|
This thread is going nowhere and I'm tired of dealing with it. Either drop the personal attacks and whining and replace it with actual discussion or it'll be closed.
12:09 KST Page 98 |
On June 25 2012 18:26 redruMBunny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 16:58 submarine wrote:
To put an end to that stupid "tickle" argument once and for all:
QUEEN:
Attributes Biological, Psionic
Defense HP 175 Armor 1 (+1)
Ground Attack: 4(+1) (x2)
Ground DPS: 8(+2)
Air Attack: 9(+1)
Air DPS: 9(+1)
Range: 5 (ground), 7 (air)
Cooldown: 1 (air and ground)
Sight 9
Speed on Creep 2.5
ROACH:
Attributes Armored, Biological
Defense HP 145 Armor 1 (+1)
Ground Attack: 16(+2)
Ground DPS: 8(+1)
Range: 4
Cooldown: 2
Speed on Creep 2.92 (+0.975)
The queen has no Armor attribute! Thats huge! The queen has same DPS, more range and more health. The only disadvantages of queens compared to roaches as a fighting unit on creep are: They are a little bit slower, the attack is more affected by armor and they are a little big bigger. The last one can sometimes even be a advantage.(hello splash damage)
The range change made queens a very good early game fighting unit. Please stop to repeat this stupid "tickle" BS you heard on SOTG. Just build Terran battlecruisers. They have huge DPS 35.6 ground. Roaches useless against them. GG zerg. Ridiculous? But why? You're making a DPS argument aren't you? Reply is - you make DPS, I make DPS, you make resource based DPS, I make resource based DPS, etc. etc. It doesn't work. You don't just build queens, you don't just build roaches. You don't just build marines, or marauders, or tanks. It's about making use of the strengths of each race and combining forces effectively. If you build nothing but marines, you'll get killed by speedling/baneling. If you build nothing but speedling/baneling, you can get slaughtered by banshees. If you think it's insulting that I should point this out, then please don't try to simplify things down to DPS, because if you WERE insulted, you know better than to try to base an argument on DPS. The fact is that idra was right. Oh, okay, he has a reputation for being BM (or maybe he really is BM lol - let's just say he's a passionate guy). And maybe his performance hasn't been great recently compared to what he's done in the past. And maybe higher ranked players disagree with him, and he's a zerg, and not known for well-reasoned arguments (even if he makes them, they're lost behind a wall of BM). But he's right. They didn't buff queen damage. Just range. BTW, zergling DPS is 7.2 ground, and they cost 25 minerals. (Attack is 5) Roaches have DPS 8 ground (Attack is 16), and they cost 75 mineral 25 gas. That is to say, roaches are f*ing trash in the DPS department, considering supply, considering cost, considering damage dealt. Oh, they're nice against mech because they do a chunk of damage per attack so do well against armor. But when you're talking about nice soft targets, 28.8 ground DPS versus 8 ground DPS? No contest, ZERGLINGS are the monster. (I'm not even talking adrenal gland zerglings.) So actually idra was ABSOLUTELY RIGHT about queens just tickling from further away. Again - queen damage wasn't buffed, just range. And the REAL DPS monster is zergling, with over triple that of the queen. I know, right, Idra being right about things - doesn't seem right, maybe. But really, he's a talented guy, and again, in this case, absolutely right in every real sense. -- As far as queens being viable army - already gone over the DPS difference between simple zerglings and queen, but it's even greater for banelings. Besides which even early, you don't want to grab too many queens. Fighting off creep isn't just some trivial weakness. If someone pushes into Zerg base, okay, queens nasty, and yes, more queens more creep, etc. But really, you're not going to get queens running out of the Zerg base into your base and killing you and blowing up your bunkers like Zerg can with speed/banelings. Nor are you even just going to get queens running after you and surrounding you and killing chunks of your army like regular speedlings after an early failed push. Besides which you really don't want to load up on queens going into late game either. If you load up on queens, where are your minerals for other things? What about early fighting units? Queens cost 150. Roaches cost 100. That's a huge difference. 