On November 02 2011 20:58 CptCutter wrote: ummm, why hasnt FG or Storm had a nerf along with it too? because unlike EMP, both of these spells actually kill units whereas EMP only temporarily damages them.
Are you really that stupid? If it takes all shield of ground units (100 for an archon) and their energy, then this is GOOD DAMAGE, even guaranteed one. You also lower energy by 100. What else do you want???
Is this fair? EMP is: instant, 10 range, AoE (2 radius atm) Feedback is: instant, 9 range, TARGET ONLY Storm is: 20 damage per sec (80 for 4), 9 range, AoE (1.5 radius I think) It's not guaranteed storm will do 80 because average zerg or terran don't sit under it unless they're forced somehow (terrain/FF/etc). On the other hand, EMP does 100 AoE shield damage on any protoss unit instantly. That's good even itself without taking out energy. Moreover, how is protoss supposed to counter ghosts? Well, protoss just has to rely on terran not controlling a specific ghost whose range is, again, longer than a high templar.
Are you really stupid? Because the point he is trying to make is that fungal and storm can completely wipe out an army. EMP is only going to do anything if you have enough army support with the ghosts. Not to mention archons need 4 emps to drain all their shields. Nerfing Terrans only AoE against toss is brutal, when toss now has more effective HT's and still has Colossus. If you EMP an army, you've weakened it. But if you miss, you get stormed to death. And no, you can never perfectly dodge a storm, especially when they have multiple ones spammed around you. So missing an EMP means you lose, missing a storm does not.
Nonsense. Missing a storm means you lose, because protoss needs splash, since gate units are shit. Rax units are godly, thus terran spells are optional.
On November 02 2011 20:58 CptCutter wrote: ummm, why hasnt FG or Storm had a nerf along with it too? because unlike EMP, both of these spells actually kill units whereas EMP only temporarily damages them.
Are you really that stupid? If it takes all shield of ground units (100 for an archon) and their energy, then this is GOOD DAMAGE, even guaranteed one. You also lower energy by 100. What else do you want???
Is this fair? EMP is: instant, 10 range, AoE (2 radius atm) Feedback is: instant, 9 range, TARGET ONLY Storm is: 20 damage per sec (80 for 4), 9 range, AoE (1.5 radius I think) It's not guaranteed storm will do 80 because average zerg or terran don't sit under it unless they're forced somehow (terrain/FF/etc). On the other hand, EMP does 100 AoE shield damage on any protoss unit instantly. That's good even itself without taking out energy. Moreover, how is protoss supposed to counter ghosts? Well, protoss just has to rely on terran not controlling a specific ghost whose range is, again, longer than a high templar.
Are you really stupid? Because the point he is trying to make is that fungal and storm can completely wipe out an army. EMP is only going to do anything if you have enough army support with the ghosts. Not to mention archons need 4 emps to drain all their shields. Nerfing Terrans only AoE against toss is brutal, when toss now has more effective HT's and still has Colossus. If you EMP an army, you've weakened it. But if you miss, you get stormed to death. And no, you can never perfectly dodge a storm, especially when they have multiple ones spammed around you. So missing an EMP means you lose, missing a storm does not.
Nonsense. Missing a storm means you lose, because protoss needs splash, since gate units are shit. Rax units are godly, thus terran spells are optional.
What are the chances that you are both right and both spells are equally important? Well, except for the part were an EMP only "weakens" an army. With the exception of zealots, colossi and immortals, all protoss ground units are at least a 50/50 split on HP and shields. Losing 1/3 to 1/2 of your HP is pretty brutal. So maybe all AOEs should be on a level playing field, same range, same size?
On November 02 2011 20:58 CptCutter wrote: ummm, why hasnt FG or Storm had a nerf along with it too? because unlike EMP, both of these spells actually kill units whereas EMP only temporarily damages them.
Are you really that stupid? If it takes all shield of ground units (100 for an archon) and their energy, then this is GOOD DAMAGE, even guaranteed one. You also lower energy by 100. What else do you want???
