• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 06:03
CEST 12:03
KST 19:03
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: Within Reach5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: In A Tizzy11[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver5[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters10[ASL22] Ro24 Preview: Siren's Call8
Community News
SC4ALL: II SC2 Complete Invited Player Lineup5StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026)66Weekly Cups (Sept 21-27): herO and ByuN double2Weekly Cups (Sep 13-20): herO scores triple3BSL Season 2316
StarCraft 2
General
SC4ALL: II SC2 Complete Invited Player Lineup Back to SC2 after 14 years - Protoss CTRL groups? How do you feel about the mass reverts in the 5.0.17 PTR? October World Ranking: herO stays #1, ByuN returns StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026)
Tourneys
Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20) 2026 GSTL Grand Finals Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) SC2 INu's Battles#21 [ 3-Days tournament ]
Strategy
[H] ZvP Mid-Late Game: Stalkers Collossi HT
Custom Maps
[M] (2) Sweltering Sands [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 545 And Drops and Rifts Mutation # 544 Double Trouble Mutation # 543 Enhanced Defenses
Brood War
General
Fantasy returning? Bot on ladder Sagi.gg Launcher Released BSL Season 23 BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL22] Ro8 Day 4 2v2v2v2 Tournament [ASL22] Ro8 Day 3
Strategy
Cliff Jump Revisited (1 in a 1000 strategy) Replay Review Process - What do you do? Simple Questions, Simple Answers Odyssey Mineral Stack Saturation
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread General RTS Discussion Thread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Zero
Dota 2
Dota 2 Champions League Season 3 Begins April 25! Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread
Fan Clubs
Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Diablo Animated Series on Netflix
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
[ASL22] Ro4 Day1 Ticket Giv…
bITt.mAN
Escaping Into Video Games: G…
TrAiDoS
38 yo Retired SWE loo…
PurE)Rabbit-SF
Can Bots Beat Pros?? Starcr…
namkraft
[meme] I finally understa…
LUCKY_NOOB
Regacy Esports:Our Goa…
regacyesports
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 11490 users

Call To Action: Balance Testing TvZ. - Page 21

Forum Index > SC2 General
1619 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 81 Next
Neurosis
Profile Joined October 2010
United States893 Posts
August 09 2012 00:49 GMT
#401
On August 09 2012 09:46 TheDwf wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 09:42 SugoZerg wrote:
They should try to reduce the area of scans, maybe terran will make some raven for detection.
With one scan, you can get ride of 2screens of creep tumors, it's too effective and there's no use for a raven at all... Even in TvP or TvT, terran rely on scans not on raven when it comes to detection.
Nerf tumors, Nerf scan and buff ravens so it will become usefull.

You're aware that scans are not only needed for detection, but also for vision so that Terran armies don't get instantly surrounded and caught unsieged by 6,11 movespeed Zerglings?


And for desperation scouting...
Shiori
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
3815 Posts
August 09 2012 00:49 GMT
#402
On August 09 2012 09:38 larse wrote:
OK. Most people that advocate a drastic buff to raven's seeker missile forget the point that seeker missile is a very very different spell from other AOE damage spells.

The fundamental difference is that seeker missile is an instant damage while the other two main AOE damage spells--fungal growth and storm--do their damage over 4 seconds. Because they are doing damage over 4 seconds, their "DPS" is much much lower than instant damage spell such as seeker missile and EMP. For example, fungal growth's damage is 30 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 7.5 for each unit. Storm's damage is 80 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 20 for each unit. But because seeker missile does an instant 100 damage, its DPS is 100 for the central units, 75 for more closed units, and 50 for less closed units. So its DPS is much much higher than storm and fungal. This is why when Blizzard designs it, there are so many requirements for this spell--research, 125 energy cost, and a very slow projectile.

If the seeker missile's energy cost is reduce to 100, or its research is removed, it will be very very OP.

The reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be focused on the costs of getting seeker missile, but not some direct buffs. Therefore, some reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be:

1. Raven energy research cost reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150. Research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80)
2. Durable Materials reserach removed. The duration of Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones is now 240 seconds (up from 180 seconds), and the duration of the Seeker Missile is now 20 Seconds (up from 15 seconds).

So you think that having a reasonably stronger DPS accounts for:

1) HSM having shorter range than Fungal/EMP/Storm
2) HSM being easier to dodge than Fungal/EMP/Storm
3) HSM requiring research
4) HSM requiring 125 energy
5) HSM being attached to a unit that costs much more than the units which cast Storm/EMP/Fungal

Seems a bit much to sacrifice for a stronger AoE, don't you think? 1 decent advantage and then 5+ horrible disadvantages to compensate?
Smoodish
Profile Joined April 2011
United States95 Posts
August 09 2012 00:52 GMT
#403
On August 09 2012 09:03 Liquid`Jinro wrote:
This is a really nice and measured patch I think, I'm impressed. I would consider having creep recede faster instead of spread slower, but I'm sure they considered both options.

I like this a lot eitherway.



Yea, for the longest time i thought the same for soo long. I hope they looked at both and picked the better of the two.
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13426 Posts
August 09 2012 00:52 GMT
#404
On August 09 2012 09:49 Shiori wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 09:38 larse wrote:
OK. Most people that advocate a drastic buff to raven's seeker missile forget the point that seeker missile is a very very different spell from other AOE damage spells.

The fundamental difference is that seeker missile is an instant damage while the other two main AOE damage spells--fungal growth and storm--do their damage over 4 seconds. Because they are doing damage over 4 seconds, their "DPS" is much much lower than instant damage spell such as seeker missile and EMP. For example, fungal growth's damage is 30 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 7.5 for each unit. Storm's damage is 80 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 20 for each unit. But because seeker missile does an instant 100 damage, its DPS is 100 for the central units, 75 for more closed units, and 50 for less closed units. So its DPS is much much higher than storm and fungal. This is why when Blizzard designs it, there are so many requirements for this spell--research, 125 energy cost, and a very slow projectile.

If the seeker missile's energy cost is reduce to 100, or its research is removed, it will be very very OP.

The reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be focused on the costs of getting seeker missile, but not some direct buffs. Therefore, some reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be:

1. Raven energy research cost reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150. Research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80)
2. Durable Materials reserach removed. The duration of Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones is now 240 seconds (up from 180 seconds), and the duration of the Seeker Missile is now 20 Seconds (up from 15 seconds).

So you think that having a reasonably stronger DPS accounts for:

1) HSM having shorter range than Fungal/EMP/Storm
2) HSM being easier to dodge than Fungal/EMP/Storm
3) HSM requiring research
4) HSM requiring 125 energy
5) HSM being attached to a unit that costs much more than the units which cast Storm/EMP/Fungal

Seems a bit much to sacrifice for a stronger AoE, don't you think? 1 decent advantage and then 5+ horrible disadvantages to compensate?


Storm needs research as well. The unit costs more because it does more than cast spells (it also is mobile detection)

As for easier to dodge and shorter range THAT is what is making it weaker. The energy and research are a result of early timings with rushing to HSM I am sure.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
GumBa
Profile Blog Joined July 2012
United Kingdom31935 Posts
August 09 2012 00:52 GMT
#405
Hmm tried it and like the new raven speed they always felt so slow and fragile.
Looking forward to perhaps see more ravens in TvX
To all the haters: you deserve to witness many, many more Serral victories, worthy of the godlike player he is.
iTzSnypah
Profile Blog Joined February 2011
United States1738 Posts
August 09 2012 00:54 GMT
#406
I don't think the movement buff will quite produce the effect Blizzard is looking for. I'm going to put my pixels on them increasing the casting distance of HSM before the Raven truly becomes a standard unit.

