|
On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive
I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me.
I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd.
|
On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 05:16 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:13 FabledIntegral wrote:[quote] I was grandmasters, so thanks, please begin to give a fuck. Admittedly when I switched to Terran, I only managed to reach rank 2 Masters (overall, not in my division) because I had no experience in TvP and my winrate was around 31% at the time GM opened. My TvT and TvZ was fine though  . gz you can be really proud now, but I won't change my opinion on mutalisks Ok? As long as you realize your opinion is less valid, I'm sure neither of us are too bothered by the issue. 1 no it isn't 2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid, I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble  But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post
I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)...
I doubt these are "more" games than you did.
I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you.
You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right".
I mean.. Just read what you put out in these last few posts...
You seriously compare 400 Minerals and a 200/200 upgrade spent on Hellions with 20-30 Mutas as a reason to nerf Mutas (or buff the defense against them) ... SERIOUSLY?
You cry that Turrets are "weak" and think that 300-400 Minerals invested in turrets should protect you against over 10 times that amount invested in Mutas... ...
just arghl.... Why not make every building a planetary fortress that is also atacking airunits... I'm sure that would balance things...
|
On November 01 2011 00:36 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 00:21 malaki wrote:On October 31 2011 22:38 Big J wrote:On October 31 2011 22:32 malaki wrote:
they kill turrets way too fast, you cant repair them fast enough when the mutas are in big enough numbers,
and after that you lose 10 20 of your workers Maybe because your 300-400cost defense fights an 3000/3000 cost army? That's why good terrans just have 2-3 troops of marines all over the place and just stim in, once the turrets start to fall. But ofc, I you like 10min pushes and lose all marines/tanks without killing his mutas, his mutanumbers will slowly get out of control. not 30 15+ are enough to 1shot turrets, and turrets should hard counter muta balls you know how many marines you need to kill 30 mutalisks? 30 mutalisks kill 20 marines with only losing 5 mutas so you're gonna keep 20 marine balls at all your bases all the time? No shit.. You mean those 3000/3000, 60 supply mutas kill the 1000/0, 20 supply Marines while ONLY losing 500/500 (which is more than 1000/0-.-)? HOW IMBALANCED IS THAT FFS!
I think he was using un-upgraded marines as well - no stim - no shield. This guy is looking more and more like a real joker troll.
|
On November 01 2011 06:12 mlspmatt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me. I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd.
Honestly I don't really like the concept of the Thor super unit or any kind of super super unit, but I'd probably be pretty pissed if they cut the thor cuz...... I bought the CE.....
|
On November 01 2011 06:18 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:12 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me. I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd. Honestly I don't really like the concept of the Thor super unit or any kind of super super unit, but I'd probably be pretty pissed if they cut the thor cuz...... I bought the CE.....
To be fair it doesn't really feel like a super unit. When I think of "super unit" I think of Titans from Age of Mythology or something like that. T_T.
|
On November 01 2011 06:18 Blasterion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:12 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me. I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd. Honestly I don't really like the concept of the Thor super unit or any kind of super super unit, but I'd probably be pretty pissed if they cut the thor cuz...... I bought the CE.....
this is a great point! blizzard has to keep the thor in!
|
On November 01 2011 06:22 ComaDose wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:18 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 06:12 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me. I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd. Honestly I don't really like the concept of the Thor super unit or any kind of super super unit, but I'd probably be pretty pissed if they cut the thor cuz...... I bought the CE..... this is a great point! blizzard has to keep the thor in!
Or those who have them could just get new skins on the new units, like the warhound :o.
|
On November 01 2011 00:21 malaki wrote:
not 30 15+ are enough to 1shot turrets
15?
math fail
Even if the mutas have 3 attack and the turret has no armor upgrade, it takes 21 mutas to one shot a turret.
|
On November 01 2011 06:12 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 05:16 malaki wrote:
[quote]
gz you can be really proud now,
but I won't change my opinion on mutalisks Ok? As long as you realize your opinion is less valid, I'm sure neither of us are too bothered by the issue. 1 no it isn't 2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid, I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)... I doubt these are "more" games than you did. I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you. You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right".
great nobody cares,
also "snowballs chance," wtf are you trying to say ? whatever does not make you sound smarter
I mean.. Just read what you put out in these last few posts...
