. 10-12 bling will make a zlot meatshield disappear instantly, roaches and corruptors tank damage while corruptors burn colossus down and then finish up by queued corruption on remaining protoss units, and then the giant deathball of sling/hydra comes in after it's safe from AoE spam. If its bio, corrupt tanks and kill medivacs while bling wipe bio and sling/roach wipe tank/marauder. If its mech, bling cleans up hellions, and mass ling/roach with corrupt on thors cleans up thors. Fungal/muta/BL as needed. If they're too light in tanks and/or thors, corrupt and ultralisk is the way to go for me. Instead of 43 damage 57 damage. The biggest issue zerg units have with mech is the armor on thors. 20% more damage stripped that from them and made them a giant grid size walked targed to be picked off by ling/roach/ultra/bl whatever, and splashed to death by their own tanks.
|
When they will fix raven in TvZ ?
This unit counter everything zerg has, and has no counter (except huge T miscontrol like being 5 times chain fungal on stacked raven out of tank ranged).
The main problem is PDD countering every units that can shoot raven, except infestated terran that are nerfed to death.
For me fungal growth should black-out raven and pdd (removed the building attribute so FG can affect them) when they are affected. Right now, raven still can cast PPD/seeker when they're fungaled.
And the armored attributes of infestor should be removed so infestors would be no more 2 shoted by tank, but they'd need 3 shots before dying.
|
On June 10 2014 07:24 Wombat_NI wrote:
I'd always felt regarding Oracles they are the worst kind, either doing horrific damage or very little depending on your opponent being prepared. Protoss already had a cool, well-designed air harass unit in the Phoenix IMO, didn't see the need. I love their utility in the later game, clearing creep vs Z and keeping tags on army movements is pretty cool
On June 10 2014 07:29 Socup wrote:
Wombat, that essentially defines Cheese.. It feels kind of like zerg 7 pools now, I guess. Protoss has an early game cheese option relative to a zerg cheese.
The problem is that you can go oracles without huge risks (where as zerg has to spend their limited early game larva and terran has to cut tech). This is possible because you just MSC into 1 gate into Oracle. Photon overcharge is so powerful that it can basically stop any non-all in push by itself. This means that even if the oracle dies, you either bought time with it by keeping army at their base, or possibly game ending damage (most effectively against Terran because Zerg will have Queen which can tank oracle).
|
On June 10 2014 18:04 Tyrhanius wrote:
When they will fix raven in TvZ ?
This unit counter everything zerg has, and has no counter (except huge T miscontrol like being 5 times chain fungal on stacked raven out of tank ranged).
The main problem is PDD countering every units that can shoot raven, except infestated terran that are nerfed to death.
For me fungal growth should black-out raven and pdd (removed the building attribute so FG can affect them) when they are affected. Right now, raven still can cast PPD/seeker when they're fungaled.
And the armored attributes of infestor should be removed so infestors would be no more 2 shoted by tank, but they'd need 3 shots before dying.
Mass Mutas counter mass Ravens.
Mutas have such a high firerate that PDDs are out of energy very quickly.
Mutas can also outrun Seeker Missiles easily.
That speed also helps flying circles around the Raven fleet, always attacking where the Ravens are not.
Muta + Swarm Host is currently the best combo against any Mech into mass Ravens style afaik. The Terran still needs a lot of Tanks against the Locusts, so there's not much space left for other units to protect the Ravens from your Mutas.
|
Ravens are just as stupid as swarm hosts but you only ever really see them against swarm hosts so they cancel eachother out <.<
|
On June 10 2014 20:30 BurningRanger wrote:Show nested quote +On June 10 2014 18:04 Tyrhanius wrote:
When they will fix raven in TvZ ?
This unit counter everything zerg has, and has no counter (except huge T miscontrol like being 5 times chain fungal on stacked raven out of tank ranged).
The main problem is PDD countering every units that can shoot raven, except infestated terran that are nerfed to death.
For me fungal growth should black-out raven and pdd (removed the building attribute so FG can affect them) when they are affected. Right now, raven still can cast PPD/seeker when they're fungaled.
And the armored attributes of infestor should be removed so infestors would be no more 2 shoted by tank, but they'd need 3 shots before dying. Mass Mutas counter mass Ravens. Mutas have such a high firerate that PDDs are out of energy very quickly. Mutas can also outrun Seeker Missiles easily. That speed also helps flying circles around the Raven fleet, always attacking where the Ravens are not. Muta + Swarm Host is currently the best combo against any Mech into mass Ravens style afaik. The Terran still needs a lot of Tanks against the Locusts, so there's not much space left for other units to protect the Ravens from your Mutas. Muta+SH is good midgame combo centered about a lot of harass or denying aggressive mech. It's actually pretty bad lategame since PDD, thors and short muta range. Corruptors are little better because of longer range, more hp and they don't die to thors so hard.
Anyway with mass raven terran will win unless he fucks up a lot and no matter what zerg does.
|
This discussion about ravens and what Socup wrote put me to thinking. T currently has 2 main splashdamage units. One being the raven and the other is the widowmine. Both serve the same purpose in the game. Zoneing. Take more losses by attacking in a certain position. The Widow Mine is devastating and boring to play against. It is gimmick and doesn't require a lot of skill in order to place them down and kill a bunch of lings (or zealots nowadays which is crazy). On the other hand we have the Raven which can zone with 3 abilities, PDD, HSM and Turrets.
Why on earth do we have a unit (widowmine) which does exactly the same as HSM (splashdamage in specific radius with short delay) but which requires only half the APM / control. Widow mines are boring, Ravens are kind of o.k. but quite strong when massed.
I feel like the whole Widowmine is just a copypaste of a stationairy baneling/HSM combination.
Bad design?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
