|
On October 27 2011 01:47 Grndr101 wrote:
I feel like the emp change affects non-pro players a hell of a lot more than pro players. Because the pros will have enough ghosts and land those critical emps, while this is a very hard skill to master for the lower level player.
I'm not trolling here, but I feel that now a lot of protoss who aren't that good will have a much higher win rate aganst terran just amoving their army. Obviously it's different when you get to masters and higher because the skill level allows for that much APM and good ghost control.
But in the lower leagues this will wreak havoc to the PvT win rate, as very little micro is involved(from either side) and without emps protoss is just better composition-wise. It's far from UP, but imo this will discourage a lot of terrans who are just casual players as they just won't be able to stand up to protoss in a macro game.
Tbh the ghost change is far less scary than the upgrade change. I'm not against shield ups getting reduced in cost, but protoss with upgrade advantage is beastly, making it easier(when it's already pretty easy I'd say) is just crazy.
I mean I don't love the EMP change as a terran, and I don't think it was to strong before, but it's one of those things that's kind of like "meh". I mean TvP with EMP vs storm wars is always kind of "I massacre you, or you massacre me" and I don't think this will effect who wins the fight *that* much(getting more than 2 archons per emp was not *that* common anyway), might just leave your MMM kiting for a few seconds more.
|
looks pretty solid imo.
I do see a lot fo triple forge build coming into common prctice in PvT and PvZ. Mainly on 3 base though or something like a forge fe. then go 5 gate 1/1/1 timing or something along that lines.
I was fiddling around with triple forge a few months ago and it works well. It will work even better once this patches goes through.
|
Cant wait this patch. Should boost PvT slightly late game. Triple forge sounds interesting.
|
anyone else having trouble winning against toss lategame?... like im hitting every emp and have enough vikings against the few colossus and have 33 bio... and yes i micro from zeals.. not mismicroing and then toss happens to hit 1 storm cuz i didnt double emp on some spot and they autowin? like wtf is that i seriously think the pro terrans will start losing alot more... and as for like masters level i think terrans are really doing quite badly compared to zerg or toss
|
please qq some more jimbo. terran doesnt need anymore help late game tvz.
|
I like the emp change as it was too strong before, but the upgrade changes don't make much sense to me. Double forge pvt for protoss is already strong so it'll be interesting to see how this affects that matchup.
|
On October 27 2011 01:13 Snowbear wrote:
I can't believe how much anti-terran reactions there are. Do people really look to any other tournament then the GSL? Am I the only one seeing that terrans are getting slaughtered in most of the tourneys? Am I the only one seeing that in EU and NA only thorzain and select are doing decent?
I read comments like "nerf snipe" and then I really really wonder if those people ever look at the terran side. Turn on a terran pro-stream and watch them die hard against broodlord + infestor.
I hate to make elitist sounding comments, but it's because nobody thinks those game matter. Korea is assumed to be the highest level of skill and if you're not playing at that level your games can't be counted as meaningful to balance.
The foreigners that have won tournaments lately are Huk, idrA and Stephano, and they have proven themselves to be at the level of top Koreans by beating them. If nobodies were winning tournaments, then I could admit your point.
|
On October 27 2011 01:37 SeaSwift wrote:
Mech has yet to be explored by Terran vs Protoss, because currently bio play is having a lot of success.
When people do go for Mech, it tends to be a "funky" strat thrown into a BoX or just as a fun build or to metagame their opponent, or more as a characteristic of the player than because they think it's good (see Goody). Because of this, people assume that Mech is bad vs Protoss, and come up with their own reasons to try and prove this to themselves (Chargelots too good, VRs too good, yaddayaddayadda).
Mech is fully unexplored and has potential. Guys, don't dismiss it.
Everyone tried to make it work. Do you really think the pro's never tried it? Goody is trying to make it work since the release. Mech vs toss is not possible. It can work 1 or 2 times, but never as a basic solid strat. It's amazing how you think that terrans never tried to "really" explore it.
|
I don't really understand all the Protoss balance whine. Are they all whining just because of what happened in GSL Code S or because of personal experience on ladder? I find Protoss hard to beat late game. A lot of the Terrans in GSL did the 1/1/1 in at least 1 of their games against Protoss for easy wins. I think Blizzard has already fixed that problem with the last patch.
Protoss are doing pretty good in NA and EU. Everywhere else besides Code S, Protoss are doing fine.
I play mid-masters on NA and I think Protoss are still pretty hard to beat late game. Actually, I try to limit it to 1 or 2 base play because late game is hard against Protoss. I'm not saying they're impossible to beat but I don't think it's as bad as people make it out to be.
|
On October 27 2011 02:01 crocodile wrote:
I like the emp change as it was too strong before, but the upgrade changes don't make much sense to me. Double forge pvt for protoss is already strong so it'll be interesting to see how this affects that matchup.