You seriously compare 400 Minerals and a 200/200 upgrade spent on Hellions with 20-30 Mutas as a reason to nerf Mutas (or buff the defense against them) ... SERIOUSLY?
You cry that Turrets are "weak" and think that 300-400 Minerals invested in turrets should protect you against over 10 times that amount invested in Mutas... ...
just arghl.... Why not make every building a planetary fortress that is also atacking airunits... I'm sure that would balance things...
thats not what I wrote, and yes turrest ar weak against mutas when they are in a ball of 15+ mutas
if i'd check your last posts now I think I'D have a 90% chance of you being a zerg player too, but whatever getting into diamond as zerg is not impressive
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On November 01 2011 06:25 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 00:21 malaki wrote:
not 30 15+ are enough to 1shot turrets 15? math fail Even if the mutas have 3 attack and the turret has no armor upgrade, it takes 21 mutas to one shot a turret.
not oneshot but they die fast enough that you have almost no chance of repairing them
your post > fail
User was warned for this post
|
On November 01 2011 06:20 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:18 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 06:12 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 06:02 Blasterion wrote:On November 01 2011 05:58 mlspmatt wrote:On November 01 2011 05:21 Meff wrote:On November 01 2011 04:43 malaki wrote:
seriously to all the zerg players here,
offrace as terran, get an equally skilled friend of yours to play zerg, and see how annoying mutalisks are, enjoy building turrets everywhere only to then get the turrets 1shot, then get your teclabs and reactors sniped off, while you try to catch the mutas with stimmed marines, and they just fly away, only to return a few seconds later and harass your next basee
(btw I play random and zerg was my main) Well... mutas exist in ZvZ too. Things are a little different, since queens are better AA than marines (range, hp, transfuse, open base) and spore crawlers are slightly worse than turrets, but as far as base defence goes the tactics are similar. Thing is, no Z in their right mind tries to fight a flock of 20+ mutas with just static and mineral-only queens: they go for infestors. Likewise, a competent T player usually gets thors. That way the mutas cannot bunch up on turrets to one-shot them: the risk of a thor being within 10 range of that turret and shooting a volley into their middle is too high. What if the Thor was really big and really expensive and really slow? Hmmmmm. What then? Might a proposed solution be a smaller more agile unit that can deal with the mutas better? That's just common sense. Would you agree? Hydras are too slow so they're getting a speed upgrade. Ultras too "Big and Bulky and get stuck on themselves (Remind you of any unit?) so they're getting an upgrade. Zergs also getting a siege unit to help in situations. And some other stuff, pretty good stuff. Protoss getting a bunch of stuff to help their problems. I don't understand a lot of the comments. I though the reaction would be: "This makes perfect sense. Thor is too big, immobile and expensive, a smaller Goliath type unit would make more sense and can help in other match ups where Thor has no role" Instead what I hear is "Stop complaining about Mutas, (Who's complaining, its a discussion thread) learn to play better, you bunch of whiners." Unfortunately most threads turn into this. If anyone makes a point that you disagree with its a whine, or complaint, or worse. Instead of just acknowledging the point and explaining why you disagree. I wonder though what will Thor's Anti air be like if it still had one, Valkyrie Splash? or Viking type single focus? Also, Another, does shredders shred, both X and Y axis? if it does it makes for viable muta deterent. Another question is if Shredders are activated next to buildings Warhounds sound pretty good, though I wish they looked more impressive I agree. I never liked the Thor. Its a tier 3 unit that's very expensive and across the three Terran match ups had a very small role: anti-muta. That never made any sense to me. I always preferred the Goliath , or similar unit, that has more use and isn't tier 3. I also agree that the current design is .... poor, to put it mildly. Its a video game, make it look like an intimidating unit - not a lanky mechanical nerd. Honestly I don't really like the concept of the Thor super unit or any kind of super super unit, but I'd probably be pretty pissed if they cut the thor cuz...... I bought the CE..... To be fair it doesn't really feel like a super unit. When I think of "super unit" I think of Titans from Age of Mythology or something like that. T_T.
