|
On September 24 2011 18:28 SilverforceX wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 18:12 sylverfyre wrote:On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote:On September 23 2011 10:40 AxelTVx wrote:
Hmmm this does seem to cover almost everything except the problem with Ghosts that the Zerg have been having. Hopefully he explains why the ghost remained untouched. I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? I don't expect you to win, Mr. Terran, I expect you to die! </bond villain> In more serious note... with the infestor damage and range on its spells respectively nerfed, and ghost techniques improving immensely, it's even more difficult to respond effectively to ghost usage. We have no exceptional unit for just dealing with the ghost (this is fine, it's just a thing we as zerg have to be aware of) and terran late-game armies with siege tanks, ghosts, vikings all providing backup to whatever backbone the terran feels is appropriate... Terran just has ALL the range. I know you meant range as in flexibility.. but, consider: Viking, longest air range. Check. Tank, sieged longest ground range. Check. Tank unsieged/Thor, longest range to not get stuck like stupid dancing Immortals (with 6 range they still get stuck behind stalkers requiring micro like b4 the patch) behind the bioball. Check. Thors AA, longest range vs air units. Check. BCs, yamato destroys any anti-air since its the longest range. Check. BCs are used often, Carriers blow since beta. WTF bliz! MS is still a PoS that never leaves dock. Ghost snipe, longest range to easy counter a lot of stuff. Check. Ghost EMP, longest spell range to counter protoss and casters. Check. Ghost Nuke, long range to help its ease of use, unlike NP which got nerfed to 7. WTF. Check.
Truth. Terran is the ultimate casual race and I'm sure they have taken this into account. The inherent flexibility of Terran unit compositions is far too forgiving.
|
On September 24 2011 18:28 SilverforceX wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 18:12 sylverfyre wrote:On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote:On September 23 2011 10:40 AxelTVx wrote:
Hmmm this does seem to cover almost everything except the problem with Ghosts that the Zerg have been having. Hopefully he explains why the ghost remained untouched. I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? I don't expect you to win, Mr. Terran, I expect you to die! </bond villain> In more serious note... with the infestor damage and range on its spells respectively nerfed, and ghost techniques improving immensely, it's even more difficult to respond effectively to ghost usage. We have no exceptional unit for just dealing with the ghost (this is fine, it's just a thing we as zerg have to be aware of) and terran late-game armies with siege tanks, ghosts, vikings all providing backup to whatever backbone the terran feels is appropriate... Terran just has ALL the range. I know you meant range as in flexibility.. but, consider: Viking, longest air range. Check. Tank, sieged longest ground range. Check. Tank unsieged/Thor, longest range to not get stuck like stupid dancing Immortals (with 6 range they still get stuck behind stalkers requiring micro like b4 the patch) behind the bioball. Check. Thors AA, longest range vs air units. Check. BCs, yamato destroys any anti-air since its the longest range. Check. BCs are used often, Carriers blow since beta. WTF bliz! MS is still a PoS that never leaves dock. Ghost snipe, longest range to easy counter a lot of stuff. Check. Ghost EMP, longest spell range to counter protoss and casters. Check. Ghost Nuke, long range to help its ease of use, unlike NP which got nerfed to 7. WTF. Check.
I actually did mean distance range - which means the army is exceptionally difficult to engage in an effective way and scales extremely well into high supply numbers. The longest ranges on stuff is something terrans have always had since BW (well, air to air not so much in BW, but goliath vs air was badass range.) and part of their race design.
|
Now that we start complaing about marauders (yay easily the most unterran unit in the game) why don't we complain about the zerg dragoon aswell? The fucking roach, hard to kill and the reason why we don't see any hydralisk (though based upon broodwar thats the zergiest unit beside the ling).
Colossi are a joke compared to reavers, they don't requiere much micro, can't be used for harras and, to make it even better, are the main reason why noone even tries to build carriers.
