This looks like a really good patch, Terran ghosts becoming less imba (they kill ALL zerg units late game) and protoss getting some more small tweaks to buff them a bit. I like it.
On October 27 2011 03:18 Marcuz wrote: How come no one is saying what pvt will be like it hots? I mean yea its kind of stupid to talk about a game that's not even out yet but with the new replicator unit protoss has the ability to get a 33 death ball with ht ghosts and collosi. It will come down to the terran emping the toss ghosts lol so the toss could use the ghosts to emp fotter( wrong spelling) the terrans ghosts wile he uses ht to feedback. Like I can't think of a situation that the terrab will come out ahead. That being said in order for toss to get that death ball he has to invest in a lot of tech that might make a timing for terrans to push and shut down an expo. But yea what do you guys think
Trying to speculate about units in a game that isn't even out yet IS stupid.
Maybe Replicators can't replicate spellcasters as a chance before the game comes out. Blizzard isn't stupid, and they'll know how to deal with the Replicator.
I could easily say that Battle Hellions are going to hurt mass Chargelot, so Ghosts would really only need to target HTs with EMPs, and try to EMP Stalkers/Archons/whatever as a bonus.
Still, no one is talking about it because EVERY unit is still subject to change. And this isn't the place to talk about it either.
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?
Are you dead serious???? You claim to be a masters player on the NA server and you have no idea that the shield's upgrade only affects shields?
Did you know that zerg melee upgrade only affects melee units?
On October 27 2011 02:57 Grani wrote: T-T-T-Triple Forge!!!
Really nice to see this changes from Blizzard. And now nerf Snipe for the sake of all the poor Ultras and Broodlords.
Why don't zerg players start using transfuse more? (it does more healing per mana than snipe does damage).
Because queens are slooow off-creep.
Dammit, now if only there was some mechanic in sc2 to spread creep!
Yeah, if only there was a way! But to be honest, those creep tumors usually get sniped by terrans and protoss players. I wonder how mass overlord creep pooping would work though or just transport queens with overlords...
On October 27 2011 02:57 Grani wrote: T-T-T-Triple Forge!!!
Really nice to see this changes from Blizzard. And now nerf Snipe for the sake of all the poor Ultras and Broodlords.
Why don't zerg players start using transfuse more? (it does more healing per mana than snipe does damage).
Because queens are slooow off-creep.
Dammit, now if only there was some mechanic in sc2 to spread creep!
Yeah, if only there was a way! But to be honest, those creep tumors usually get sniped by terrans and protoss players. I wonder how mass overlord creep pooping would work though or just transport queens with overlords...
lol next meta-game shift will involve queen dropping in fights. great. xD I like the changes!!! Blizz needs to keep this shit simple and just keep making minor changes instead of completely radical ones.
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
I looked up the info. It's interesting that the health armor double dips on the shield armor once shield is depleted. I wonder how it will go now that people will be upgrading shield armor more.
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
I looked up the info. It's interesting that the health armor double dips on the shield armor once shield is depleted. I wonder how it will go now that people will be upgrading shield armor more.
It only double dips for the one hit that depletes shields and starts taking away HP. Every other hit is applied to only one armor type
On October 27 2011 03:18 Marcuz wrote: How come no one is saying what pvt will be like it hots? I mean yea its kind of stupid to talk about a game that's not even out yet but with the new replicator unit protoss has the ability to get a 33 death ball with ht ghosts and collosi so the emp nurf is actually a protoss nerf as well infact any neft or buff to any unit other that protoss is still a buf/nerf to toss lol so if I was a toss I wouid not like this nerf cus in hots it qwont matter was the radius is cuz toss will have ghosts too. It will come down to the terran emping the toss ghosts lol so the toss could use the ghosts to emp fotter( wrong spelling) the terrans ghosts wile he uses ht to feedback. Like I can't think of a situation that the terrab will come out ahead. That being said in order for toss to get that death ball he has to invest in a lot of tech that might make a timing for terrans to push and shut down an expo. But yea what do you guys think
I think this is a pretty terrible post. There is no saying whether or not the replicant will or will not be in the game, but regardless the replicant's high food cost act as a shittier ghost, if that's what one will use it. Also, Terran will have more ghosts than the protoss will almost 100% of the time, as they would be easier to reproduce. Generally, Terrans will have more tech lab barracks than a protoss will have robotics facilities, not to mention a replicant may delay a more important unit at the time.