Kind of true but it should feel epic, like it's worth the tech, like once 1 hits the battlefield your opponent should be like "oh shit, i gotta get my shit together or else I amma fucking die". mean while it can't be a unit that's a one man army, the delicate balance is kind of a thin wire to walk. Something like the colossus (A terrible example but you kind of get it right?)
|
On November 01 2011 06:29 malaki wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:12 Velr wrote:On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:
[quote]
Ok? As long as you realize your opinion is less valid, I'm sure neither of us are too bothered by the issue. 1 no it isn't 2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid, I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)... I doubt these are "more" games than you did. I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you. You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right". great nobody cares, also "snowballs chance," wtf are you trying to say ? whatever does not make you sound smarter Show nested quote +
I mean.. Just read what you put out in these last few posts...
You seriously compare 400 Minerals and a 200/200 upgrade spent on Hellions with 20-30 Mutas as a reason to nerf Mutas (or buff the defense against them) ... SERIOUSLY?
You cry that Turrets are "weak" and think that 300-400 Minerals invested in turrets should protect you against over 10 times that amount invested in Mutas... ...
just arghl.... Why not make every building a planetary fortress that is also atacking airunits... I'm sure that would balance things...
thats not what I wrote, and yes turrest ar weak against mutas when they are in a ball of 15+ mutas if i'd check your last posts now I think I'D have a 90% chance of you being a zerg player too, but whatever getting into diamond as zerg is not impressive
Getting into diamond with any race ain't impressive, and into masters as well so I don't know why are you keep talking about leagues in the thread about mutas^^
|
On November 01 2011 06:29 malaki wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:12 Velr wrote:On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:
[quote]
Ok? As long as you realize your opinion is less valid, I'm sure neither of us are too bothered by the issue. 1 no it isn't 2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid, I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)... I doubt these are "more" games than you did. I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you. You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right". great nobody cares, also "snowballs chance," wtf are you trying to say ? whatever does not make you sound smarter
1. I would value his opinion more than yours, if you consider that "caring."
2. It doesn't make him sound smarter necessarily, but your response made you sound a lot more dumb. It's an expression - if English isn't your native language you probably shouldn't be criticizing other people on the English language. Not to mention if you just think about it for a second you should clearly realize what it means.
On November 01 2011 06:31 malaki wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:25 Mindcrime wrote:On November 01 2011 00:21 malaki wrote:
not 30 15+ are enough to 1shot turrets 15? math fail Even if the mutas have 3 attack and the turret has no armor upgrade, it takes 21 mutas to one shot a turret. not oneshot but they die fast enough that you have almost no chance of repairing them your post > fail
How is his post a fail? You were wrong, like you have been in nearly every single post you've made, just like how nearly every other person in this thread has disagreed with you. Not to mention you've made yourself look like a dolt.
You're bad at SC2, you're bad at balance discussion, you have poor English skills but are criticizing people's expressions, and you're criticizing people that are correcting you on YOUR mistakes. Why are you even posting?
|
I honestly think the Tempest is a terribly uncreative unit and is the least interesting way to solve any presumed "muta problem" for late-game PvZ (which I don't think I ever see in pro games). I think a lot better way to do things would have been to give an ability to the existing air units to deal with things.
For example, they could have brought back the overload ability for the phoenix, made it researchable at the fleet beacon, and make it an area targeted ability, or slowdown the phoenix for a short period before firing so that you can't just bum rush a pack of mutas with your pack of phoenixes and obliterate them all. Or they could have allowed carrier interceptors to have corsair splash against air, or an "air strafing" ability where they get multiple attacks per pass against different air targets.