2 Queens are 350 HP 18 DPS. 3 Roaches are 435 HP 24 DPS. You can afford queens for larvae, creep spread, a few transfers. But you don't base an army on a unit with 66% the damage output and 80% the hit points. Sure, transfer is very good stuff. But again, you can't just build a single unit and plow opponents. There's a reason why top pros don't just build queen armies, and although I think they may sometimes lack vision, there is very good and obvious reason for this in the case of queens vs roaches. You need the DPS, and I mean the REAL DPS, not some "8 DPS per second" based on a Liquipedia entry and hasty assessment. (Not dissing Liquipedia. It's useful! But players REALLY have to read it carefully.) Besides which players REALLY need to think about the mid/late game development. Queen ground attack isn't 8. It's 4 x 2, cooldown 1 A bit of armor, and queens are suddenly very crappy, even upgraded queens with +1. Contrast with roach base 16 damage that punch through armor with +2 per upgrade. Cooldown is 2. Now let's say you're looking at mech with 3 ups vs Zerg with 3 ups. Queens do 7 x 2 cooldown 1, less the 4 armor per, so 3 x 2 = 6 DPS (real). Roaches do 22 cooldown 2, less the 4 armor per, so 18 / 2 = 9 DPS (real). Then consider you're buying 3 roaches for the cost of 2 queens, so you have 12 DPS (real) versus 27 DPS (real). Transfer is cool, but it doesn't compensate for the additional viability of roaches, the fact that overkill is wasted on more targets with less hp, and the 125% damage increase that roaches offer. You get similar things if you run through for Hydralisk (although they're horribly fragile), zergling, baneling, etc. When it comes right down to it, queens are most definitely useful. Transfer is mighty. But they are never what you want as the core of your army, and they usually shouldn't even be the first things targeted down when armies clash. If Terran is going bio, Zerg will want speedling/baneling/infestor, if Terran is going mech, Zerg will want roach, but in either event Zerg absolutely CANNOT afford to just stock up on queens, or Zerg get crushed. -- You WILL see almost pure queen armies in some games, but not so much in serious games between fairly skilled players in the TvZ matchup.
WTF man, if you had spent the time you wasted writing down that wall of BS in the unit tester you would realize how powerful queens are now, especially in combination with other common early defense like lings and spines. 2 more range is a huge f****** deal and this "tickle" or the "they are still just queens" rhetoric is so far from the truth. If people would just test some more in the unit tester and use less "theory crafting" they would waste less time and some of the posts here would be far less dumb.
The simple fact is: Queens are so much better at fighting now. Do not argue against that.
Edit: Oh and most of the answers to your wall of BS can be found in the few words i wrote down below the charts.
|
On June 25 2012 19:06 mutantmagnet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 15:55 s3rp wrote:
The Thing about Cloak Tech against Zerg is how easy it is for Zerg to defend Cloaked Units with early Evos and Overseers. If you tech to Banshees you at least will probably keep the Banshees alive and you're already at Startport tech that is important to have anyway. Cloaked Ghosts will die once detection in Up and the damage they deal isn't that great against anything but Drones and Lings. ( If you try to kill Queens with snipe you'd use too much Energy ). I mean it could deal ok damage but its really delays your tech ALOT. While you are talking about Ghosts getting cloak I would like to point out that if people want to try a smoother transition into RAvens into the mid and late game their banshee openers should be Raven first then banshee and ignore the cloak. PDD offers so much tanking against Queens and Spores Banshees shouldn't spend the gas on their own cloak anymore.
Go to the unit tester and test that! If the zerg wants to be super cute he can deplete the PDD with focus fire on a friendly ground target even faster. In the end you trade Raven energy (PDD) for queen energy (transfuse). Thats not a good trade. A early raven cuts far too much into your follow up.
