• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:05
CEST 05:05
KST 12:05
  • 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
ByuL, and the Limitations of Standard Play3Team Liquid Map Contest #22: Results and Winners7Code S Season 2 (2026): RO4 and Finals Preview12TL.net Map Contest #22 - Voting & Ladder Map Selection7Code S Season 2 (2026) - RO8 Preview8
Community News
MC vs IdrA, Boxer vs Nal_rA to be Legacy Matches @ BlizzCon205.0.16 Hotfix (June 30) - Balance + Bug Fixes26Weekly Cups (June 22-28): Zergs thrive in new patch2[TLMC] Summer 2026 Ladder Map Rotation05.0.16 patch for SC2 goes live (8 worker start)99
StarCraft 2
General
MC vs IdrA, Boxer vs Nal_rA to be Legacy Matches @ BlizzCon 5.0.16 Hotfix (June 30) - Balance + Bug Fixes 5.0.16 patch for SC2 goes live (8 worker start) Is the larve respawn broken? ByuL, and the Limitations of Standard Play
Tourneys
Crank Gathers Season 4: BW vs SC2 Team League RSL Revival: Season 6 - Qualifiers and Main Event Douyu Cup 2026: $20,000 Legends Event (June 26-28) Maestros of The Game 2 announcement and schedule ! INu's Battles#17 <BO.9>
Strategy
[G] Having the right mentality to improve
Custom Maps
New Map Maker - Looking for Advice - Love or Hate Work In Progress Melee Maps [D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3
External Content
The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 532 Nuclear Family Mutation # 531 Experimental Artillery Mutation # 530 One For All
Brood War
General
Starcraft vs Retro Category on Twitch Best thing happen to StarCraft since Remastered? BW General Discussion ASL 22 Proposed Map Pool ProGamer Paychecks Story
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL21] Grand Finals The Casual Games of the Week Thread [BSL22] GosuLeague Casts - Tue & Thu 22:00 CEST
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Creating a full chart of Zerg builds Relatively freeroll strategies Why doesn't anyone use restoration?
Other Games
General Games
ZeroSpace at Steam NextFest - Last free demo Dawn of War IV Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread
Dota 2
Looking for a Dota Mentor Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
[94721]Better Good-Health Signs Than 3-15 Bans/Yea TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Russo-Ukrainian War Thread US Politics Mega-thread Men's Fashion Thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread The Games Industry And ATVI
Fan Clubs
The HerO Fan Club! The herO Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Movie Discussion! Series you have seen recently... [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books [TV/BOOK] *SPOILERS* Game of Thrones Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 Formula 1 Discussion McBoner: A hockey love story Cricket [SPORT]
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
How to clean a TTe Thermaltake keyboard? Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Listen To The Coaches!
TrAiDoS
An Exploration of th…
waywardstrategy
I'm an arrogant trash talke…
FlaShFTW
Gauntlet SC2: A Retrospectiv…
Ctone23
ramps on octagon
StaticNine
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Evil Gacha Games and the…
ffswowsucks
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 5076 users

Updated Balance Test Map - Page 12

Forum Index > SC2 General
620 CommentsPost a Reply
Prev 1 10 11 12 13 14 32 Next All
pedduck
Profile Blog Joined August 2004
Thailand468 Posts
September 26 2013 04:45 GMT
#221
I always have this idea that siege tank should be the unit that has concussive shell. This should allow the tank to do a lot better against ground unit and make player think twice before attacking siege line. It wilk probably be very strong against bling but it might be better than just straight out increase attack speed or raw damage of the tank.
SsDrKosS
Profile Joined March 2013
330 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:01:58
September 26 2013 04:52 GMT
#222
I always have this idea that....

SC2 TANK SHOULD BE AWESOME AS BW TANK!!!!

tadada dada tadada dadan~
I'm about to drop the hammer...
...and dispense some indiscriminate justice!
Edit: forgot to thank about op.
I love dat picture~
xxjcdentonxx
Profile Joined November 2012
Canada163 Posts
September 26 2013 05:07 GMT
#223
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?
"Expand or die." —Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #45
Thieving Magpie
Profile Blog Joined December 2012
United States6752 Posts
September 26 2013 05:15 GMT
#224
On September 26 2013 12:40 Nerevar wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 11:52 Thieving Magpie wrote:
On September 26 2013 11:44 ke_ivan wrote:
On September 26 2013 10:08 Dogfood wrote:
On September 26 2013 09:52 rd wrote:
On September 26 2013 09:40 mikumegurine wrote:
try making tanks do extra +damage to shields or something? lol

might make mech more viable vs P


They avoid doing changes where units have unintuitive special cases and don't function as described.

http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Spore_Crawler


lol that's funny!


