|
On February 22 2012 11:26 CyDe wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:13 Shiori wrote:On February 22 2012 11:01 Bagi wrote:On February 22 2012 10:53 envisioN . wrote:
I played a ZvT on Cloud Kingdom today, got to the late game and got 6 Broodlords up, then laughed as my terran opponent attempted to snipe them down, using all of his energy on 5 ghosts and only killing 2 Broodlords. I honestly feel bad for Terrans late-game now because Vikings will be their only answer to BLs and they die to fungal if they get clumped even once I think the only way to beat it is to snipe/EMP the infestors before the zerg can force the engagement. If the brood lords manage to get into attack range with infestors hiding safely behind them, you are now fucked as terran. Then you just barely hold the Infestor/Bl aggression, making a tonne of Vikings...only to have a bunch of Ultralisks and Lings stream into your now tattered siege lines. I guess the pilots of the Vikings will get some sick polaroids for their families though. Macabre ones, yeah, but dramatic. Haha yeah. I think maybe what Blizz should do is have some sort of buff to Viking's landed mode. I mean, not enough to make them counter Ultras, because then we would have the same so-called problem that the ghosts had, but enough to make the useful. Because, honestly, when is the last time you saw landed Vikings used? Personally, I have never seen that as an actual strategy. Sometimes as a last ditch attempt to hold off a nydus worm, but never harassment or countering a tech switch. With this new hypothetical buff, at least all those Vikings you overproduced when you saw BLs could be used to some extent.
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed.
|
On February 22 2012 11:40 Empirimancer wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:25 thurst0n wrote:Did you guys see this in the bug fixes section? THis might need it's own thread.. probably not though. Fixed an issue that could cause ladder matches to sometimes start three seconds late. I'm pretty sure this has happened to me before. The way the game starts has always seemed like it could be unfair if a computer is still loading at the first second. Maybe it should load the map with complete Fog of War, and then 321 real quick for the start.. Anyway this seems pretty big. Was it 3 seconds late for BOTH players? Anyone know more about this? I know for a fact that my coworker's game often starts at least 2 seconds late when we play together, and I can't be mistaken because his screen is directly in my field of view. It's ridiculous.
Yeah that's messed up. I guess it apparently isn't an issue in custom games which is what tournaments use so it's not that big of a deal. But my MMR could ride on those seconds!! think of PvP!! Haha, seriously though I don't care what my MMR is but for the sake of competition I'm glad this got changed/fixed/whatever. Anyone who purportedly had this issue notice any difference with patch?
|
On February 22 2012 11:31 Tula wrote:
I must admit i have never tried to play with upgraded vikings in mech mode, how badly do they suck against ultra/ling? I seem to remember them doing decently against lings.
With equal upgrades or better, it takes 3 shots/3 seconds per ling, any less and it's 4 shots/4 seconds.
They tend to do well against lings because they can land right into chokes. In an open field fight, they're basically a little over twice the cost of a Roach and just slightly more powerful than one.
They can turn a close battle if you don't care about wasting money or you already sniped the greater spire.
|
On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed.
I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness.
|
On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness.
Bolded the important part-
It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit.
Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts...
I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential"
|
On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:26 CyDe wrote:On February 22 2012 11:13 Shiori wrote:On February 22 2012 11:01 Bagi wrote:On February 22 2012 10:53 envisioN . wrote:
I played a ZvT on Cloud Kingdom today, got to the late game and got 6 Broodlords up, then laughed as my terran opponent attempted to snipe them down, using all of his energy on 5 ghosts and only killing 2 Broodlords. I honestly feel bad for Terrans late-game now because Vikings will be their only answer to BLs and they die to fungal if they get clumped even once I think the only way to beat it is to snipe/EMP the infestors before the zerg can force the engagement. If the brood lords manage to get into attack range with infestors hiding safely behind them, you are now fucked as terran. Then you just barely hold the Infestor/Bl aggression, making a tonne of Vikings...only to have a bunch of Ultralisks and Lings stream into your now tattered siege lines. I guess the pilots of the Vikings will get some sick polaroids for their families though. Macabre ones, yeah, but dramatic. Haha yeah. I think maybe what Blizz should do is have some sort of buff to Viking's landed mode. I mean, not enough to make them counter Ultras, because then we would have the same so-called problem that the ghosts had, but enough to make the useful. Because, honestly, when is the last time you saw landed Vikings used? Personally, I have never seen that as an actual strategy. Sometimes as a last ditch attempt to hold off a nydus worm, but never harassment or countering a tech switch. With this new hypothetical buff, at least all those Vikings you overproduced when you saw BLs could be used to some extent. Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own. The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed.