One thing that not enough people talk about (imo) is the fact that dts requier their own building. WTF went wrong there at blizzard? You know if I could actually make HTs and DTs with the same building going dts in the first place wouldn't be the huge investement it is, yes you'd still pay 375 gas for 3 dts, but you wouldn't pay 250 for a almost useless tech path if it doesn't work. Plus wtf happened to dark archons?
The fact that the mothership is just a raped version of the arbiter doesn't need to be discussed, I'm still amazed whenever I see arbiters in bw, and thinking about the mothership as the sc2 equivelent makes me really sad 
Talking about shit that makes me sad, why the fuck can terran suddenly swap around addons as they please? I think thats part of the reason why terran is that versatile and can transition that well into different stuff. I really hope we get to see individual addons for each production facility again like in bw.
|
Agree. If they don't want to reduce the versatility of basically every Terran unit, they could simply make specialized add-ons so you can't just keep switching them around whenever it suits you.
|
On September 24 2011 18:50 theBizness wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 18:28 SilverforceX wrote:On September 24 2011 18:12 sylverfyre wrote:On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote:On September 23 2011 10:40 AxelTVx wrote:
Hmmm this does seem to cover almost everything except the problem with Ghosts that the Zerg have been having. Hopefully he explains why the ghost remained untouched. I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? I don't expect you to win, Mr. Terran, I expect you to die! </bond villain> In more serious note... with the infestor damage and range on its spells respectively nerfed, and ghost techniques improving immensely, it's even more difficult to respond effectively to ghost usage. We have no exceptional unit for just dealing with the ghost (this is fine, it's just a thing we as zerg have to be aware of) and terran late-game armies with siege tanks, ghosts, vikings all providing backup to whatever backbone the terran feels is appropriate... Terran just has ALL the range. I know you meant range as in flexibility.. but, consider: Viking, longest air range. Check. Tank, sieged longest ground range. Check. Tank unsieged/Thor, longest range to not get stuck like stupid dancing Immortals (with 6 range they still get stuck behind stalkers requiring micro like b4 the patch) behind the bioball. Check. Thors AA, longest range vs air units. Check. BCs, yamato destroys any anti-air since its the longest range. Check. BCs are used often, Carriers blow since beta. WTF bliz! MS is still a PoS that never leaves dock. Ghost snipe, longest range to easy counter a lot of stuff. Check. Ghost EMP, longest spell range to counter protoss and casters. Check. Ghost Nuke, long range to help its ease of use, unlike NP which got nerfed to 7. WTF. Check. Truth. Terran is the ultimate casual race and I'm sure they have taken this into account. The inherent flexibility of Terran unit compositions is far too forgiving.
Have the longest range units -> ultimate casual race. Just wow.
What about unit health, damage, micro requirements?
|
obsession with details is a fool's errand - minus being a pro. Two more expansions incoming. New units, new mechanics. Dark Archon, Leviathan, Terratron... Dark Swarm, plague, Starfall, heroes, mobs, equip-able BFG for your specters. Starting bonuses for being in higher leagues (start with 10 workers for GM, 8 for M ... etc)
Not to mention 1 new race per expansion. Xel Naga and then .. UED?
|
On September 24 2011 19:09 theBizness wrote:
Agree. If they don't want to reduce the versatility of basically every Terran unit, they could simply make specialized add-ons so you can't just keep switching them around whenever it suits you.
Or make the other races have that same versatility, which is (hopefully) to come in the upcoming expansions, unfortunately.
Zerg lacks diversity, Protoss is rather predictable (which is part of their current downfall)
|
On September 23 2011 10:54 ch33psh33p wrote:
In the end, it came down to a choice between the Carrier and the Mothership
WHAT THE FUCK.
yeh.never had that choice ^^
|
fantastic patch. I'm actually so excited hellions got nerfed aside from in TvZ but TvT may actually be fun again.
|
On September 23 2011 10:46 Fig wrote:
GAH! Why did they choose to buff the mothership when they could have picked carriers?!?!?! I thought they said the mothership was a joke unit! And the buff just makes it a more maneuverable joke unit!