Oh and it's like the first time Terran isn't getting a nerf. A cause for celebration!
Team Liquid needs more Terrans.
xTrim
Profile Joined April 2011
472 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 00:55:23
August 09 2012 00:55 GMT
#407
Than yoU!!!
the_business_og
Profile Joined April 2012
United States167 Posts
August 09 2012 00:55 GMT
#408
THANK THE LORD PLEASE PLEASE LET THIS GO THROUGH
shanti
Shiori
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
3815 Posts
August 09 2012 00:56 GMT
#409
On August 09 2012 09:52 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 09:49 Shiori wrote:
On August 09 2012 09:38 larse wrote:
OK. Most people that advocate a drastic buff to raven's seeker missile forget the point that seeker missile is a very very different spell from other AOE damage spells.

The fundamental difference is that seeker missile is an instant damage while the other two main AOE damage spells--fungal growth and storm--do their damage over 4 seconds. Because they are doing damage over 4 seconds, their "DPS" is much much lower than instant damage spell such as seeker missile and EMP. For example, fungal growth's damage is 30 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 7.5 for each unit. Storm's damage is 80 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 20 for each unit. But because seeker missile does an instant 100 damage, its DPS is 100 for the central units, 75 for more closed units, and 50 for less closed units. So its DPS is much much higher than storm and fungal. This is why when Blizzard designs it, there are so many requirements for this spell--research, 125 energy cost, and a very slow projectile.

If the seeker missile's energy cost is reduce to 100, or its research is removed, it will be very very OP.

The reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be focused on the costs of getting seeker missile, but not some direct buffs. Therefore, some reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be:

1. Raven energy research cost reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150. Research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80)
2. Durable Materials reserach removed. The duration of Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones is now 240 seconds (up from 180 seconds), and the duration of the Seeker Missile is now 20 Seconds (up from 15 seconds).

So you think that having a reasonably stronger DPS accounts for:

1) HSM having shorter range than Fungal/EMP/Storm
2) HSM being easier to dodge than Fungal/EMP/Storm
3) HSM requiring research
4) HSM requiring 125 energy
5) HSM being attached to a unit that costs much more than the units which cast Storm/EMP/Fungal

Seems a bit much to sacrifice for a stronger AoE, don't you think? 1 decent advantage and then 5+ horrible disadvantages to compensate?


Storm needs research as well. The unit costs more because it does more than cast spells (it also is mobile detection)

As for easier to dodge and shorter range THAT is what is making it weaker. The energy and research are a result of early timings with rushing to HSM I am sure.

I don't disagree, but what I'm saying is that the Raven has horrible disadvantages compared to HTs/Ghosts/Infestors, even if you factor in its detection. Just as a tech choice it's significantly more prohibitive given the cost of a tech labbed Starport (both in the sense that this cuts into Medivac/Viking production and in the sense that Starports cost more than Barracks/Gateway). Everything about the Raven, aside from flying (not really relevant) detection (again, not actually that important by the time it comes out) and the strength of HSM's damage is weaker than the more standard casters. I don't think all these disadvantages are warranted by HSM being a strong spell when it hits. It's slapped with so many disadvantages already that I don't see why a unit which costs so much shouldn't be allowed to regularly do huge amounts of damage.
SolarJto
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States260 Posts
August 09 2012 00:56 GMT
#410
Yeah HSM should be messed around with. I would love to see it changed.
-University of New Mexico CSL Coordinator-
larse
Profile Blog Joined March 2012
1611 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 01:00:27
August 09 2012 00:59 GMT
#411
On August 09 2012 09:56 Shiori wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 09:52 ZeromuS wrote:
On August 09 2012 09:49 Shiori wrote:
On August 09 2012 09:38 larse wrote:
OK. Most people that advocate a drastic buff to raven's seeker missile forget the point that seeker missile is a very very different spell from other AOE damage spells.

