EPTOn August 12 2012 16:34 etofok wrote:
How about to include into Hi-sec auto-tracking (range for turrets upgrade) HSM?
How about to include into Hi-sec auto-tracking (range for turrets upgrade) HSM?
Very good idea!!
Call To Action: Balance Testing TvZ. - Page 55
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Thylacine
Sweden882 Posts
Very good idea!! | ||
|
734pot
Australia294 Posts
Or perhaps replacing one of the other raven upgrades with a HSM upgrade | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
On August 12 2012 09:58 Shiori wrote: Oh shut up. None of the games Taeja has played against Zerg have been anywhere near standard. Most of them have been the Zerg failing at metagaming him or Baneling Busting. If you try to 4CC on ladder you're going to get smashed. I still think Teaja's OC-heavy style is key. You don't go 22-3 just by being a superior player. Teaja outmacros with OC's + mules, so he can fight zerg late game with a macro advantage. Mules are insane, as you do not have oversaturation. You can mine 4000 minerals from one base if you have enough OC's, so you have to cover only few bases and don't lose supply to scv's. | ||
|
Thylacine
Sweden882 Posts
On August 12 2012 17:25 734pot wrote: Or perhaps replacing one of the other raven upgrades with a HSM upgrade You mean combining them into one upgrade? | ||
|
PVJ
Hungary5221 Posts
On August 12 2012 05:48 zmansman17 wrote: I agree here. At the end of the day, the Infestor is just a poorly designed unit. Give Zerg more options to work with (Which HOTS might do), and eliminate this unit that denies any micro, can be repeatedly cast and has a huge AoE. I would rather just see the Defiler remade in sc2. I don't understand why they feel the need to create separate units, which have elements of their predecessors, but are re-made into inferior versions. You guys should maybe check the Starbow mod, no defiler there but it's a pretty good mix-up of BW and SC2, imho. As for the balance issue, so I don't go offtopic, I like the Raven buff but why not make the HSM radius bigger (even an upgrade instead of all the unnecessary never used shit would be cool). I hate how basic range upgrades are missing a lot from the game, which could make for a lot of interesting strategies and more varied build orders. Every time I go for stalkers I'm looking for the range upgrade ._. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27269 Posts
On August 12 2012 19:00 PVJ wrote: You guys should maybe check the Starbow mod, no defiler there but it's a pretty good mix-up of BW and SC2, imho. As for the balance issue, so I don't go offtopic, I like the Raven buff but why not make the HSM radius bigger (even an upgrade instead of all the unnecessary never used shit would be cool). I hate how basic range upgrades are missing a lot from the game, which could make for a lot of interesting strategies and more varied build orders. Every time I go for stalkers I'm looking for the range upgrade ._. There's just not enough variance in range either, across the board, or in the move speeds of the units. If there was there'd be more of an onus on good players to position well and gain incremental advantages over lazy A-movers who (as things stand) still get roughly equivalent results. | ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On August 12 2012 17:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: I still think Teaja's OC-heavy style is key. You don't go 22-3 just by being a superior player. Teaja outmacros with OC's + mules, so he can fight zerg late game with a macro advantage. Mules are insane, as you do not have oversaturation. You can mine 4000 minerals from one base if you have enough OC's, so you have to cover only few bases and don't lose supply to scv's. You can mine even more from one base as Zerg or Protoss! 12000 minerals from one base last time I checked. With MULEs and SCVs you can mine up to ~2000 minerals per minute from a base (1Mule and 2 SCVs per patch equals 6.5 workers per patch so 52 workers per base with 40 mins/min). | ||
|
Aunvilgod
2653 Posts
| ||
|
Bagi
Germany6799 Posts
On August 12 2012 17:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: I still think Teaja's OC-heavy style is key. You don't go 22-3 just by being a superior player. Teaja outmacros with OC's + mules, so he can fight zerg late game with a macro advantage. Mules are insane, as you do not have oversaturation. You can mine 4000 minerals from one base if you have enough OC's, so you have to cover only few bases and don't lose supply to scv's. The problem is reaching this point safely on a map that isn't Metropolis or Atlantis Spaceship. Most zergs will push the advantage when they get to hive tech. If all other things are equal but you've invested thousands of minerals into extra CC's, there's no way to hold the typical BL push for example. It really was the failed early aggression that won Taeja those games, along with the maps that make greedy play so much easier to pull off. | ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
| ||
|
followZeRoX
Serbia1451 Posts
| ||
|
Thrombozyt
Germany1269 Posts
On August 12 2012 20:46 Nawe wrote: Mb auto turets will now own protoss. That strat is underused and now will be mb exploited as.it will be hard to catch ravens Mb PDD will now own marines. That strat is underused and now will be mb exploited as.it will be hard to catch ravens | ||
|
Lukeeze[zR]
Switzerland6838 Posts
On August 12 2012 21:06 Thrombozyt wrote: Mb PDD will now own marines. That strat is underused and now will be mb exploited as.it will be hard to catch ravens PDD has no effect on marines. | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
On August 12 2012 19:49 Bagi wrote: The problem is reaching this point safely on a map that isn't Metropolis or Atlantis Spaceship. Most zergs will push the advantage when they get to hive tech. If all other things are equal but you've invested thousands of minerals into extra CC's, there's no way to hold the typical BL push for example. It really was the failed early aggression that won Taeja those games, along with the maps that make greedy play so much easier to pull off. Well, ofc this is not easy, you have to do this reactively (scouting required  ) same as a droning zerg. When the Zerg drones hard, you can build OC's, else better build army. | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