I agree, and to add, shield upgrade is like a bonus. No other race has this upgrade, It should stay the same.
|
On October 27 2011 00:28 AmericanUmlaut wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2011 00:24 Big.E33 wrote:
is it now viable to get shields +1 before armor +3?
especially in a archon/zealot composition? Keep in mind that the more defense you already have, the better a defense upgrade is. Going from +2 armor to +3 means you're going from taking 3 damage per shot from an unupgraded Marine to 2 damage, a 33% reduction. Going from +0 shields to +1 takes you from 6 damage per shot to 5, which is only a 17% reduction. Especially given that a lot of those shots will be reduced still further by Guardian Shield, it's probably still worth the investment to get the armor first.
lets pretend health and shields are the same, to mostly simulate a stalker,a sentry, or even a collosus (for almost any other units this is wrong)
you're not wrong, but considering you're picking your first upgrade, +1 armor and +1 shields is practically the same upgrade (with the above). there is however a tendancy to want to not take hull damage or actual HP damage. the handful-of-stalker-vs-handful-of-marine situation happens a bit earlier than you would get either upgrade, but i can't help but think shields-first would be ideal if you can save most of your hurt units from death in your very first engagements.
shields recharge to their full amount, armor only applies to the remaining health of the unit whether it's 10 hp or 80. i'm sure you get what i mean there.
it's interesting to me that you look at the numbers that way, and most people i know just calculate it by how many marines are firing at once at a target and how many shots it takes. 2 hits from a +1 zealot against a +0 armor zergling for common example.
so althought at first it looked like +1 armor didn't seem like a big deal no matter your current existing upgrades,
assuming everyone is at full upgrades+guardian shield, taking 3 damage from marines ( i think that's the lowest you can go? if everyone is max-upgraded )
is a big difference compared to taking 4 damage. about a 10-11 shot difference
without upgrades, it's about 29 shots for a 6 damage marine to kill a non-upgraded zealot
now once again let's assume protoss' armor upgrade is 1 ahead of terran's weapons
at+2 armor against +1 terran weapons it is about 27 shots from the marine
at +3 armor against +2, it's 31 shots, and so on (all without shield upgrade)
the difference is all in the amount of HP the armor protects, and the greater the HP pool, the more armor is in effect (obviously haha). so for something like a zealot, armor upgrades are keeping them alive much longer, while for something like a stalker or collosus which you dance around with, shields seem a bit better (only against lower attack units like a marine or zergling). naturally a +1 difference in armor/shields against stronger units like a marauder has very little effect even if the unit has a high amount of HP/shields
*edit* i guess this is why people value attack upgrades more than armor sometimes : D when they get a ball of units.
the units themselves---the zealot or even a stalker are special units for protoss though,, which go against the above statement because of the units that are used against them. (marauders which do 10, with marines, or zerglings against stalkers)
to clarify even that, i mostly mean that those two units benefit more from armor than they would from attack upgrades. last example--- a +1 weapon stalker is just about as good as a +0 one in a fight against zerglings (exactly the same). it's not until +2 that a stalker can begin to 3-shot a zergling with 0 carapace. the zealot example is just because the units they face (bio) have much, much lower DPS with armor upgrades, and so they also benefit more from armor than with attack.
|
On October 27 2011 02:00 KAmaKAsa wrote:
anyone else having trouble winning against toss lategame?... like im hitting every emp and have enough vikings against the few colossus and have 33 bio... and yes i micro from zeals.. not mismicroing and then toss happens to hit 1 storm cuz i didnt double emp on some spot and they autowin? like wtf is that i seriously think the pro terrans will start losing alot more... and as for like masters level i think terrans are really doing quite badly compared to zerg or toss
I share your pain dude. If you actually let them cast one or two storms you're pretty much dead. I think most diamond-master terran players are struggling at late game TvP. If the P actually microes well, it's gonna be tough. I'm resorting to 1-1-1 or 2 base timing pushes.
|
i dont get it - protoss is anyway able to get 3/3 faster than terran or zerg is.
its understandable for shields but not for ground weapons and armor.
ghost change seems to be ok.
|
On October 27 2011 02:10 nanaoei wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2011 00:28 AmericanUmlaut wrote:On October 27 2011 00:24 Big.E33 wrote:
is it now viable to get shields +1 before armor +3?
especially in a archon/zealot composition? Keep in mind that the more defense you already have, the better a defense upgrade is. Going from +2 armor to +3 means you're going from taking 3 damage per shot from an unupgraded Marine to 2 damage, a 33% reduction. Going from +0 shields to +1 takes you from 6 damage per shot to 5, which is only a 17% reduction. Especially given that a lot of those shots will be reduced still further by Guardian Shield, it's probably still worth the investment to get the armor first. lets pretend health and shields are the same, to mostly simulate a stalker,a sentry, or even a collosus (for almost any other units this is wrong) you're not wrong, but considering you're picking your first upgrade, +1 armor and +1 shields is practically the same upgrade (with the above). there is however a tendancy to want to not take hull damage or actual HP. the handful-of-stalker-vs-handful-of-marine situation happens a bit earlier than you would get either upgrade, but i can't help but think shields-first would be ideal if you can save most of your hurt units from death in your very first engagements.