Seriously though, mothership deserved a buff, but carriers deserve one too. Atm carriers are inferior to BCs in every way except for range. .... wtf. No unit in starcraft 2 is a joke unit.
|
On September 24 2011 19:35 Mysticesper wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 19:09 theBizness wrote:
Agree. If they don't want to reduce the versatility of basically every Terran unit, they could simply make specialized add-ons so you can't just keep switching them around whenever it suits you. Or make the other races have that same versatility, which is (hopefully) to come in the upcoming expansions, unfortunately. Zerg lacks diversity, Protoss is rather predictable (which is part of their current downfall)
I have to completely disagree. Terran already has the hardest time in dealing with Zerg lategame tech switches and there is nothing more frustrating than having to deal with mass warp ins.
Yes you are right, terran can swap add ons, but what most people forget is that 1 tech building(cyber core- dark shrine - archives) gives you access to an almost infinite amount of dark templars, stalkers and high templars, only limited by the amount of ressources and warp gates.
If terran wants to go for mass banshees they are limited because they can only produce them off starports, which are expensive and high tech, same goes for factory units, the only similar unit that works like protoss units in production is the ghost (1 ghost academy - only limited by amount of barracks with add on), that's why it's so hard for terran to deal with lategame tech switches.
It's even a bigger problem against zerg, 1 tech building gives you access to an almost infinite amount of every unit, only limited by larva and ressources.
Zerg can tech switch from mass air, into mass tier 1 into mass tier 3 in less than a minute, it's already next to impossible for terran lategame to adjust to these tech switches, if you take away the ability to swap add ons to for example quickly produce mass vikings or mass marauders, etc... it's going to be absolutely impossible. If for example the zerg goes for mass broodlord and you have to get vikings, and you then need to build the reactors instead of swapping them with your barracks it would be pretty much game over.
Terran lategame tech switches are by far the slowest in the game, even with add on swapping, take that away from terran and there is no way on earth they will ever beat zerg lategame ever again and it will be very very problematic against protoss, if not impossible aswell.
What most people forget is that terran add-ons actually are really expensive, larva (which is the same thing essentially) is for free though and like I said, protoss can build units only limited by the amount of warpgates.
So you see, both other races use similar mechanics, for zerg it is even easier. Even Protoss robotics units use similar mechanics, immortals dont need an add-on, collossus need 1 robo bay and are then only limited by the amount of robos, same goes for carriers for example.
I think it's funny that Z and P players complain about add-on swaping when their races don't even require add-ons and can use the same game mechanic for essentially free. Larva even might be overpowered for all we know, there are no zerg who really perfectioned larva usage and tech switches, in years they might have to nerf larva because it might be too hard for terran and maybe protoss to keep up with zerg lategame tech switches.
|
The Mothership is just a silly unit idea and I don't know why it made it into the final release. Motherships and carriers come out at the same time, if you know carriers need to be reworked, why not just fucking do it? Insanity.
I agree sooo much.
Mothership was the dumbest idea ever its the kind of thing that works with C&C, but for SC2 its just stupid.
Stronger carriers or even just faster building carriers would be so much better.
|
The problem with 111, like said a million times here, isnt the build itself, its the protoss not knowing what will came from behind the rax/suplly depos. I dont think Immortal range will help at all. Im not even going to talk about marine/tanks all in.