Is this fair? EMP is: instant, 10 range, AoE (2 radius atm) Feedback is: instant, 9 range, TARGET ONLY Storm is: 20 damage per sec (80 for 4), 9 range, AoE (1.5 radius I think) It's not guaranteed storm will do 80 because average zerg or terran don't sit under it unless they're forced somehow (terrain/FF/etc). On the other hand, EMP does 100 AoE shield damage on any protoss unit instantly. That's good even itself without taking out energy. Moreover, how is protoss supposed to counter ghosts? Well, protoss just has to rely on terran not controlling a specific ghost whose range is, again, longer than a high templar.
Are you really stupid? Because the point he is trying to make is that fungal and storm can completely wipe out an army. EMP is only going to do anything if you have enough army support with the ghosts. Not to mention archons need 4 emps to drain all their shields. Nerfing Terrans only AoE against toss is brutal, when toss now has more effective HT's and still has Colossus. If you EMP an army, you've weakened it. But if you miss, you get stormed to death. And no, you can never perfectly dodge a storm, especially when they have multiple ones spammed around you. So missing an EMP means you lose, missing a storm does not.
Nonsense. Missing a storm means you lose, because protoss needs splash, since gate units are shit. Rax units are godly, thus terran spells are optional.
What are the chances that you are both right and both spells are equally important? Well, except for the part were an EMP only "weakens" an army. With the exception of zealots, colossi and immortals, all protoss ground units are at least a 50/50 split on HP and shields. Losing 1/3 to 1/2 of your HP is pretty brutal. So maybe all AOEs should be on a level playing field, same range, same size?
That defeats the purpose of having 3 races in the game, racial diversity is intended. Making every race the same is redundant.
On November 02 2011 22:54 Toadvine wrote: I don't know about Infestors and Broodlords, but HTs are literally impossible to pull off against really good TvPers. As in, they will always Snipe before the Ghost can be Feedbacked. You can even see this with Select, who is hardly a top Terran, but his Snipes are pretty goddamned amazing. Just now, I was watching hero play makaprime on his stream, he was trying to feedback a ghost, had the spell selected with the range indicator on, and the HT got sniped before the Ghost got in range.
I'd be fine if Protosses were dealing with Ghosts with sick HT control or Warp Prisms, but it simply doesn't happen. The mechanical difference of range and speed is simply too much.
Feel free to open up the unit tester and make the following test.
Have a ghost and a HT miles away from each other.
Tell the HT to feedback the ghost, and tell the ghost to snipe the HT.
When I did this simple test, the HT was always able to cover the small difference of range and feedback the ghost before the ghost could get off two snipes.
Hell I struggled even getting off the first snipe due to the animation.
You can EMP the HTs before they can feedback you on the other hand, but if they got 150+ energy, they're still going to feedback you.
Edit: Interesting thing is that you need to hit the HT before it reaches the max range of the center of the EMP itself, otherwise it'll still get a feedback off while the EMP missile is traveling. Basically, you need to aim slightly ahead of where the HT is moving to hit it with the edge of your EMP if you want to avoid getting feedbacked. If you just hit the HT when it's within the center of your EMP the feedback will always hit. I think with the lower radius the feedback vs EMP battle will be even closer, maybe even tipped to the HTs favor.
Now try to FB 5 ghost with cloak in a bioball, before they spam EMP like no tomorrow.
And share the replay plz.
I saw trump get smashed last night against a player who went zealot templar colossus into archons... the protoss player spread his units and was able to feedback the ghost killteam (killing 2 of the ghosts and forcing the rest back out of fear) with minimal emp damage.
It relies on the situation... trying to balance something so skill dependant and something so close is extremely challenging... Feedback is superior to snipe because it only takes 1 to neutralise or even kill a target... emp is more valuable as an area disable, but to be honest, i like feedback more... i mean EMPs don't kill dropships full of units... feedbacks do!
It's fair to say that in most situations the player with the best positioning will win... at high levels if one side is statistically stronger than the other, than blizzard makes small changes like reducing the EMP radius and improving incentive for getting upgrades on protoss units.