The fundamental difference is that seeker missile is an instant damage while the other two main AOE damage spells--fungal growth and storm--do their damage over 4 seconds. Because they are doing damage over 4 seconds, their "DPS" is much much lower than instant damage spell such as seeker missile and EMP. For example, fungal growth's damage is 30 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 7.5 for each unit. Storm's damage is 80 for 4 seconds, so its DPS is 20 for each unit. But because seeker missile does an instant 100 damage, its DPS is 100 for the central units, 75 for more closed units, and 50 for less closed units. So its DPS is much much higher than storm and fungal. This is why when Blizzard designs it, there are so many requirements for this spell--research, 125 energy cost, and a very slow projectile.

If the seeker missile's energy cost is reduce to 100, or its research is removed, it will be very very OP.

The reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be focused on the costs of getting seeker missile, but not some direct buffs. Therefore, some reasonable buffs for seeker missile should be:

1. Raven energy research cost reduced to 100/100, down from 150/150. Research time reduced to 80, down from 110. (Infestor's energy research time is 80)
2. Durable Materials reserach removed. The duration of Auto-Turrets and Point Defense Drones is now 240 seconds (up from 180 seconds), and the duration of the Seeker Missile is now 20 Seconds (up from 15 seconds).

So you think that having a reasonably stronger DPS accounts for:

1) HSM having shorter range than Fungal/EMP/Storm
2) HSM being easier to dodge than Fungal/EMP/Storm
3) HSM requiring research
4) HSM requiring 125 energy
5) HSM being attached to a unit that costs much more than the units which cast Storm/EMP/Fungal

Seems a bit much to sacrifice for a stronger AoE, don't you think? 1 decent advantage and then 5+ horrible disadvantages to compensate?


Storm needs research as well. The unit costs more because it does more than cast spells (it also is mobile detection)

As for easier to dodge and shorter range THAT is what is making it weaker. The energy and research are a result of early timings with rushing to HSM I am sure.

I don't disagree, but what I'm saying is that the Raven has horrible disadvantages compared to HTs/Ghosts/Infestors, even if you factor in its detection. Just as a tech choice it's significantly more prohibitive given the cost of a tech labbed Starport (both in the sense that this cuts into Medivac/Viking production and in the sense that Starports cost more than Barracks/Gateway). Everything about the Raven, aside from flying (not really relevant) detection (again, not actually that important by the time it comes out) and the strength of HSM's damage is weaker than the more standard casters. I don't think all these disadvantages are warranted by HSM being a strong spell when it hits. It's slapped with so many disadvantages already that I don't see why a unit which costs so much shouldn't be allowed to regularly do huge amounts of damage.


This is somewhat the design philosophy of Blizzard. Battlecruiser, costly and hard to get to, does not do huge amounts of damage. Carrier, costly and hard to get to, does not do huge amounts of damage. Thor, costly and hard to get to, does not do huge amounts of damage. Mothership, costly and hard to get to, does not do huge amounts of damage.

The only exceptions are Broodlord and Ultra, costly and hard to get to, DOES huge amounts of damage. LOL
forsooth
Profile Joined February 2011
United States3648 Posts
August 09 2012 01:01 GMT
#412
On August 09 2012 09:42 SugoZerg wrote:
They should try to reduce the area of scans, maybe terran will make some raven for detection.
With one scan, you can get ride of 2screens of creep tumors, it's too effective and there's no use for a raven at all... Even in TvP or TvT, terran rely on scans not on raven when it comes to detection.
Nerf tumors, Nerf scan and buff ravens so it will become usefull.