Its not actually that weird. You could say that the spores are extra virulent in biological hosts causing them to be more damaging to non-mechanical units.

Ie; you get sick due to spores in the air.

It's only funny because it only affects 2 units in the whole game.... both zerg....

5 units including mutas, ovies, corruptors, broodlords, and overseers.

More if you include neuraling a probe, rebuilding the protoss tech tree up to stargate, and using phoenixes to pick up any number of ground-based biological units.


Oh right... I always forget those other units show up in a zvz....
Hark, what baseball through yonder window breaks?
wishr
Profile Joined February 2012
Russian Federation262 Posts
September 26 2013 05:22 GMT
#225
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
4.35% faster. Am I missing something?

Yep. Now burrowed speed is 1.41 with upgrade.
After patch it will be 2.25.
Too fast and furious. ZvZ will be so good.
* Only girls complain about balance! *
Nachtwind
Profile Joined June 2011
Germany1130 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:48:37
September 26 2013 05:27 GMT
#226
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?


̶g̶̶o̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶s̶̶o̶̶m̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶p̶̶r̶̶o̶̶b̶̶l̶̶e̶̶m̶̶ ̶̶w̶̶i̶̶t̶̶h̶̶ ̶̶y̶̶o̶̶u̶̶r̶̶ ̶̶w̶̶o̶̶r̶̶d̶̶i̶̶n̶̶g̶̶.̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶y̶̶ ̶̶w̶̶a̶̶n̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶o̶̶ ̶̶c̶̶h̶̶a̶̶n̶̶g̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶b̶̶a̶̶s̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶b̶̶u̶̶r̶̶r̶̶o̶̶w̶̶ ̶̶s̶̶p̶̶e̶̶e̶̶d̶̶.̶̶ ̶̶f̶̶r̶̶o̶̶m̶̶ ̶~̶1̶̶,̶̶4̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶o̶̶ ̶̶2̶̶,̶̶2̶̶5̶̶.̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶a̶̶t̶´̶s̶̶ ̶̶m̶̶o̶̶r̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶n̶̶ ̶~̶4̶%̶ ̶̶f̶̶a̶̶s̶̶t̶̶e̶̶r̶̶.̶̶ ̶̶i̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶j̶̶u̶̶s̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶m̶̶e̶̶a̶̶n̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶a̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶n̶̶e̶̶w̶̶ ̶̶b̶̶a̶̶s̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶b̶̶u̶̶r̶̶r̶̶o̶̶w̶̶ ̶̶s̶̶p̶̶e̶̶e̶̶d̶̶ ̶̶i̶̶s̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶s̶̶a̶̶m̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶a̶̶s̶̶ ̶̶t̶̶h̶̶e̶̶ ̶̶n̶̶o̶̶r̶̶m̶̶a̶̶l̶̶ ̶̶m̶̶o̶̶v̶̶e̶̶m̶̶e̶̶n̶̶t̶̶ ̶̶s̶̶p̶̶e̶̶e̶̶d̶̶ ̶̶o̶̶f̶̶f̶̶ ̶̶c̶̶r̶̶e̶̶e̶̶p̶̶ ̶̶o̶̶f̶̶ ̶̶a̶̶ ̶̶u̶̶n̶-̶u̶̶p̶̶g̶̶r̶̶a̶̶d̶̶e̶̶d̶̶ ̶̶n̶̶o̶̶r̶̶m̶̶a̶̶l̶̶ ̶̶r̶̶o̶̶a̶̶c̶̶h̶̶ ̶̶i̶̶f̶̶ ̶̶i̶´̶m̶̶ ̶̶c̶̶o̶̶r̶̶r̶̶e̶̶c̶̶t̶̶.̶

Roach normal

off creep : 2.25
on creep: 2.925
burrowed : 1.4062
burrowed on creep : 1.828

Roach speed upgrade

off creep : 3.0
on creep : 3.9
burrowed : doesn´t change
burrowed on creep : doesn´t change

Roach update:

burrowed : 2.25
burrowed on creep : approx 2,68(7) ( base + 0,42 )

edit: ya burrow speed increase only with speed upgrade i get it :>
invisible tetris level master
SsDrKosS
Profile Joined March 2013
330 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:38:43
September 26 2013 05:36 GMT
#227
On September 26 2013 14:27 Nachtwind wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?