I used to watch Trump's Stream too, he is cool, and most of the time when he get some ghost out, he is able to make them worth every single mineral, I mean, he is able to micro them properly in the vast majority of the games and emp most of the time.
I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
i feel like thats a good point. It seems that the radius change nerfs emp most against unit it should nerf it least against.
On November 02 2011 09:32 Toadvine wrote: Yeah guys, Terran has it so hard! So much micro needed to make bio efficient! Terran players are just so much better at everything, that's why they take up 60% of Code S! It's a good thing Terrans have Ghosts, because they'd lose to HTs even with their insane micro skill, so why is Blizzard nerfing EMP?! Can't they see it doesn't kill anything? Terrans only barely win lategame engagements against Protoss even with superior upgrades and perfect EMPs on everything!
...
Seriously guys, we're concerned with the very top level of play here, not the ladder woes of a Diamond Terran.
I must agree here. I couldn't care less about any random Diamond/Master player's balance experiences. I care about balance at the Korean pro level, and I want to see a fair playing field for the players who undoubtedly deserve one the most. Seriously, if anyone's excuse for why a certain nerf is bad is simply "In my experience it'll make it soooo hard for me to win!", then your opinion is completely irrelevant - tough luck. I want to see an even playing ground for the absolute best players who dedicate their very lives to the game, not for some random person who just makes it a mere hobby to play SC2, and at the very top level, it's been pretty clear that EMP as it used to be, was too strong.
The issue is Blizzard doesn't necessarily want to balance just for the pros (otherwise this process would probably go by much faster). They want to balance it for the noobs as well as keep it reasonable for pros. I mean, from a business perspective, would you really want to alienate your customers to serve just a small percentage of the people who play your game for a living? Ideally, you'd want to satisfy both groups. You want to satisfy the casual gamers with a balanced game at the lower and middle levels while still balancing the game at the higher levels, which is INCREDIBLY difficult to do if it's even possible. Do you think Blizzard will be happy with nobody playing Battle.net 2.0 and instead just paid organizations like MLG and GSL to watch people play their game? Of course not. And if that ever happened, then how would new players get into the game? We'd see a total monopoly of skill unless you have a professional take a LOT of time out of their schedule to teach you. Or if the end result is that a race or two becomes completely unviable at the lower levels, then eventually you'll only have the remaining races at the top of the game because nobody else will play the other 2 races.
So we're going to have to accept this process to be slow and imperfect if everyone is to be happy at the end of it all. If Starcraft 2 is going to survive, EVERYONE (noobs and pros) needs to be reasonably satisfied with game balance.
I'm aware that that's the issue and I completely agree with you on all counts. It just annoys me to see some people pretend that the game is balanced at the very top level (when, obviously, if you try to cater to the lower levels and the top at the same time, it's going to be EXTREMELY difficult to have a well-balanced game at the top level) , or just ignore balance at the top completely and only talk about it in terms of their own experiences. Everything that you've said is, in my opinion, an unfortunate reality, but at the same time, I wish more people would acknowledge that reality and stop pretending that the game is balanced when, as you've said, trying to balance for the top and lower levels at the same time just means that the process is all the more unreliable and goes far more slowly. IMO this dynamic between skill and balance worked out unfortunately for Protoss pro players due to how the skill cap of Terran worked out - for example, at the low levels, nerfing Ghosts can make things a lot harder for Terran players who don't have godly Korean pro micro, but at the very top level, Ghosts in the hands of Korean pros simply seem too strong, and thus appear to deserve a nerf.
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
How about terran stop trying to fight archons with bio
I believe that balancing the game around the top level and the lower level is just simply impossible.The games should be balanced at the highest calibre of level since pro players have solid mechanics,micro,strategy and so on. The lower tier player will always make micro mistake or slip up in their macro play so its hard to justify balancing the game at the lower level.
Blizzard is trying too hard to balance the game for top and lower level which honestly speaking is literally impossible.Thats why they said its take longer time to balance the game.