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.
Massive... you want massive, look at EMP radius as it is now. Almost 2/3rds of the screen. It just means terran will have to use a couple more ghosts and it will be possible to dodge EMP.
I love how all the terran cry for FG/PsiStorm nerf along with their EMP nerf. Take the nerf like men and get better at the game instead.
It would be kool if they just changed the whole mechanic to require a nuke, and instead of nuking units, you can send a nuke to explode in the outer atmosphere around a targeted area creating an EMP. It would be scientifically consistent. Of course, there would be a slight delay between target, nuclear launch, and emp. And the radius could stay the same or be larger to compensate.
Also I want to add... unlike emp, psi storm doesn't do instant damage. EMP already has a larger range than psi storm and emp isn't an upgrade either. Atleast you can dodge part of the damage of psi storm unlike EMP.
this is going to far, i don't see why blizzard doesn't go back to their old tactics and wait it out, the game seems really balanced right now(daimond random 1v1 here) the hardest matchup for me is tvp because i don't know how to deal with charge lot archon and with this ghost nerf idk, it shouldn't make a huge difference but i don't see the purpose for the change
On October 26 2011 11:22 The Final Boss wrote: Now, for all the people talking about "Name a good Korean Protoss" or "Name a good Foreign Terran," I want everybody to try and name something for me. A Macro-Oriented Korean Protoss.
As far as Terrans go, you have players like TOP, TheStC, or Jjakji who consistently go for macro games. I can't think of a Korean Protoss player who looks for macro games often times in PvT, as they usually wind up doing some sort of timing attack, whether it is 1, 2, and very rarely 3 bases. The problem isn't lack of skill, but lack of depth in the play. Korean Protoss players are constantly aggressive--or, at the very least they are overly predictable.
Puzzle, and he got rolled pretty much every single time in PvT everytime due to EMP lategame. MC as well, after his GSL March win, and had alot of success against against Terran, with Puma and Bomber.
MC does Timing attacks in almost every game he plays. He is far from a Macro-Protoss. And Puzzle's PvT has never really impressed me. Maybe it's because he beat MMA with Dark Templar back in Code A and still almost managed to lose those games due to poor control and macro, but I just don't think he really understands the match-ups that well.
But regardless, congrats on naming a single Korean Macro Protoss.
Anyone who says "show me a macro protoss herp derp" doesn't really understand the game.... In late game situations terran has the ability to have a much more massive army than toss because they are running off of almost purely mules.. thats at least 30+ extra supply in army comp. Toss have always relied on timing pushes because they are the weakest macro race...
Yeah I don't understand why naming a macro toss is relevant; players do whatever they think they have the best chance of winning with, so if they are doing timing attacks it is because that's what they think they have the greatest chance of success with, and they sure as hell know better than you. .
Who exactly are you to tell them the reason they are losing is because they don't play macro and instead rely on timing pushes?
The importance is that there is less diversity in Protoss players play at the highest level than there is with other races. I can list you players who are Macro Terrans (TOP, TheStC, Jjakji), I can list you Macro Zergs (NesTea, LosirA, Leenock), I can list you aggressive Terrans (Polt, MMA, sC), and I can list you aggressive Zergs (July, Kyrix, YuGiOh); but when it comes to Protoss--players like MC, Alicia, SangHo, Genius, HongUn--everybody seems to fall into that aggressive category of players (or at least the players who have done well). I think that the more we see of Ps such as Sage or Inori, we'll see more and more macro Ps. Hopefully then this nonsense about balance can be resolved and Terran can stop getting nerfed.