I think fungal should damage air units, like storm, but it shouldnt lock them.
Even if you dont clump, a couple fungals can destroy lots and lots of vikings easily.
|
On February 22 2012 12:32 Active.815 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness. Bolded the important part- It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit. Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts... I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential"
Realistically, Vikings blow Phoenix out of the water. If you have marines in your army and the Protoss has Stalkers in his, then neither one of them can chase the other too far for fear that the enemy ground units will rip them to shreds. Then you get a poking competition, between a flyer with range 4 vs. a flyer with range 9. It doesn't end well for the Phoenix.
|
On February 22 2012 12:35 Bashion wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:On February 22 2012 11:26 CyDe wrote:On February 22 2012 11:13 Shiori wrote:On February 22 2012 11:01 Bagi wrote:On February 22 2012 10:53 envisioN . wrote:
I played a ZvT on Cloud Kingdom today, got to the late game and got 6 Broodlords up, then laughed as my terran opponent attempted to snipe them down, using all of his energy on 5 ghosts and only killing 2 Broodlords. I honestly feel bad for Terrans late-game now because Vikings will be their only answer to BLs and they die to fungal if they get clumped even once I think the only way to beat it is to snipe/EMP the infestors before the zerg can force the engagement. If the brood lords manage to get into attack range with infestors hiding safely behind them, you are now fucked as terran. Then you just barely hold the Infestor/Bl aggression, making a tonne of Vikings...only to have a bunch of Ultralisks and Lings stream into your now tattered siege lines. I guess the pilots of the Vikings will get some sick polaroids for their families though. Macabre ones, yeah, but dramatic. Haha yeah. I think maybe what Blizz should do is have some sort of buff to Viking's landed mode. I mean, not enough to make them counter Ultras, because then we would have the same so-called problem that the ghosts had, but enough to make the useful. Because, honestly, when is the last time you saw landed Vikings used? Personally, I have never seen that as an actual strategy. Sometimes as a last ditch attempt to hold off a nydus worm, but never harassment or countering a tech switch. With this new hypothetical buff, at least all those Vikings you overproduced when you saw BLs could be used to some extent. Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own. The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I think fungal should damage air units, like storm, but it shouldnt lock them. Even if you dont clump, a couple fungals can destroy lots and lots of vikings easily.
I disagree, I think the lock is necessary against drops. Without it, zergs would be forced to go mutas again just to be able to deal with drops, and protoss air play would wreck them. Lingfestor would be useless against both terran and protoss.
|
On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 11:26 CyDe wrote:On February 22 2012 11:13 Shiori wrote:On February 22 2012 11:01 Bagi wrote:On February 22 2012 10:53 envisioN . wrote:
I played a ZvT on Cloud Kingdom today, got to the late game and got 6 Broodlords up, then laughed as my terran opponent attempted to snipe them down, using all of his energy on 5 ghosts and only killing 2 Broodlords. I honestly feel bad for Terrans late-game now because Vikings will be their only answer to BLs and they die to fungal if they get clumped even once I think the only way to beat it is to snipe/EMP the infestors before the zerg can force the engagement. If the brood lords manage to get into attack range with infestors hiding safely behind them, you are now fucked as terran. Then you just barely hold the Infestor/Bl aggression, making a tonne of Vikings...only to have a bunch of Ultralisks and Lings stream into your now tattered siege lines. I guess the pilots of the Vikings will get some sick polaroids for their families though. Macabre ones, yeah, but dramatic. Haha yeah. I think maybe what Blizz should do is have some sort of buff to Viking's landed mode. I mean, not enough to make them counter Ultras, because then we would have the same so-called problem that the ghosts had, but enough to make the useful. Because, honestly, when is the last time you saw landed Vikings used? Personally, I have never seen that as an actual strategy. Sometimes as a last ditch attempt to hold off a nydus worm, but never harassment or countering a tech switch. With this new hypothetical buff, at least all those Vikings you overproduced when you saw BLs could be used to some extent. Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own. The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed.