It's interesting to see what unlimited muta selection has done to it though - truth is, mutas have statistically remained the same as Brood War (some might argue they've gotten worse, since they can't attack and turn on a dime quite as fast), yet most of their counters have gotten better (marines are denser DPS, have more HP and combat shields, turrets do way more damage and have more health, cannons do more damage to light and have more health, stalkers are much more mobile than dragoons, guardian shield and building armor exist, thors air splash exists) and yet people think mutas are OP. Sure corsairs and irradiate don't exist, but are they the turning factors, or is it more the fact that you can now have 30 mutas flying around instead of just 12?
|
On November 01 2011 06:32 Alpina wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 06:29 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 06:12 Velr wrote:On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:
[quote]
1 no it isn't
2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid,
I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)... I doubt these are "more" games than you did. I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you. You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right". great nobody cares, also "snowballs chance," wtf are you trying to say ? whatever does not make you sound smarter
I mean.. Just read what you put out in these last few posts...
You seriously compare 400 Minerals and a 200/200 upgrade spent on Hellions with 20-30 Mutas as a reason to nerf Mutas (or buff the defense against them) ... SERIOUSLY?
You cry that Turrets are "weak" and think that 300-400 Minerals invested in turrets should protect you against over 10 times that amount invested in Mutas... ...
just arghl.... Why not make every building a planetary fortress that is also atacking airunits... I'm sure that would balance things...
thats not what I wrote, and yes turrest ar weak against mutas when they are in a ball of 15+ mutas if i'd check your last posts now I think I'D have a 90% chance of you being a zerg player too, but whatever getting into diamond as zerg is not impressive Getting into diamond with any race ain't impressive, and into masters as well so I don't know why are you keep talking about leagues in the thread about mutas^^
I didn't its because the zerg players here want to make my opinion seem less valid because I'm a random plat player,
but I'm still right ,
|
On November 01 2011 06:12 Velr wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2011 05:45 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:42 hunts wrote:On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:36 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:33 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:31 blobrus wrote:On November 01 2011 05:24 malaki wrote:On November 01 2011 05:20 FabledIntegral wrote:On November 01 2011 05:16 malaki wrote:
[quote]
gz you can be really proud now,
but I won't change my opinion on mutalisks Ok? As long as you realize your opinion is less valid, I'm sure neither of us are too bothered by the issue. 1 no it isn't 2 read above > you playing this game for a longer time doesn't make your opinion more valid, I'd say him being at a much higher level than you should make his understanding of the game a lot better than yours. Especially when your understanding seems to be that a small group of turrets should shut down a large muta flock. so you're a gold zerg on NA (would be about bronze on korean server) what does that make your opinion then? Am I? I'm actually plat Na and gold Korea, so unless you really think the EU server is the greatest thing ever it certainly doesn't make your opinion any more valid than mine. not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server also you're a zerg player and clearly biased If you really want to get into it, EU server = NA server, both are < korean server. Being plat on EU does not make you diamond on NA, sorry to burst your bubble But, now I'm derailing so for that I truely do apologize. Bottom line is, in a game where skill should be the deciding factor, balance desicions should not be made about what feels strong/weak at low levels, where players play at a low skill level. Balance should be made at a high level where skill is equal, and high enough to execute most things. Skill is very volatile at lower levels, and much easier for someone to gain a burst of skill by realizing something or having something click. Skill is much more steady and even at the pro level, and you normally won't see a pro just get 2x as good over night and go from having trouble with something to destroying it and everyone the next day. EU > NA, sorry to burst your bubble and the rest of your post tl;dr User was warned for this post I'm Diamond on EU with like... 30 games in the last 2 seasons combined (or 3? I dunno)... I doubt these are "more" games than you did. I got terrible mechanics, i got no "real" BO's... Yet, i'm still ranked higher than you. You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be "right". I mean.. Just read what you put out in these last few posts... You seriously compare 400 Minerals and a 200/200 upgrade spent on Hellions with 20-30 Mutas as a reason to nerf Mutas (or buff the defense against them) ... SERIOUSLY? You cry that Turrets are "weak" and think that 300-400 Minerals invested in turrets should protect you against over 10 times that amount invested in Mutas... ... just arghl.... Why not make every building a planetary fortress that is also atacking airunits... I'm sure that would balance things...
"You should just shut up when a GM player tells you something or disagrees with you, you got like a snowballs chance in hell to actually be 'right'"
Seriously? Come on man. That's silly.