Also, as far as the massive amount of Terrans in Code S, look at Code A, Code A qualifiers, and the Korean Weekly Tournaments are primarily Protoss and Zerg, with very few Terrans. I think that the reason why there are so many Terran players in Code S is a mixture of the relative ease of retaining Code S status and also the fact that a year ago, when GSL rankings were originally being won, and the game was relatively undiscovered, Terrans were dominating play. With time, (and maybe a new Code S/Code A system) not unnecessary balance changes, we'll see more Protoss players in Code S.
On October 26 2011 11:22 The Final Boss wrote: Now, for all the people talking about "Name a good Korean Protoss" or "Name a good Foreign Terran," I want everybody to try and name something for me. A Macro-Oriented Korean Protoss.
As far as Terrans go, you have players like TOP, TheStC, or Jjakji who consistently go for macro games. I can't think of a Korean Protoss player who looks for macro games often times in PvT, as they usually wind up doing some sort of timing attack, whether it is 1, 2, and very rarely 3 bases. The problem isn't lack of skill, but lack of depth in the play. Korean Protoss players are constantly aggressive--or, at the very least they are overly predictable.
Puzzle, and he got rolled pretty much every single time in PvT everytime due to EMP lategame. MC as well, after his GSL March win, and had alot of success against against Terran, with Puma and Bomber.
MC does Timing attacks in almost every game he plays. He is far from a Macro-Protoss. And Puzzle's PvT has never really impressed me. Maybe it's because he beat MMA with Dark Templar back in Code A and still almost managed to lose those games due to poor control and macro, but I just don't think he really understands the match-ups that well.
But regardless, congrats on naming a single Korean Macro Protoss.
Anyone who says "show me a macro protoss herp derp" doesn't really understand the game.... In late game situations terran has the ability to have a much more massive army than toss because they are running off of almost purely mules.. thats at least 30+ extra supply in army comp. Toss have always relied on timing pushes because they are the weakest macro race...
Yeah I don't understand why naming a macro toss is relevant; players do whatever they think they have the best chance of winning with, so if they are doing timing attacks it is because that's what they think they have the greatest chance of success with, and they sure as hell know better than you. .
Who exactly are you to tell them the reason they are losing is because they don't play macro and instead rely on timing pushes?
The importance is that there is less diversity in Protoss players play at the highest level than there is with other races. I can list you players who are Macro Terrans (TOP, TheStC, Jjakji), I can list you Macro Zergs (NesTea, LosirA, Leenock), I can list you aggressive Terrans (Polt, MMA, sC), and I can list you aggressive Zergs (July, Kyrix, YuGiOh); but when it comes to Protoss--players like MC, Alicia, SangHo, Genius, HongUn--everybody seems to fall into that aggressive category of players (or at least the players who have done well). I think that the more we see of Ps such as Sage or Inori, we'll see more and more macro Ps. Hopefully then this nonsense about balance can be resolved and Terran can stop getting nerfed.
Also, as far as the massive amount of Terrans in Code S, look at Code A, Code A qualifiers, and the Korean Weekly Tournaments are primarily Protoss and Zerg, with very few Terrans. I think that the reason why there are so many Terran players in Code S is a mixture of the relative ease of retaining Code S status and also the fact that a year ago, when GSL rankings were originally being won, and the game was relatively undiscovered, Terrans were dominating play. With time, (and maybe a new Code S/Code A system) not unnecessary balance changes, we'll see more Protoss players in Code S.
Nonsense of imbalance? So you're saying even when Korean Terrans admit overpoweredness it is nonsense, not to mention a plethora of statistics backing up Protoss balance inferiority? No need to create petty mythology when facts exist. Btw, DKim barely looks at GSL, so your argument doesn't have much weight (assuming it would even if Kim did). If he did, I'd be willing to bet that Protoss would be getting some massive buffs both vT and vZ.