landed vikings are used in tvt, for harassment and do really well early game in the army after you defended banshees with them, and they do pretty well reactored for a push as they reinforce pretty fast close air for example. Atleast i saw a few pro games lately (happy on that nasl map in a tvt used landed vikings for harassment). And people that don't use ghosts, but a combi of viking marauder vs zerg, use either marauders or vikings depending what techswitch the zerg does to snipe hatches that are far of the track. And vikings do really good damage still on the ground, but just lift them if an ultra is near. (i use wallins if i messed up the broodlord fight and only got vikings left before the ultras are there)
The ground mode didn't got nerfed just out of a mood by blizzard. the low tech ground anti air did really poorly against the vikings, now its kinda even. They are still armored and get extreme damage from the groung to ground anti armor units. They could removed the armor on ground, wouldn't affect anit air units, but they would have a chance against marauders and immortals.
My issue with them on the ground were aoes mostly, they are fine tanks (except for armor crackers) and do fast damage, which is rare for a terran mech unit (to bad they have air upgrades, otherwise they would rock for mech), but they clump together so much, its like hitting a group of hellions just that those hellions are tripple in the price.
Anyway i like the viking, if they want to buff it they could make the viking to still move in the lift off, with ground speed, that what keeps most people from using them, they take alot of damage if you lift them to late with harassment, thats why you should always have one viking spot anyway.
and vikings have to use their range, people that say corrupter phoenix etc win against vikings. Most of the time, lack of upgrades etc. The other part is, vikings have range 9. An opponent attacking them will have all their units in range. after the first units of the opponent died, the vikings will start targeting the weak ones by themself, which turns into a huge overkill fest. If you group up vikings in groups that one shot the opponent units, they do around two times better. Thats of course the noob version. The pro version would be having your vikings in different groups to one-shot your opponents units. Go into a unit tester and try that on slow and then with just having a viking flower (the not nerfed version that still works).
Also Vikings aren't the only air unit a terran has, vikings alone can get you air dominance, but might leave your ground weak. Well one raven replaces around 4 vikings (effectiveness goes down with more ravens), a bc replaces around 6 (effectiveness goes down with more bcs). And you need the second starport anyway, so you can techlab it for some time. The more micro you put into your air army as terran, the stronger it will become. They can even fight mutas heads on from the start of the zerg getting mutas. (though this play is extremly hard)
|
On February 22 2012 12:50 Zato-1 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 12:32 Active.815 wrote:On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness. Bolded the important part- It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit. Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts... I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential" Realistically, Vikings blow Phoenix out of the water. If you have marines in your army and the Protoss has Stalkers in his, then neither one of them can chase the other too far for fear that the enemy ground units will rip them to shreds. Then you get a poking competition, between a flyer with range 4 vs. a flyer with range 9. It doesn't end well for the Phoenix.
But phoenixes are way better in non-staredowns than vikings. When's the last time you saw someone use vikings to harass worker lines in a high-level TvP? As opposed to phoenixes that can lift and get bonus damage against phoenixes.
Straight-up damage-wise, Vikings beat phoenixes-its only when it's a deathball v deathball situation that vikings get the advantage...