|
|
|
On September 24 2011 19:19 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 18:50 theBizness wrote:On September 24 2011 18:28 SilverforceX wrote:On September 24 2011 18:12 sylverfyre wrote:On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote:On September 23 2011 10:40 AxelTVx wrote:
Hmmm this does seem to cover almost everything except the problem with Ghosts that the Zerg have been having. Hopefully he explains why the ghost remained untouched. I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? I don't expect you to win, Mr. Terran, I expect you to die! </bond villain> In more serious note... with the infestor damage and range on its spells respectively nerfed, and ghost techniques improving immensely, it's even more difficult to respond effectively to ghost usage. We have no exceptional unit for just dealing with the ghost (this is fine, it's just a thing we as zerg have to be aware of) and terran late-game armies with siege tanks, ghosts, vikings all providing backup to whatever backbone the terran feels is appropriate... Terran just has ALL the range. I know you meant range as in flexibility.. but, consider: Viking, longest air range. Check. Tank, sieged longest ground range. Check. Tank unsieged/Thor, longest range to not get stuck like stupid dancing Immortals (with 6 range they still get stuck behind stalkers requiring micro like b4 the patch) behind the bioball. Check. Thors AA, longest range vs air units. Check. BCs, yamato destroys any anti-air since its the longest range. Check. BCs are used often, Carriers blow since beta. WTF bliz! MS is still a PoS that never leaves dock. Ghost snipe, longest range to easy counter a lot of stuff. Check. Ghost EMP, longest spell range to counter protoss and casters. Check. Ghost Nuke, long range to help its ease of use, unlike NP which got nerfed to 7. WTF. Check. Truth. Terran is the ultimate casual race and I'm sure they have taken this into account. The inherent flexibility of Terran unit compositions is far too forgiving. Have the longest range units -> ultimate casual race. Just wow. What about unit health, damage, micro requirements?
Longest range units + most forgiving race regarding composition = ideal for casuals, who are most likely to pick Terran to begin with.
|
On September 25 2011 08:32 theBizness wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On September 24 2011 19:19 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 18:50 theBizness wrote:On September 24 2011 18:28 SilverforceX wrote:On September 24 2011 18:12 sylverfyre wrote:On September 23 2011 10:42 HypernovA wrote:On September 23 2011 10:40 AxelTVx wrote:
Hmmm this does seem to cover almost everything except the problem with Ghosts that the Zerg have been having. Hopefully he explains why the ghost remained untouched. I don't understand why do Zerg players want Ghosts to be nerfed. How else do you expect Terran to win versus Broodlord/infestors? I don't expect you to win, Mr. Terran, I expect you to die! </bond villain> In more serious note... with the infestor damage and range on its spells respectively nerfed, and ghost techniques improving immensely, it's even more difficult to respond effectively to ghost usage. We have no exceptional unit for just dealing with the ghost (this is fine, it's just a thing we as zerg have to be aware of) and terran late-game armies with siege tanks, ghosts, vikings all providing backup to whatever backbone the terran feels is appropriate... Terran just has ALL the range. I know you meant range as in flexibility.. but, consider: Viking, longest air range. Check. Tank, sieged longest ground range. Check. Tank unsieged/Thor, longest range to not get stuck like stupid dancing Immortals (with 6 range they still get stuck behind stalkers requiring micro like b4 the patch) behind the bioball. Check. Thors AA, longest range vs air units. Check. BCs, yamato destroys any anti-air since its the longest range. Check. BCs are used often, Carriers blow since beta. WTF bliz! MS is still a PoS that never leaves dock. Ghost snipe, longest range to easy counter a lot of stuff. Check. Ghost EMP, longest spell range to counter protoss and casters. Check. Ghost Nuke, long range to help its ease of use, unlike NP which got nerfed to 7. WTF. Check. Truth. Terran is the ultimate casual race and I'm sure they have taken this into account. The inherent flexibility of Terran unit compositions is far too forgiving. Have the longest range units -> ultimate casual race. Just wow. What about unit health, damage, micro requirements? Longest range units + most forgiving race regarding composition = ideal for casuals, who are most likely to pick Terran to begin with.
Actually the race i play when i want to chill is Protoss.