Nope. Terran mobile detection isn't comparable to that of Zerg and Protoss. Ravens lack the speed of overseers and aren't permacloaked like observers, and they're much more expensive than both. Like the science vessel, the role they play is a high tech spellcasting support unit that happens to detect rather than a dedicated detection unit like the aforementioned Z/P units. Scanning is Terran's primary means of detection and scouting just like it was in BW.
BlindKill
Profile Blog Joined July 2011
Australia1508 Posts
August 09 2012 01:02 GMT
#413
HSM only works on slow units or bad players , rather get ravens for autoturrets now that they can outrun corruptors
creep nerf is great news
“Life is a grindstone, and whether it grinds a man down or polishes him up depends on the stuff he's made of.”
Trozz
Profile Blog Joined November 2008
Canada3456 Posts
August 09 2012 01:02 GMT
#414
Yay, a raven buff.
Good news for random players.
Terrans needed help.
A build is not a guess, an estimation or a hunch, a feeling, or a foolish intuition. A build is a dependable, unwavering, unarguably accurate, portrayer of your ambition.
ZeromuS
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada13426 Posts
August 09 2012 01:05 GMT
#415
On August 09 2012 10:01 forsooth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 09:42 SugoZerg wrote:
They should try to reduce the area of scans, maybe terran will make some raven for detection.
With one scan, you can get ride of 2screens of creep tumors, it's too effective and there's no use for a raven at all... Even in TvP or TvT, terran rely on scans not on raven when it comes to detection.
Nerf tumors, Nerf scan and buff ravens so it will become usefull.

Nope. Terran mobile detection isn't comparable to that of Zerg and Protoss. Ravens lack the speed of overseers and aren't permacloaked like observers, and they're much more expensive than both. Like the science vessel, the role they play is a high tech spellcasting support unit that happens to detect rather than a dedicated detection unit like the aforementioned Z/P units. Scanning is Terran's primary means of detection and scouting just like it was in BW.


Agreed, however having it helps against creep, having it helps against a lot of stuff.

Honestly, its energy isn't used on a lot so 125 isn't horrible. Its speed and acceleration might be enough to help it out in terms of maneuverability and micro. With less creep spread in the early mid game you might be able to do more as well.

I think we should give it a chance. It isn't perfect, its not the silver bullet but between These changes and hopefully more ghost usage we can see some improvements.
StrategyRTS forever | @ZeromuS_plays | www.twitch.tv/Zeromus_
chuiboy
Profile Joined October 2011
55 Posts
August 09 2012 01:07 GMT
#416
Not a fan of the creep vision being decreased by 2 since it will affect every matchup for zerg. Like the raven changes though.
bellsNkeys
Profile Joined November 2011
United States52 Posts
August 09 2012 01:08 GMT
#417
On August 09 2012 08:56 Whitewing wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 07:52 bellsNkeys wrote:
On August 09 2012 06:21 Whitewing wrote:
On August 09 2012 06:18 ragz_gt wrote:
On August 09 2012 06:12 Whitewing wrote:
On August 09 2012 06:08 ragz_gt wrote:
On August 09 2012 06:03 Whitewing wrote:
On August 09 2012 05:58 ragz_gt wrote:
On August 09 2012 05:52 Whitewing wrote:
On August 09 2012 05:48 ragz_gt wrote:
[quote]

The problem is that infestor is good against everything, and ghost is good against infestor. You can make 20 ghost to counter Zerg infestors, but what happens after infestors die? Terran can handle BL/Ultra army easily when there is no infestors, but that's also without Ghost totally kills the composition/DPS.


Rest of zerg army sucks ass once the infestors are good, the infestors are literally the lynch-pin of the entire army. Take them out of the equation and everything starts falling apart. Ghosts also don't kill the composition/dps as badly as you think. Sure they aren't as high damage dealers, but they don't need to be, and you have more army supply anyway due to the mules. Plus, ghosts can still snipe, even though it does 20 less damage than it used to, after you take out the infestors, so it's not like they're completely worthless or anything after the infestors are dead. They still do 10/20(light) a pop + upgrades.

You keep saying the infestor is good against everything, that's completely irrelevant, because your ghosts are stopping them entirely. It just doesn't matter what they are good against, because they're dead/useless with good ghost usage. Take ghosts and infestors completely out of the equation (assume they trade, not fair because ghosts still help after the infestors are gone but just imagine it): terran army vs. zerg army with no infestors. Terran army will win almost every time no problem.