TRUE STORY
A little less than a year ago I was watching a stream, high masters (Maybe Grand Masters but Im not sure if GM had been invented yet) of a High ranking Terran. Very good pro-semi Pro player. He was having trouble with Toss at the time and i stated how Thor was a viable unit at the time.
Well, I was laughed out of the room and the pro commented about my lack of knowledge and that Thor was useless at high level play v Toss and no pro would use them but i could enjoy them in "Bronze league" even though I wasn't in Bronze - but I shut-up anyway LOL.
Like a week later, no joke, was the TSL 3 where Thorzain broke out the Thor build and easily handled no less than Tyler, then MC with his "Thor build" that Blizzard nurfed shortley there after cause it was too good. - TRUE STORY
Pros and Grand masters aren't all knowing. I have a lot of Engineer and Entrepreneur friends who are crazy smart, but play Gold league cause they're busy. Don't dismiss peoples ideas cause they're in Bronze or gold.
If Steve Jobs were around he'd have to start at Bronze like everyone else. And I bet his ideas you'd want to hear.
|
On November 01 2011 05:37 malaki wrote:
not the greatest thing but a lot greater than the NA server
also you're a zerg player and clearly biased
On November 01 2011 06:29 malaki wrote:
if i'd check your last posts now I think I'D have a 90% chance of you being a zerg player too, but whatever getting into diamond as zerg is not impressive
On November 01 2011 06:29 malaki wrote:
great nobody cares,
Have you ever heard of what Ad Hominem is? you're just spamming that.
|
On November 01 2011 06:33 malaki wrote:
I didn't its because the zerg players here want to make my opinion seem less valid because I'm a random plat player,
but I'm still right ,
I would like to see your account, because from your posting I highly doubt you are random platinum.
Also I'd like to suggest you change your nick to malaka, I think it would go well with your posts.
User was warned for this post
|
The protoss side of things can surely be debated, but the terran change is obviously to open up new oppurtunities like mech against zerg.
|
On November 01 2011 06:33 delayed reflex wrote:
I honestly think the Tempest is a terribly uncreative unit and is the least interesting way to solve any presumed "muta problem" for late-game PvZ (which I don't think I ever see in pro games). I think a lot better way to do things would have been to give an ability to the existing air units to deal with things.
For example, they could have brought back the overload ability for the phoenix, made it researchable at the fleet beacon, and make it an area targeted ability, or slowdown the phoenix for a short period before firing so that you can't just bum rush a pack of mutas with your pack of phoenixes and obliterate them all. Or they could have allowed carrier interceptors to have corsair splash against air, or an "air strafing" ability where they get multiple attacks per pass against different air targets.
It's interesting to see what unlimited muta selection has done to it though - truth is, mutas have statistically remained the same as Brood War (some might argue they've gotten worse, since they can't attack and turn on a dime quite as fast), yet most of their counters have gotten better (marines are denser DPS, have more HP and combat shields, turrets do way more damage and have more health, cannons do more damage to light and have more health, stalkers are much more mobile than dragoons, guardian shield and building armor exist, thors air splash exists) and yet people think mutas are OP. Sure corsairs and irradiate don't exist, but are they the turning factors, or is it more the fact that you can now have 30 mutas flying around instead of just 12?
Mass mutas would be significantly stronger in BW if the Science Vessel did not have irridiate.
EDIT: Just saw the last sentence, missed it my first round. Thing is, Science Vessels and Corsairs were super good and used against Zerg no matter what Zerg went - thus, it wasn't an issue. Unlike the current situation, you only want mass phoenix vs Zerg if htey went mass muta, BW builds wanted to get Corsairs and Science Vessels regardless if the Zerg player went mutas. In fact, if Zerg skipped a spire, Corsairs were even better due to lack of scourge, and a Protoss player would continue to pump corsairs.
The biggest thing is that the other races had splash dmg abilities that were air based. Similar to the Raven, and except the abilities couldn't really be dodged (evne if a seeker missile is better, it might yield no return, and the energy required is significantly higher).
Science Vessels were so good because it was a "free kill" vs units like Lurkers and heavy dmg to units like Ultras. If science vessels were still around, there'd be a lot less issue with Broodlords, I promise you :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