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
How about terran stop trying to fight archons with bio
Will happen in HOTS. Until then it's an outspoken blizz intention to keep bio death-ball as the only viable TvP strategy.
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
How about terran stop trying to fight archons with bio
With what exactly should terrans fight archons then ? Siege tanks ? Since Archons are neither light nor armored, there is no real counter to them - other than EMP.
Sure, they don't deal as much damage to non-biological but you can't fight archon/zealot with mech either. HotS might change that with hellions being more effective against zealots and more rubust but it remains to be seen. For now, EMP is the only real answer terrans have to archons.
On November 02 2011 20:58 CptCutter wrote: ummm, why hasnt FG or Storm had a nerf along with it too? because unlike EMP, both of these spells actually kill units whereas EMP only temporarily damages them.
Are you really that stupid? If it takes all shield of ground units (100 for an archon) and their energy, then this is GOOD DAMAGE, even guaranteed one. You also lower energy by 100. What else do you want???
Is this fair? EMP is: instant, 10 range, AoE (2 radius atm) Feedback is: instant, 9 range, TARGET ONLY Storm is: 20 damage per sec (80 for 4), 9 range, AoE (1.5 radius I think) It's not guaranteed storm will do 80 because average zerg or terran don't sit under it unless they're forced somehow (terrain/FF/etc). On the other hand, EMP does 100 AoE shield damage on any protoss unit instantly. That's good even itself without taking out energy. Moreover, how is protoss supposed to counter ghosts? Well, protoss just has to rely on terran not controlling a specific ghost whose range is, again, longer than a high templar.
Are you really stupid? Because the point he is trying to make is that fungal and storm can completely wipe out an army. EMP is only going to do anything if you have enough army support with the ghosts. Not to mention archons need 4 emps to drain all their shields. Nerfing Terrans only AoE against toss is brutal, when toss now has more effective HT's and still has Colossus. If you EMP an army, you've weakened it. But if you miss, you get stormed to death. And no, you can never perfectly dodge a storm, especially when they have multiple ones spammed around you. So missing an EMP means you lose, missing a storm does not.
Nonsense. Missing a storm means you lose, because protoss needs splash, since gate units are shit. Rax units are godly, thus terran spells are optional.
What are the chances that you are both right and both spells are equally important? Well, except for the part were an EMP only "weakens" an army. With the exception of zealots, colossi and immortals, all protoss ground units are at least a 50/50 split on HP and shields. Losing 1/3 to 1/2 of your HP is pretty brutal. So maybe all AOEs should be on a level playing field, same range, same size?
Correction, only Zealots and Colossi take less than half of their total health in damage from an EMP. Immortals on the other hand loose about half, often more, of their health to an EMP. With hardened shields and fighting Marauders, those 100 shields block 20 shots, regardless of upgrades, for 200-260 damage, almost always much more than the 200 hit points of an Immortal. It´s only when fighting Marines and Hellions (lol) that those 100 shields only block 100 damage, making Immortals just as vulnerable to EMPs as Stalkers and other high-shield Protoss units.
At the current state of the game i think the HT:s need a small speed bump, they are just to slow to be able to be apart of the biggest fights, i still think that the ghosts need a small nerf...
And i think that toss is starting to figure out ways to deal with certain things in the matchup ie 1-1-1.
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
How about terran stop trying to fight archons with bio
I reported this post. With what can we fight archons? Thors? Siegetanks? Banshees? Do you really think that every single terran would use bio if there was another option? Alot of terrans are sick of bio, but it's the only viable thing (unless you go for a 1-1-1 allin or a 2base rine tank timing which is gimmicky).
I reported this post. With what can we fight archons? Thors? Siegetanks? Banshees? Do you really think that every single terran would use bio if there was another option? Alot of terrans are sick of bio, but it's the only viable thing (unless you go for a 1-1-1 allin or a 2base rine tank timing which is gimmicky).