shields recharge to their full amount, armor only applies to the remaining health of the unit whether it's 10 hp or 80. i'm sure you get what i mean there.... *edit* i guess this is why people value attack upgrades more than armor sometimes : D when they get a ball of units. the units themsevles---the zealot or even a stalker are special units for protoss though which go against this because of the units that are used against them. (marauders which do 10, with marines, or zerglings against stalkers)
Are you absolutely sure that armor only affects the health portion of a protoss army??? That doesn't sound right to me.
source?
|
were is my hydralisk buff ?
|
Italy12248 Posts
On October 27 2011 02:27 blamekilly wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2011 02:10 nanaoei wrote:On October 27 2011 00:28 AmericanUmlaut wrote:On October 27 2011 00:24 Big.E33 wrote:
is it now viable to get shields +1 before armor +3?
especially in a archon/zealot composition? Keep in mind that the more defense you already have, the better a defense upgrade is. Going from +2 armor to +3 means you're going from taking 3 damage per shot from an unupgraded Marine to 2 damage, a 33% reduction. Going from +0 shields to +1 takes you from 6 damage per shot to 5, which is only a 17% reduction. Especially given that a lot of those shots will be reduced still further by Guardian Shield, it's probably still worth the investment to get the armor first. lets pretend health and shields are the same, to mostly simulate a stalker,a sentry, or even a collosus (for almost any other units this is wrong) you're not wrong, but considering you're picking your first upgrade, +1 armor and +1 shields is practically the same upgrade (with the above). there is however a tendancy to want to not take hull damage or actual HP. the handful-of-stalker-vs-handful-of-marine situation happens a bit earlier than you would get either upgrade, but i can't help but think shields-first would be ideal if you can save most of your hurt units from death in your very first engagements.
shields recharge to their full amount, armor only applies to the remaining health of the unit whether it's 10 hp or 80. i'm sure you get what i mean there.... *edit* i guess this is why people value attack upgrades more than armor sometimes : D when they get a ball of units. the units themsevles---the zealot or even a stalker are special units for protoss though which go against this because of the units that are used against them. (marauders which do 10, with marines, or zerglings against stalkers) Are you absolutely sure that armor only affects the health portion of a protoss army??? That doesn't sound right to me. source?
http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Plasma_Shield
Liquipedia is your friend.
|
On October 27 2011 01:54 dolvlo wrote:
The EMP nerf is huge, it reduces the area affected by EMP by ~45%
It's only as huge as the psi storm nerf was... which changed psi storm from radius 2 to 1.5.
Yes that's right. The exact same thing originally happened to psi storm, and now EMP is ::gasp!:: going to be *only* as large as psi storm! 
It's certainly called for.
|
I'm a toss player and I actually didn't mind the cost of upgrades for at least the ground and armor upgrades, but that's cool at least people won't forget about shield this patch 
|
On October 27 2011 02:27 blamekilly wrote:Show nested quote +On October 27 2011 02:10 nanaoei wrote:On October 27 2011 00:28 AmericanUmlaut wrote:On October 27 2011 00:24 Big.E33 wrote:
is it now viable to get shields +1 before armor +3?
especially in a archon/zealot composition? Keep in mind that the more defense you already have, the better a defense upgrade is. Going from +2 armor to +3 means you're going from taking 3 damage per shot from an unupgraded Marine to 2 damage, a 33% reduction. Going from +0 shields to +1 takes you from 6 damage per shot to 5, which is only a 17% reduction. Especially given that a lot of those shots will be reduced still further by Guardian Shield, it's probably still worth the investment to get the armor first. lets pretend health and shields are the same, to mostly simulate a stalker,a sentry, or even a collosus (for almost any other units this is wrong) you're not wrong, but considering you're picking your first upgrade, +1 armor and +1 shields is practically the same upgrade (with the above). there is however a tendancy to want to not take hull damage or actual HP. the handful-of-stalker-vs-handful-of-marine situation happens a bit earlier than you would get either upgrade, but i can't help but think shields-first would be ideal if you can save most of your hurt units from death in your very first engagements.
shields recharge to their full amount, armor only applies to the remaining health of the unit whether it's 10 hp or 80. i'm sure you get what i mean there.... *edit* i guess this is why people value attack upgrades more than armor sometimes : D when they get a ball of units. the units themsevles---the zealot or even a stalker are special units for protoss though which go against this because of the units that are used against them. (marauders which do 10, with marines, or zerglings against stalkers) Are you absolutely sure that armor only affects the health portion of a protoss army??? That doesn't sound right to me. source?
it's true lol. Armor doesnt apply to shield
|
On October 26 2011 07:50 synergy_sin wrote:
Hmm, when are they nerfing Psi Storm radius too? Guess it's okay for Protoss to do massive AoE damage to a Terran army, but not okay for EMP to disable Protoss Shields and spellcasters.
Storm was reduced from 2 to 1.5 like.. 8 -10month ago?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