+3 Ghost DSP is 1/3 (2/3 against light) of +3 marine on a per supply bases, it's beyond bad. Terran army win will almost time against Zerg with no infestors, yes, but when you swap out 20 marine for 10 ghost (that's without considering resource/build cost), it's not on the same page.


*rolls eyes* Are you seriously arguing that trading 20 marines for 10 ghosts to take out all of your opponents infestors is a bad deal for you, especially since, if you don't take out those infestors, they'll just kill your 20 marines easily anyway.


No, I'm saying:

Against a infestorless (especially roach based) army, ghost is pretty useless.
Zerg can tech switch alot faster than Terran can.
If Terran makes too many ghost compare to infestor, Zerg can just max out on roach and GG.
Zerg don't have a problem of "making too many infestor", so they can arbitrary shift the infestor/ghost balance.
This is compounded because Zerg can make 20 infestors at once, Terran can't make 20 ghost at once.

It's like Colosus / Viking balance, except if P have 10 Robo bay built already.


Okay, you try a max roach army against a marine/marauder/medivac/tank composition with 10-20 ghosts mixed in and see how that goes for you, especially since you have no roach attack upgrades. Hell, even give the terran supply tied up in some vikings, you'll get rolled hilariously easily. You're just making things up at this point, have you ever actually seen a high level zerg player switch to mass roach in the late game?


Not pure roach, just the infestor supply worth of roach (or ultra, BL, or anything not infestor). Have you tried to engage a maxed out zerg army without infestor when you have a dozen ghost? It's literally like 1/3 of your supply just disappeared before engaging.


Roaches aren't even a consideration, they're just BAD. And you're just making shit up at this point, I'm not discussing this with you anymore. Until you can figure out that 12 ghosts (24 supply) is not 1/3 of your army supply (if your army is a whopping 72 supply total, you've got other problems besides composition), trying to discuss anything with you is a waste of time.


It kind of annoys me that ever since Zerg players found out the infestor was an amazing unit, all of a sudden everything else is bad. And when Terran found out that mass ghost late game TvZ was good it gets nerfed to hell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but last I checked Zerg players have won numerous tournaments and GSLs with muta/ling/bling in ZvT and there have been no significant Terran buff nor Zerg nerfs that affect the muta/ling/bling composition.

My main issue with ghosts is that they're more situational whereas Z and P can blindly make infestors and sentries/HTs and it will always help them. The good thing is that Blizzard at least tried to give the Raven that role as well, but failed pretty hard at it.


Terran players have gotten much better at defeating and defending muta/ling/bling play, and again, that's not an end-game composition, it's a mid-game strategy. If you're stuck in ling/bling/muta while terran is on a late game economy/tech level with good upgrades, you just lose. Infestors are straight up superior against terran in the mid-game for the most part, and are essential late game, because without them in your composition, you just straight up lose to terran end-game.

Ghosts are designed to fit into the race. They are a purely support unit designed to negate essential units from other races so that the rest of the superior terran force can crush an enemy missing a required unit. The units fill different roles: Infestors are a lockdown/damage dealing/harass unit, high templar are a damage dealing/ weak caster negator, and ghosts are an excellent caster negater/harass unit.


I agree that Terran players have adapted against muta/ling/bling play, but same argument applies that pure marine-tank is a mid-game composition as well. I'd have to disagree that HTs are weak caster negators. Feedback is very powerful but toss would obviously rather use storms. Doesn't make them necessarily weak against casters.

And I don't buy that ghosts are just for support and were created purposely to negate other spellcasters. There was nobody saying that until the snipe nerf was applied. It was more of an excuse to make the nerf acceptable, but imo is pure bullshit.
Dingobloo
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Australia1903 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 01:12:48
August 09 2012 01:09 GMT
#418
Only part they always have to be weary of is the raven's potential as a harassment unit, it's the only caster that doesn't need drops to operate so they have to keep an eye on it's speed and range to make sure it's not just going to be nuking mineral lines from orbit.