EDIT: Bagi, no other race can lock drops in place before they let units out. Zerg also get high MS for most units because of creep and speedlings... They don't need a lock to stop a drop-static defense is just as viable for zerg as it is for terran and protoss...
|
On February 22 2012 12:32 Active.815 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness. Bolded the important part- It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit. Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts... I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential"
Zerg and protoss players would give their right testicle to get vikings instead of corrupters or phoenix. The important part is that vikigs are cheaper, have longer range and do bonus damage vs armoured. Yes, vikings are armoured and have low health but it seems all terran units tend to die quickly.
Also, landed vikings do far more damage than people give them credit for. The problem is that they are slow and bulky. All they need is +1 range when landed and they would be solid units (the same thing immortals needed).
|
On February 22 2012 13:04 hzflank wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 12:32 Active.815 wrote:On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness. Bolded the important part- It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit. Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts... I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential" Zerg and protoss players would give their right testicle to get vikings instead of corrupters or phoenix. The important part is that vikigs are cheaper, have longer range and do bonus damage vs armoured. Yes, vikings are armoured and have low health but it seems all terran units tend to die quickly. Also, landed vikings do far more damage than people give them credit for. The problem is that they are slow and bulky. All they need is +1 range when landed and they would be solid units (the same thing immortals needed).
Vikings are weaker than every other air unit in a straight up fight except battlecruisers since BC's are slow. There is literally no need for the viking anywhere in the other races unless you wanted viking vs viking wars like TvT...
They're also ridiculously weak when they're transforming-they have like 2 seconds where they can be hit by AA and not do anything, and 2 seconds when they can be hit by AG and not do anything... and they only have, what, 125 health? 25 more than a marauder when you pay 50 more gas and 25 more mins, it comes from the highest level of production building T can make, takes longer to make, and is worse than everything else except other terran air?
|
United States13143 Posts
On February 22 2012 13:12 Active.815 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 22 2012 13:04 hzflank wrote:On February 22 2012 12:32 Active.815 wrote:On February 22 2012 12:18 lowercase wrote:On February 22 2012 11:44 Bagi wrote:
Actually this is something I've been considering as a viable terran buff (if the need arises) for a while now, making landed vikings a bit better. The closest thing I can compare them is archons, because initially Blizzard only wanted archons to be a "last resort" sort of unit, one that you only make once your templars have no use. Vikings are similar, they only get landed when there is nothing else in the air. However since protoss was a bit lacking they made archons massive and gave them more range, and now archons are beastly and people often make templar just to turn them into archons. Basically archons became a viable unit on their own.
The vikings change wouldn't have to be so drastic, but it could give terran some flexibility against both lategame zerg and protoss if vikings weren't quite so horrible on the ground. Even making them take less space and move faster when in land mode would be huge, a buff to their stats isn't even needed. I still think you have to factor in that the viking transform is instant and reversible. For all other transforms in the game (brood lords, archons, banelings, etc), the transformation costs money, takes a lot of time, and is irreversible. I'm not saying landed vikings are great, but the fact that they can switch back and forth is inherently very powerful, notwithstanding their combat effectiveness. Bolded the important part- It is not "inherently very poewrful" when it means that both modes turn into a mediocre/worse-than-average version of the average ground range fighter/air superiority unit. Phoenixes, mutas, and corruptors all beat vikings. Roaches, marauders, and stalkers also all beat vikings. You are essentially paying for an air mediocrity fighter and a ground shield that does best against drones, and bad against anything that has an attack that hurts... I would rather have a dedicated air fighter ala valkyrie-at least then it wouldn't be some shitty half-job since the transformation gives vikings so much "potential" Zerg and protoss players would give their right testicle to get vikings instead of corrupters or phoenix. The important part is that vikigs are cheaper, have longer range and do bonus damage vs armoured. Yes, vikings are armoured and have low health but it seems all terran units tend to die quickly. Also, landed vikings do far more damage than people give them credit for. The problem is that they are slow and bulky. All they need is +1 range when landed and they would be solid units (the same thing immortals needed). Vikings are weaker than every other air unit in a straight up fight except battlecruisers since BC's are slow. There is literally no need for the viking anywhere in the other races unless you wanted viking vs viking wars like TvT... They're also ridiculously weak when they're transforming-they have like 2 seconds where they can be hit by AA and not do anything, and 2 seconds when they can be hit by AG and not do anything... and they only have, what, 125 health? 25 more than a marauder when you pay 50 more gas and 25 more mins, it comes from the highest level of production building T can make, takes longer to make, and is worse than everything else except other terran air?