1 OC costs 400+150 (OC) you save: 100 for a depot 200 for 4 scv (1 mule ~ 4 scv's) resulting cost ~250 minerals. if you turtle well early game, it should not be a problem to get 4 early OC's safely. with 10 OC's you have the mineral income roughly equal to a 3 base zerg with ~50 drones on minerals, while only requiring one mining base. EDIT: subtract another ~35 as you also save the 4 supply that 4 SCV's would require, so net cost is 215 | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On August 12 2012 21:21 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: Well, ofc this is not easy, you have to do this reactively (scouting required ) same as a droning zerg. When the Zerg drones hard, you can build OC's, else better build army.You have to understand that an orbital takes far longer to pay for itself compared to a round of drones. Terran is not designed to play reactive on that level. Terran can't build an army in 2 production cycles like zerg does. To have a certain army at a certain time you have to build the necessary infrastructure far ahead in time. If zerg builds a fast 3rd he can choose to use it to produce an army with it. An OC does not offer that kind of flexibility. Edit: On August 12 2012 22:45 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: Boah, never did the math .. 1 OC costs 400+150 (OC) you save: 100 for a depot 200 for 4 scv (1 mule ~ 4 scv's) resulting cost ~250 minerals. if you turtle well early game, it should not be a problem to get 4 early OC's safely. with 10 OC's you have the mineral income roughly equal to a 3 base zerg with ~50 drones on minerals, while only requiring one mining base. It just is not that easy. You have to think about when you have to invest a certain sum. Sure, an CC does add 11 supply, but it takes 100 seconds to build and costs 400 minerals. Any 4 OC build will have very few units at certain points in time, and zerg can build a very big army in a very short time. 3 OC builds often die to roach bane aggression, guess what happens to 4 OC builds? | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
On August 12 2012 09:58 Shiori wrote: Oh shut up. None of the games Taeja has played against Zerg have been anywhere near standard. Most of them have been the Zerg failing at metagaming him or Baneling Busting. If you try to 4CC on ladder you're going to get smashed. I love how so many Zergs point to Taeja and say "Do that." That's like saying: "Play perfectly and register an average of 300 apm". | ||
|
zmansman17
United States2567 Posts
On August 12 2012 10:00 convention wrote: You need to think of these units in the context of the game. Sure mutas cost more than a marine and have less dps. They are still good AA because they are fast. Their dps doesnt matter at all, just that they snipe a few medivacs, harass mineral lines, and pick off stray marines without taking damage. That makes mutas more scary than marines. Corruptors do cost a lot, but they have armor (-2 damage per armor against vikings!), lots of HP, and still have good dps, on top of that they can be morphed to BLs in the late game, so you never really "overproduce" them. Queens are strong defensive AA with transfuse. Ghosts don't really counter them well when you think of the situation where queens are fighting. They sit behind infestors and BLs and transfuse the corruptors. The ghosts do not get close enough to emp or snipe. Spores are not barely mobile. They are mobile and used defensively. They stop any banshee harass and can frequently take out medivacs if the terran doesnt realize it is there when units are dropped. Infestors are not the only reason you survive to lategame. They are just the free ticket there. Other units can be used for AA, just the infestor is better in every regard. Infestors are not only your best AA, they are also one of your best anti-ground units as well. On top of that, they are really strong harassing units as well. You can't just talk about the bad points of your units and say they are bad. The corruptor is the best example of this again. Corruptors only need to fight vikings, and with a natural armor point, they tear through vikings. DPS of it might look bad if you take that in a vacuum, but corruptors are good. Well written post that addresses the poor arguments of the post before it. | ||
|
Schnullerbacke13
Germany1199 Posts
On August 12 2012 22:50 submarine wrote: You have to understand that an orbital takes far longer to pay for itself compared to a round of drones. Terran is not designed to play reactive on that level. Terran can't build an army in 2 production cycles like zerg does. To have a certain army at a certain time you have to build the necessary infrastructure far ahead in time. If zerg builds a fast 3rd he can choose to use it to produce an army with it. An OC does not offer that kind of flexibility. I understand that, however OC's a re still good  . The time for ROI (return on investment) of drones is about 1,5 to 2 minutes (build time 17s + walk to minerals line [depends] + 75 seconds of mining).Roi of Macro Orbital: it takes les than one mule to mine the net cost of 215. so 100s for macro cc+35s for orbital+~75s = 210s for ROI. that's significantly longer. However long term OC's seem of enormous value to me .. | ||
|
submarine
Germany290 Posts
On August 12 2012 23:01 Schnullerbacke13 wrote: I understand that, however OC's a re still good . The time for ROI (return on investment) of drones is about 1,5 to 2 minutes (build time 17s + walk to minerals line [depends] + 75 seconds of mining).Roi of Macro Orbital: it takes les than one mule to mine the net cost of 215. so 100s for macro cc+35s for orbital+~75s = 210s for ROI. that's significantly longer. However long term OC's seem of enormous value to me .. How did you manage to land on 215 minerals? Thats some serious magic math^^. Please just stop this hardcore theory crafting and at least try those builds in a build order tester. Yes, mules and OCs are great but they have limits and cost a lot of minerals. You can not just build OCs instead of scvs. That does not work. | ||
| ||