Decent changes, I wish the synergy between the creep tumor sight range and it's creep spread range was a little stronger though.
Scrubwave
Profile Joined July 2010
Poland1786 Posts
August 09 2012 01:10 GMT
#419
--- Nuked ---
TheDwf
Profile Joined November 2011
France19747 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-08-09 01:14:07
August 09 2012 01:12 GMT
#420
On August 09 2012 10:05 ZeromuS wrote:
Show nested quote +
On August 09 2012 10:01 forsooth wrote:
On August 09 2012 09:42 SugoZerg wrote:
They should try to reduce the area of scans, maybe terran will make some raven for detection.
With one scan, you can get ride of 2screens of creep tumors, it's too effective and there's no use for a raven at all... Even in TvP or TvT, terran rely on scans not on raven when it comes to detection.
Nerf tumors, Nerf scan and buff ravens so it will become usefull.

Nope. Terran mobile detection isn't comparable to that of Zerg and Protoss. Ravens lack the speed of overseers and aren't permacloaked like observers, and they're much more expensive than both. Like the science vessel, the role they play is a high tech spellcasting support unit that happens to detect rather than a dedicated detection unit like the aforementioned Z/P units. Scanning is Terran's primary means of detection and scouting just like it was in BW.


Agreed, however having it helps against creep, having it helps against a lot of stuff.

Honestly, its energy isn't used on a lot so 125 isn't horrible.

Having to wait 90 seconds (after energy upgrade, otherwise it's 135 seconds) to use the mediocre damage spell you want is horrible.

Edit for clarity—90 seconds after the Raven is complete.
Prev 1 19 20 21 22 23 81 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Sparkling Tuna Cup
19:00
Weekly #149 (SHIN Mod Edition)
CranKy Ducklings25
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft: Brood War
Shuttle 7474
Hyuk 554
Horang2 538
BeSt 464
Stork 167
sorry 99
Pusan 95
Shinee 81
Killer 80
Hyun 65
[ Show more ]
ggaemo 60
Mind 56
Bonyth 50
Snow 47
Bale 37
Hm[arnc] 32
JYJ 22
PianO 22
Sacsri 16
Noble 6
Dota 2
XcaliburYe76
League of Legends
JimRising 465
Counter-Strike
byalli9
x6flipin9
Other Games
gofns29392
singsing2147
ArmadaUGS78
Mew2King75
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick709
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream153
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• StrangeGG 58
• Adnapsc2 24
• CranKy Ducklings SOOP11
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• Michael_bg 7
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2303
League of Legends
• Lourlo1282
Upcoming Events
INu's Battles
1h 58m
herO vs Classic
Percival vs Rogue
Shopify Rebellion Sundays
4h 58m
MilkiCow vs TBD
Clem vs TBD
BSL Open Qualifier
8h 58m
BSL Open Qualifier
8h 58m
Replay Cast
12h 58m
Afreeca Starleague
23h 58m
Rush vs Light
WardiTV Weekly
1d
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 5h
Replay Cast
1d 12h
Afreeca Starleague
1d 23h
Soma vs Soulkey
[ Show More ]
INu's Battles
2 days
SHIN vs Cure
ByuN vs Zoun
PiGosaur Cup
2 days
The PondCast
3 days
INu's Battles
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
BSL: Ladder Tournament
6 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL 2026 AUTUMN (S22)
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Calamity Invitational

Ongoing

ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
Acropolis #5
Acropolis #5 - GSB
Copium Cup
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual

Upcoming

Acropolis #5 - GSC
BSL Season 23
SC4ALL II: Brood War
BSL 23: Non-Korean Championship
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
Custodian Cup
eXTREMESLAND 2026
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.