Got some problem with your wording. They want to change the base burrow speed. From ~1,4 to 2,25. That´s more then ~4% faster. It just mean that the new base burrow speed is the same as the normal movement speed off creep of a un-upgraded normal roach if i´m correct.

stats from http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Speed
Burrowed Roach speed:1.4062
Burrowed Roach speed (on Creep):1.828

After this patch
Burrowed Roach speed (unupgraded): 1.4062
Burrowed Roach speed (upgrade): 2.25
Burrowed Roach speed (upgrade+creep): 2.65 approx.
about 60+% faster!!!
Edit:@ xxjcdentonxx. before this proposed patch, there was no speed upgrade for 'burrowed' roach. only for 'unburrowed' roach.
xxjcdentonxx
Profile Joined November 2012
Canada163 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:51:47
September 26 2013 05:40 GMT
#228
On September 26 2013 14:27 Nachtwind wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?


Got some problem with your wording. They want to change the base burrow speed. From ~1,4 to 2,25. That´s more then ~4% faster. It just mean that the new base burrow speed is the same as the normal movement speed off creep of a un-upgraded normal roach if i´m correct.


That's what I mean. DK wrote roach speed upgrade so he specifically was not referring to the base speed.


Quote from OP: Roach speed upgrade also increases the burrowed roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25


Edit: Maybe my information is just wrong. TL's Roach Wiki does not list any speed for upgraded, burrowed roaches, and I referred to Starcraft.Wikia.com instead, which appeared to have more detailed information.

before this proposed patch, there was no speed upgrade for 'burrowed' roach. only for 'unburrowed' roach.
"Expand or die." —Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #45
TheRabidDeer
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
United States3806 Posts
September 26 2013 05:46 GMT
#229
On September 26 2013 14:40 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 14:27 Nachtwind wrote:
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?


Got some problem with your wording. They want to change the base burrow speed. From ~1,4 to 2,25. That´s more then ~4% faster. It just mean that the new base burrow speed is the same as the normal movement speed off creep of a un-upgraded normal roach if i´m correct.


That's what I mean. DK wrote roach speed upgrade so he specifically was not referring to the base speed.

Show nested quote +

Roach speed upgrade also increases the burrowed roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25


Edit: Maybe my information is just wrong. TL's Roach Wiki does not list any speed for upgraded, burrowed roaches, and I referred to Starcraft.Wikia.comstarcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Roach instead, which appeareded to have more detailed information.

Show nested quote +
before this proposed patch, there was no speed upgrade for 'burrowed' roach. only for 'unburrowed' roach.

There is nothing listed for speed upgraded burrowed roaches because they were the same with and without speed upgrade before the change.
Pontius Pirate
Profile Blog Joined August 2013
United States1557 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:49:12
September 26 2013 05:48 GMT
#230
On September 26 2013 13:33 larse wrote:
Show nested quote +
The BW tank dealt 70 (75% vs medium, 50% vs small) damage with a cooldown of 75 in siege mode. In SC2 time, that would mean a cooldown of 4.3 and brings us to the dps:

0 attack: 16.3/12.2/8.1
1 attack: 17.4/13.1/8.7
2 attack: 18.6/14.0/9.3
3 attack: 19.8/14.8/9.9

The SC2 tank deals 35 (+15 armored) damage with a cooldown of 3 (currently) in siege mode, which means a dps of:

0 attack: 11.7/17.7
1 attack: 12.7/18.4
2 attack: 13.7/20.1
3 attack: 14.7/21.8

As you can see, it's already much higher then the BW tank in nearly every respect. With the attack speed change from 3 to 2.7 though:

0 attack: 13.0/18.5
1 attack: 14.1/20.4
2 attack: 15.2/22.2
3 attack: 16.3/24.1

Now it's even higher, the normal damage being higher then the medium damage with the BW tank. The SC2 tank also has 10 more health, 1 more range, and waaaay more dps in tank mode. So if you asked me, I'd say the Crucio Siege Tank is better then the Arclite Siege Tank.