Quite a lot of people in this thread have suggested banshees or banshee raven as kind of solution to the current zerg mass queeen style. Thats kind of strange because up until the patch the reaction from zerg to banshees was to build more queens. Before the patch this builds worked far better because zerg often build roaches to push back the hellions, and as you may know roaches cant shoot air. Now that queens can push back hellions they automatically have the tool to deal with banshees.
|
On June 25 2012 19:32 submarine wrote:
WTF man, if you had spent the time you wasted writing down that wall of BS in the unit tester you would realize how powerful queens are now, especially in combination with other common early defense like lings and spines. 2 more range is a huge f****** deal and this "tickle" or the "they are still just queens" rhetoric is so far from the truth. If people would just test some more in the unit tester and use less "theory crafting" they would waste less time and some of the posts here would be far less dumb.
The simple fact is: Queens are so much better at fighting now. Do not argue against that.
Edit: Oh and most of the answers to your wall of BS can be found in the few words i wrote down below the charts.
You don't reply to anything I wrote, dismiss the whole thing as BS, sneer at "theory crafting" and point to unit tester which is itself theorycrafting. On top of that you're ordering me around and making blind assertions which are, in fact, not true.
Well, that's your prerogative.
As far as writing text wall posts, I understand most people won't have the patience to look through them. (Frankly, I tend to snooze off in the middle of a long post myself, so it's not like I can really point fingers!) But I think it's polite to respond fully to concerns some posters have brought up, even if they may not want to take the time to read through them fully, so I hope you will be understanding and respectful of that.
|
i think this thread should get closed, all arguments were used on 100 pages, people should read them and judge by themselves instead of writing the same things over and over again and even insulting each other.
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
imho blizz should double the speed of creep dissapear after tumor was killed.
Because now at late game all the map is in creep even if terran try to kill it.
Or blizz should enter some hots changes for terrans. for example change for reapers to have 7 range but don't have grenades.
So reapers will be microable answer for mass queens.
|
On June 25 2012 20:07 redruMBunny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 19:32 submarine wrote:
WTF man, if you had spent the time you wasted writing down that wall of BS in the unit tester you would realize how powerful queens are now, especially in combination with other common early defense like lings and spines. 2 more range is a huge f****** deal and this "tickle" or the "they are still just queens" rhetoric is so far from the truth. If people would just test some more in the unit tester and use less "theory crafting" they would waste less time and some of the posts here would be far less dumb.
The simple fact is: Queens are so much better at fighting now. Do not argue against that.
Edit: Oh and most of the answers to your wall of BS can be found in the few words i wrote down below the charts. You don't reply to anything I wrote, dismiss the whole thing as BS, sneer at "theory crafting" and point to unit tester which is itself theorycrafting. On top of that you're ordering me around and making blind assertions which are, in fact, not true. Well, that's your prerogative. As far as writing text wall posts, I understand most people won't have the patience to look through them. (Frankly, I tend to snooze off in the middle of a long post myself, so it's not like I can really point fingers!) But I think it's polite to respond fully to concerns some posters have brought up, even if they may not want to take the time to read through them fully, so I hope you will be understanding and respectful of that.
He has a point ;\ You could have easily gone and tested what you were talking about instead of just comparing DPS and unit cost, which is a pretty ineffective b/c there are so many confounding factors.
|
On June 25 2012 07:19 Flippin1337 wrote:
I do not understand this thread at all. I think the queen change is fine, I am a zerg player tho.
Seems to me like there is alot of whine about the zerg having a easyer time reaching the late game, i understand the problem with that but it doesn't seem like terrans are adapting? I saw demuslim play idra yesterday randomly and he played like you did before the change... It's like people expect to play the same way and still win? If you know the zerg will play more greedy why don't you play more greedy? Like 14 cc or 2 rax in double expansion. Seems like people are whining before trying new things, kinda sad imo.