And all my newbie buddies choose the race because it was the easiest race for them to play around with. Not that it matters really, but just saying that a-moving zealot is way ''more chill''
then kiting with the marine 
On September 24 2011 18:57 Lorch wrote:Now that we start complaing about marauders (yay easily the most unterran unit in the game) why don't we complain about the zerg dragoon aswell? The fucking roach, hard to kill and the reason why we don't see any hydralisk (though based upon broodwar thats the zergiest unit beside the ling). Colossi are a joke compared to reavers, they don't requiere much micro, can't be used for harras and, to make it even better, are the main reason why noone even tries to build carriers. One thing that not enough people talk about (imo) is the fact that dts requier their own building. WTF went wrong there at blizzard? You know if I could actually make HTs and DTs with the same building going dts in the first place wouldn't be the huge investement it is, yes you'd still pay 375 gas for 3 dts, but you wouldn't pay 250 for a almost useless tech path if it doesn't work. Plus wtf happened to dark archons? The fact that the mothership is just a raped version of the arbiter doesn't need to be discussed, I'm still amazed whenever I see arbiters in bw, and thinking about the mothership as the sc2 equivelent makes me really sad Talking about shit that makes me sad, why the fuck can terran suddenly swap around addons as they please? I think thats part of the reason why terran is that versatile and can transition that well into different stuff. I really hope we get to see individual addons for each production facility again like in bw.
I agree with alot, but wtf is this about complaining about the addon swaps?! Their brilliant and make for really refined and cool build! I'd say they are one of the things Blizzard did good.
It's better adding something to the other races then taking away what's already good just because you think it's to versatile.
|
Mothership over Carriers...Hey protoss we gave you these buffs, but here is a kick to the teeth for old times sake.
|
i now really believe sc2 balance team is consisted of no more than 2 people XD
|
On September 24 2011 18:37 Roblin wrote:Show nested quote +On September 24 2011 11:53 BrosephBrostar wrote:On September 24 2011 11:36 Toadvine wrote:
I don't think they made the Immortal to counter Tanks specifically, but as a general purpose tanking unit
What is the immortal actually good at taking hits from though? Look at how hardened shields affects different attacks: Tank: 50>10 (40 less) Thor: 60>20 (40 less) Marauder: 20>10 (10 less) Stalker: 14>10 (4 less) Immortal: 50>10 (40 less) Colossus: 30>20 (10 less) Roach: 16>10 (6 less) Ultralisk: 35>10 (25 less) I definitely don't see it as a coincidence that the only things hardened shields have a significant effect on are terran mech units. Tank: 50>10 (80% less) Thor: 60>20 (~66% less) Marauder: 20>10 (50% less) Stalker: 14>10 (~29% less) Immortal: 50>10 (80% less) Colossus: 30>20 (~33% less) Roach: 16>10 (37.5% less) Ultralisk: 35>10 (~71% less) hardened shield have a significant effect on everything that triggers the hardened shield (notice that the smallest change possible of 11>10 is a ~9% decrease in dps, which is already a lot, a damage decrease of 80% is ridicolous, remember the immortal only have 100 shield, so when fighting tanks that 100 shield is equivalent to 500 shield, which means an immortal have almost as much eficient hp vs sieged tanks as an ultralisk. ridicolous) for the record, saying such things as damage reduction and damage decreases in pure numbers give very little information to the reader, see what I did? i changed it from a pure number to a percentage, and suddenly it is 50 times easier to see the actual effect of the damage reduction. for example: Tank: 50>10 (40 less) Thor: 60>20 (40 less) given this information, you can easily argue that the immortal "removes" an equal amount of dps from the respective units. Tank: 50>10 (80% less) Thor: 60>20 (~66% less) given this, you cannot argue the same, the hardened shield is very clearly much more efficient vs tanks than vs thors, which can be seen in real games. suddenly when you remove the numbers from it you can see how huge of an impact the hardened shields actually have.
I don't really understand what you're trying to argue. It takes a siege tank 30 seconds to deplete 100 hardened shields or a 400% increase compared to normal shields. On the other hand a stimmed marauder takes 10 seconds which is only a 100% increase. Plus marauders are cheaper and produce faster so you're likely to have more marauders than you would tanks. It's obvious to me that Blizzard created hardened shields specifically to counter siege tanks.
|
On September 25 2011 08:11 LeibSaiLeib wrote:BFH
Thanks for the reminder, I really miss the times where killing a mineral line required SKILL. That micro you see there, there is nothing similar in starcraft 2, blue flame hellions are easy to use at all skill levels, that is the consecuence of the game being newbie friendly.
Blue flame hellions should require huge skill to pull off great rewards...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