That's surprising.

Source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/10093119229?page=1#4

Just quickly mathing out the 0 attack upgrades and 3 attack upgrades, BW tanks did 22.4 dps at 0 and 27.2 dps at +3. This compares somewhat similarly, but noticeably higher than SC2 tanks at 18.5 dps at 0 and 24 dps at +3.

SC2 tanks would have to do at least 73 damage per shot at +3 in order to stack up with BW tanks if their cooldown was to stay at 2.7. 35 + 23 armored damage could do it pretty comfortably, and would have the bonus of having extremely similar dps to BW tanks at +0, at 21.5.
"I had to close the door so my parents wouldn't judge me." - ZombieGrub during the ShitfaceTradeTV stream
Whitewing
Profile Joined October 2010
United States7483 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-09-26 05:59:03
September 26 2013 05:56 GMT
#231
On September 26 2013 12:25 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 12:22 Whitewing wrote:
On September 26 2013 12:06 TheRabidDeer wrote:
On September 26 2013 11:43 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
On September 26 2013 11:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Oracles do 3x+ the DPS of mutalisks, if you get 4 oracles they decimate static defense and worker lines SOOOOOOOOOOOOO quickly. At the beginning of HotS I didnt take oracles seriously but they do tons of damage.


In the time it takes to get 4 oracles, you should have scouted what Protoss is doing and easily have defenses ready in time...

Same goes for any number of mutalisks, yet they are still effective harassment. Now, why is that?


Because zerg makes 10-20 of them at a time and protoss anti-air sucks complete ass?

I dont just mean ZvP, but also ZvZ and ZvT.

New oracle should be as effective if not more effective at harassing when compared to mutalisks and you should only need 3-5 of them instead of 15 or more.


They won't be. Not even close. Oracles can't kill buildings well at all, are energy dependant unlike the muta, don't self heal as quickly, don't have a bounce attack, and aren't helpful in the straight up fights. Mutalisks when they get up to 12 or more just start kililng turrets or cannons super easily and then go in to the mineral line. If I have enough oracles to kill defensive buildings and go in, I won't have the energy to do jack shit after, and you just pull your damn workers away and laugh. Not to mention that all that gas for toss in oracles means I have far fewer combat units: toss doesn't do so hot with mass zealot like zerg does with mass zergling. Mutalisks are the most versatile and useful harass unit in the game apart from dropships. They're good in fights, can kill buildings, can kill workers, can kill small groups of defenders by themselves, their very fast, they fly, and they heal super fast. In what way can the oracle match up with that? It's fast.... and it can kill workers if they sit still?
Strategy"You know I fucking hate the way you play, right?" ~SC2John
TheRabidDeer
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
United States3806 Posts
September 26 2013 05:58 GMT
#232
On September 26 2013 14:48 Pontius Pirate wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 13:33 larse wrote:
The BW tank dealt 70 (75% vs medium, 50% vs small) damage with a cooldown of 75 in siege mode. In SC2 time, that would mean a cooldown of 4.3 and brings us to the dps:

0 attack: 16.3/12.2/8.1
1 attack: 17.4/13.1/8.7
2 attack: 18.6/14.0/9.3
3 attack: 19.8/14.8/9.9

The SC2 tank deals 35 (+15 armored) damage with a cooldown of 3 (currently) in siege mode, which means a dps of:

0 attack: 11.7/17.7
1 attack: 12.7/18.4
2 attack: 13.7/20.1
3 attack: 14.7/21.8

As you can see, it's already much higher then the BW tank in nearly every respect. With the attack speed change from 3 to 2.7 though:

0 attack: 13.0/18.5
1 attack: 14.1/20.4
2 attack: 15.2/22.2
3 attack: 16.3/24.1

Now it's even higher, the normal damage being higher then the medium damage with the BW tank. The SC2 tank also has 10 more health, 1 more range, and waaaay more dps in tank mode. So if you asked me, I'd say the Crucio Siege Tank is better then the Arclite Siege Tank.


That's surprising.