Why not Thors? They MASSIVELY outrange (7 vs 4) and outDPS (47 DPS vs 14 DPS...) Archons... And have more health (400 vs 350+10)... And more armor (1 vs 0).... They also have relatively large size, so Archons splash don't work on them like on MMM. On top of that Archon cost more Gas then Thor (no matter of Templar combination, but HTs are more gas-expensive)... Actually In Thor-Archon matchup Archon has only one clear advantage - lower control requirements (4 vs 6). But Thors are still outdamaging Archons 3 times and have more then 2x range...
IMO Thor sound like best non-ghost Terran solution to Archons, I simply do not understand how Thor cannot work as Archon counter (unless you let Toss heavy outproduce you, but in this situation nothing can help you anyway, because you've already lost the game)
On November 03 2011 14:15 Quintum_ wrote: I dont know if it has been answered already but with the new emp radius how many archons can be hit with an emp as opposed to the old radius, any change. With emp able to stack damage they just become worthless with blanket emps terran is able to put down now. Emp should be able to counter archons but just not as hard as it does imo.
How about terran stop trying to fight archons with bio
And what else ? Mech is worse vs Archons and Air (lol) is just bad in general as your main units. You need EMP's to deal with masses of Archons there is no other way around.
I reported this post. With what can we fight archons? Thors? Siegetanks? Banshees? Do you really think that every single terran would use bio if there was another option? Alot of terrans are sick of bio, but it's the only viable thing (unless you go for a 1-1-1 allin or a 2base rine tank timing which is gimmicky).
Why not Thors? They MASSIVELY outrange (7 vs 4) and outDPS (47 DPS vs 14 DPS...) Archons... And have more health (400 vs 350+10)... And more armor (1 vs 0).... They also have relatively large size, so Archons splash don't work on them like on MMM. On top of that Archon cost more Gas then Thor (no matter of Templar combination, but HTs are more gas-expensive)... Actually In Thor-Archon matchup Archon has only one clear advantage - lower control requirements (4 vs 6). But Thors are still outdamaging Archons 3 times and have more then 2x range...
IMO Thor sound like best non-ghost Terran solution to Archons, I simply do not understand how Thor cannot work as Archon counter (unless you let Toss heavy outproduce you, but in this situation nothing can help you anyway, because you've already lost the game)
[and I am Zerg player]
Ehhhh you know where Archons come from ? HT's and you know what instantly deals up to 200 Damage to Thors ? Feedback and you can' t even spend your Energy on anything to not get feebacked . Thor with Energy just suck vs Toss. Even without Feedback they are very bad ( cost ineffiecient ) against Gateway units in general once there are enough of it.
You need Ghosts against any kind of Templar/Archon tech everything is just at least soft countered by it be it feedback or storm.
I reported this post. With what can we fight archons? Thors? Siegetanks? Banshees? Do you really think that every single terran would use bio if there was another option? Alot of terrans are sick of bio, but it's the only viable thing (unless you go for a 1-1-1 allin or a 2base rine tank timing which is gimmicky).
Why not Thors? They MASSIVELY outrange (7 vs 4) and outDPS (47 DPS vs 14 DPS...) Archons... And have more health (400 vs 350+10)... And more armor (1 vs 0).... They also have relatively large size, so Archons splash don't work on them like on MMM. On top of that Archon cost more Gas then Thor (no matter of Templar combination, but HTs are more gas-expensive)... Actually In Thor-Archon matchup Archon has only one clear advantage - lower control requirements (4 vs 6). But Thors are still outdamaging Archons 3 times and have more then 2x range...
IMO Thor sound like best non-ghost Terran solution to Archons, I simply do not understand how Thor cannot work as Archon counter (unless you let Toss heavy outproduce you, but in this situation nothing can help you anyway, because you've already lost the game)
[and I am Zerg player]
Are you insane you know where Archons come from ? HT's and you know what instantly deals up to 200 Damage to Thors ? Feedback and you can' t even spend your Energy on anything to not get feebacked . Thor with Energy just suck vs Toss. Even without Feedback they are very bad ( cost ineffiecient ) against Gateway units in general once there are enough of it.
EPT