Well it's better than corruptors at sniping colossus since it has higher DPS, which I think is what lowercase was driving at.
|
Fixed an issue that could cause ladder matches to sometimes start three seconds late.
oh god now it's no time to check facebook and skype
whyyyyyyy
|
Snipe has always had spammable options and never really felt like an ability with staying power. It's so easy to manipulate. Such a terrible time to patch, and the game is going to be much harder for terran without it. Terran and Zerg seems to always fluctuate and it's because both races have a lot of stupid new units that completely hard counter eachother, that seemed to be totally based on design concepts than actual fun gameplay mechanics. Banelings and Fungal Growth and EMP and Blue Flame Hellions and the Roach instead of early game hydras making zergs useless against banshees for a few months... Gameplay never really felt considered. It's for that reason that I always hated playing ZvT. I still enjoy watching games on team liquid, but ultimately i've lost any kind of motivation to play the game.
EMP was in the game because terrans only option against all the area effect spells was to a have something to stop them from going off... Snipe became another tool simply to stop the opposition from using powerful spells... and feedback serves a similar purpose for EMP... the games dynamics are all built around stopping these very harsh aoe spells from going off...
Bring back Plague. and Ensnare as seperate abilities... Slow down the speed of which aoe spells do damage. get rid of snipe... make mutas shots behave more like the boomerangs in the first game because it just looks like normal splash attack to me...
Over all the reason i stopped playing this game is because it is so unforgiving. Which obviously, is why its a succesfull pro-game. But the units don't have to be SO devastating for their to be a sport in it. The intelligence of the new game goes as far as making sure you have as many aoe units as possible and then using overkill spells to stop those aoe units from doing anything with more aoe. it's just bloody stupid to me.
|
has anyone else noticed that there epm is higher then there apm??? Isn't apm the total? and epm the effective cause I got to the end of a game with 60 apm but 100 epm.
|
On February 22 2012 13:34 JPoPP wrote:
has anyone else noticed that there epm is higher then there apm??? Isn't apm the total? and epm the effective cause I got to the end of a game with 60 apm but 100 epm.
They messed up and switched the 2 :/
|
Fixed an issue where overlapping units could sometimes traverse cliff levels.
lol dem seige tanks
|
Honestly, I laughed at the suggestion of Raven viablility in late-game Tv Z. I also laughed at myself because I didn't really have any suggestions either that could somewhat fix T v Z/P lategame which would also satisfy Protoss and Zerg players.
However, this discussion about doing something with the viking when landed actually sounds like something worth looking at.
1. Vikings are used in T v P anyways, predominantley for Collossus, it would be great if they were made a litte more beefier whilst in landing mode to mitigate and/or dish out some more damage against the Protoss army.
2. Zergs have had their whine about snipe in T v Z. Lets be fair here guys, if you want Terrans to go back to using vikings, please do something with the unit to make it that little bit more effective. Being able to utilise vikings (whilst in landing mode) which maybe a little bit more beefier could be a viable option to keep up with the sudden Brood - Ultra tech switch.
I might add, being able to transform the Viking whilst on the move would be sooooo much better instead of having to watch them for 2 seconds hoping to god your oppenents units are going to catch up and get "free" shots onto them. Also it could actually increase the intensity of those stalemate T v T, mech vs mech games.
|
"Fixed an issue which caused performance to drop significantly during large battles."
WOOOOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOO this almost made me start to boot into win7 to play sc2. Awesome this is fixed!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