I'm not one to say if there is something wrong but i doubt it. I think terran are favored in the late game against zerg so i do not understand where this is coming from. Terran is the race which scales the best with micro, atleast in my opinion, and i do not understand why you don't want to get into the lategame. Looks to me as terran have the highest skill cap and i think that's why you see so many GSL terran winners. Of course you could discuss if the queen buffs would then be fair on a lower level but meh. I don't get it please explain me the problem, cause it seems a little weird.
its sad over a million times,terran is so weak if it tryes to play more greedy vs zerg,zerg can go fast 3 bases with 6 queens and defend pretty much EVERY pressure terran tryes,and definetely terran playing greedy isnt the solution
|
Buff the Tank! Back to Beta Tanks!
Tanks should really be buffed...
|
Russian Federation125 Posts
agreed. Especially in hots where almost all new units counter tanks, tanks starts to look useless after 10min in the game
|
Tank buff would be a fucking awful idea. in TvZ the only difference is that tanks would 1shot upgraded lings pre-+1 weapons upgrade and be slightly better vs queens. That's it. But if you were to do that you'd turn TvT back into mech only and probably fuck over TvP while you're at it.
|
To be honest, ZvP didn't change much at all. But ZvT became... as long as I don't make a mistake – regardless of whether my opponent plays well or not – as long as I don't make a mistake, I play thinking that I am going to win. The queen range buff was just so huge.
-DongRaeGu
There’s a reason I aimed only for third place. Lately, my win rate for TvZ and TvP are only at 30% or so. The only reason a Zerg or Protoss loses in a broadcasted match is because they don’t play their best. Unless those races make a mistake, it’s really hard for Terran to win. Until we come up with something new, it’ll continue to be hard for Terrans.
Back when Toss was the OP race, Terran could at least deal with it. But now, there is nothing we can do against Zerg. If you have two players of equal skill, the Terran cannot beat the Zerg. - MVP
|
On June 25 2012 18:43 SnipedSoul wrote:
Terran needs to slow down the zerg economy or enter the midgame with a huge disadvantage being down 30 workers.
I'm not entirely sure about the truth of this statement.
MULEs last for 90 seconds and are equivalent to 4 workers. If I'm not mistaken, OCs generate 50 energy in about 80 seconds, so we can approximate each OC as being equivalent to an extra 4.5 workers.
If instead of getting gas and hellions, T builds an additional OC (getting 4 instead of the usual 3), then we're looking at about an 18 workers leeway. This means that if you can saturate your main and natural by the time Z has saturated his three bases, then you're about even. And with a 4 OC build... I don't know, it sort of seems doable. The disadvantage is that you enter the midgame with access to less gas than Z (4 geysers vs 6, presumably quickly going to 6 to 8 since Z is likely to grab a fourth when you claim your third), but you should have a substantial mineral income advantage once the third gets claimed - or at least you should have a ton of scans for clearing creep.
I'm not saying that it will surely work, but I've got the suspicion that it might.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On June 25 2012 20:07 redruMBunny wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 19:32 submarine wrote:
WTF man, if you had spent the time you wasted writing down that wall of BS in the unit tester you would realize how powerful queens are now, especially in combination with other common early defense like lings and spines. 2 more range is a huge f****** deal and this "tickle" or the "they are still just queens" rhetoric is so far from the truth. If people would just test some more in the unit tester and use less "theory crafting" they would waste less time and some of the posts here would be far less dumb.
The simple fact is: Queens are so much better at fighting now. Do not argue against that.
Edit: Oh and most of the answers to your wall of BS can be found in the few words i wrote down below the charts. You don't reply to anything I wrote, dismiss the whole thing as BS, sneer at "theory crafting" and point to unit tester which is itself theorycrafting. On top of that you're ordering me around and making blind assertions which are, in fact, not true. Well, that's your prerogative. As far as writing text wall posts, I understand most people won't have the patience to look through them. (Frankly, I tend to snooze off in the middle of a long post myself, so it's not like I can really point fingers!) But I think it's polite to respond fully to concerns some posters have brought up, even if they may not want to take the time to read through them fully, so I hope you will be understanding and respectful of that. The problem is not that you wrote a wall of text, it's that you're missing the point. What he's trying to say is that albeit the queen is slightly worse then the roach, without transfure that is, it's a lot more versatile and doesn't take larvae or gas. Even if it "tickles" hellions it'll still eventually kill off the hellions, effectively shutting down any pressure that the hellion were doing. Combined with the insane creep spread and the new overlord it also makes you safe to pretty much any all-in and every other known pressure build. This is not the main problem, the fact that it sets you up for an pretty much unstoppable mid-game which is followed by an even stronger late is what's the flaw of the current queen, it allows a zerg to play too greedy. The entire "to drone or not to drone" question is rendered null when the answer is absurdly simple. Zerg is no longer the reactionary race in ZvT, it's plain and simply the dominating one. I am willing to admit that maybe, and that's a big maybe, there might be some build that can defeat the queen build. Or maybe end up on even terms with an equal risk versus reward. It has yet to be discovered however and it really doesn't seem like in the current game it will ever happen. But that doesn't change the fact that this change took away a huge chunk of any TvZ early-game action and micro opportunity, and tipped the scales massively in zergs favour for the time being. I do not understand the argument behind the zerg being able to play greedy and still not take damage, that's not the way the game is supposed to be played. Risk versus reward. However there are many aspects that could be changed beyond the queen range that could reduce the effects whilst still allowing the zerg to be a bit safer early. Maybe nerf down creep spread rate, or increase creep rate of receding. Maybe limit the amount of creep tumors that can be placed in some way. Mid and late could also be nerfed to accomodate, but that has a danger of affecting the other match-ups too much. Maybe nerf the BL, considering how it dominates in both the non-mirror quite convincingly. Not sure if reverting the change is the best option but that's the most obvious one for now, but at the current state of affairs something needs to be done to help Terran in TvZ. To say that we'll adapt is like admitting we should lose to lesser players untill we manage to completely innovate the match-up, this hitches on it at all being possible ofcourse.
Spoilered a wall of text, feel free to read my two cents, not that it hasn't been said already. Why do I bother...
|
On June 25 2012 21:01 iaguz wrote:
Tank buff would be a fucking awful idea. in TvZ the only difference is that tanks would 1shot upgraded lings pre-+1 weapons upgrade and be slightly better vs queens. That's it. But if you were to do that you'd turn TvT back into mech only and probably fuck over TvP while you're at it.
how can it fuck over TvP? mech has always been terrible in TvP.
also its not as simple as you put it, tanks have different dmg depends on the radius from the splash.
".4687 matrices of the target are dealt full damage, units between .4687 and .7812 matrices of the target receive 50% of full damage, and units between .7812 and 1.25 matrices from the target suffer just 25% of the full damage."
this means, at the very outer edge of the fire, it would take 5 shots to kill lings with +1 upgrade. While pre-nerf it would take 3 shots. It would clear group of lings much, much more effectively. Buffing back tanks to beta status would will affect TvZ greatly
|
On June 25 2012 21:01 iaguz wrote:
Tank buff would be a fucking awful idea. in TvZ the only difference is that tanks would 1shot upgraded lings pre-+1 weapons upgrade and be slightly better vs queens. That's it. But if you were to do that you'd turn TvT back into mech only and probably fuck over TvP while you're at it.
I think tanks should be good, it is the staple of the Terran race... Now it is shit... Tanks was nerfed because of the maps and now we have huge maps so why should it not have back the damage it had?!
edit. Just wanted to add...
And it would make zerg not be able to just have mass zerglings very long into a game.
|
On June 25 2012 21:04 Meff wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 18:43 SnipedSoul wrote:
Terran needs to slow down the zerg economy or enter the midgame with a huge disadvantage being down 30 workers. I'm not entirely sure about the truth of this statement. MULEs last for 90 seconds and are equivalent to 4 workers. If I'm not mistaken, OCs generate 50 energy in about 80 seconds, so we can approximate each OC as being equivalent to an extra 4.5 workers. If instead of getting gas and hellions, T builds an additional OC (getting 4 instead of the usual 3), then we're looking at about an 18 workers leeway. This means that if you can saturate your main and natural by the time Z has saturated his three bases, then you're about even. And with a 4 OC build... I don't know, it sort of seems doable. The disadvantage is that you enter the midgame with access to less gas than Z (4 geysers vs 6, presumably quickly going to 6 to 8 since Z is likely to grab a fourth when you claim your third), but you should have a substantial mineral income advantage once the third gets claimed - or at least you should have a ton of scans for clearing creep. I'm not saying that it will surely work, but I've got the suspicion that it might.
Were exactly does terran get all this up front minerals? If you build orbitals just for mules they cost a lot of minerals early and take quite long to pay back. On top of that terran has to invest the most into production buildings. Sure orbitals are nice, but to get them early you have to cut something else, like army, production or upgrades. Without an army you cant even take your 3rd, and using 4 mules on 2 bases is not a good idea.
Oh and i almost forgot the most important part. 4 OC builds will just die to any form of aggression. You can not even scout it. It is nothing more then an eco cheese. And its not even a good one.
|
problem with zerg is that if left untouch their economy explodes to ridiculous level, and the queen buff ensures that they can get to such phrase by making cheap and powerful queens.
Not that big of a problem for protoss as generally they go for timing attacks and can retreat by using forcefields, but for terran, once your army is out step onto the creep, its very unlikely it'll go back home alive.
better fix would be (a mixture of these points)
1) put a smaller limit on larva stocks so it is actually punishing for zerg to be supply blocked, 20 is way too much
2) reduce number of larva spawn from injects
3) reduce queen range so terran can harass again
|
On June 25 2012 21:08 Rockmonsterdude wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 21:01 iaguz wrote:
Tank buff would be a fucking awful idea. in TvZ the only difference is that tanks would 1shot upgraded lings pre-+1 weapons upgrade and be slightly better vs queens. That's it. But if you were to do that you'd turn TvT back into mech only and probably fuck over TvP while you're at it. I think tanks should be good, it is the staple of the Terran race... Now it is shit... Tanks was nerfed because of the maps and now we have huge maps so why should it not have back the damage it had?! edit. Just wanted to add... And it would make zerg not be able to just have mass zerglings very long into a game.
Not mech necessarily, more so things like marine tank pushes. Protoss have enough trouble dealing with a lot of those without taking 15 extra damage on their zealots and sentries
|
On June 25 2012 21:08 Rockmonsterdude wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2012 21:01 iaguz wrote:
Tank buff would be a fucking awful idea. in TvZ the only difference is that tanks would 1shot upgraded lings pre-+1 weapons upgrade and be slightly better vs queens. That's it. But if you were to do that you'd turn TvT back into mech only and probably fuck over TvP while you're at it. I think tanks should be good, it is the staple of the Terran race... Now it is shit... Tanks was nerfed because of the maps and now we have huge maps so why should it not have back the damage it had?! edit. Just wanted to add... And it would make zerg not be able to just have mass zerglings very long into a game.
Yes and perhaps give zerg a tank so it can tank the Terran tank so it would not be in the game very long too.
Seriously, its damage was reduced and the patch notes said it was because it did too much damage to light units. Its role is to kill armored units and be less effective vs light so asking for more damage means your not using your units effectively enough.
|
Maybe buff tank range, bring back maps where the middle is large for flanks to happen. Maybe then we can see some BW-esque stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