Source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/10093119229?page=1#4

Just quickly mathing out the 0 attack upgrades and 3 attack upgrades, BW tanks did 22.4 dps at 0 and 27.2 dps at +3. This compares somewhat similarly, but noticeably higher than SC2 tanks at 18.5 dps at 0 and 24 dps at +3.

SC2 tanks would have to do at least 73 damage per shot at +3 in order to stack up with BW tanks if their cooldown was to stay at 2.7. 35 + 23 armored damage could do it pretty comfortably, and would have the bonus of having extremely similar dps to BW tanks at +0, at 21.5.

How are you getting different numbers than he got in that post? And how does 35 + 23 compare to 73 damage? Your post confuses me and I am not sure if it is just because it is late.
xxjcdentonxx
Profile Joined November 2012
Canada163 Posts
September 26 2013 05:58 GMT
#233
On September 26 2013 14:46 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 14:40 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
On September 26 2013 14:27 Nachtwind wrote:
On September 26 2013 14:07 xxjcdentonxx wrote:
Now:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062
With Speed Upgrade: 2.1562
Proposed Changes:
Burrowed Roach Speed Without Speed Upgrade: 1.4062 (?)
With Speed Upgrade: 2.25

4.35% faster. Am I missing something?


Got some problem with your wording. They want to change the base burrow speed. From ~1,4 to 2,25. That´s more then ~4% faster. It just mean that the new base burrow speed is the same as the normal movement speed off creep of a un-upgraded normal roach if i´m correct.


That's what I mean. DK wrote roach speed upgrade so he specifically was not referring to the base speed.


Roach speed upgrade also increases the burrowed roach movement speed from 1.41 to 2.25


Edit: Maybe my information is just wrong. TL's Roach Wiki does not list any speed for upgraded, burrowed roaches, and I referred to Starcraft.Wikia.comstarcraft.wikia.com/wiki/Roach instead, which appeareded to have more detailed information.

before this proposed patch, there was no speed upgrade for 'burrowed' roach. only for 'unburrowed' roach.

There is nothing listed for speed upgraded burrowed roaches because they were the same with and without speed upgrade before the change.


Okay so that other website has outdated information. Apparently, the roach speed upgrade did once affect burrowed roaches, sometime in the WoL beta. So they're kinda trying this for a second time.
"Expand or die." —Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #45
TheRabidDeer
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
United States3806 Posts
September 26 2013 06:16 GMT
#234
On September 26 2013 14:56 Whitewing wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 12:25 TheRabidDeer wrote:
On September 26 2013 12:22 Whitewing wrote:
On September 26 2013 12:06 TheRabidDeer wrote:
On September 26 2013 11:43 KrazyTrumpet wrote:
On September 26 2013 11:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:
Oracles do 3x+ the DPS of mutalisks, if you get 4 oracles they decimate static defense and worker lines SOOOOOOOOOOOOO quickly. At the beginning of HotS I didnt take oracles seriously but they do tons of damage.


In the time it takes to get 4 oracles, you should have scouted what Protoss is doing and easily have defenses ready in time...

Same goes for any number of mutalisks, yet they are still effective harassment. Now, why is that?


Because zerg makes 10-20 of them at a time and protoss anti-air sucks complete ass?

I dont just mean ZvP, but also ZvZ and ZvT.

New oracle should be as effective if not more effective at harassing when compared to mutalisks and you should only need 3-5 of them instead of 15 or more.


They won't be. Not even close. Oracles can't kill buildings well at all, are energy dependant unlike the muta, don't self heal as quickly, don't have a bounce attack, and aren't helpful in the straight up fights. Mutalisks when they get up to 12 or more just start kililng turrets or cannons super easily and then go in to the mineral line. If I have enough oracles to kill defensive buildings and go in, I won't have the energy to do jack shit after, and you just pull your damn workers away and laugh. Not to mention that all that gas for toss in oracles means I have far fewer combat units: toss doesn't do so hot with mass zealot like zerg does with mass zergling. Mutalisks are the most versatile and useful harass unit in the game apart from dropships. They're good in fights, can kill buildings, can kill workers, can kill small groups of defenders by themselves, their very fast, they fly, and they heal super fast. In what way can the oracle match up with that? It's fast.... and it can kill workers if they sit still?

12 mutas kill turrets at the same speed as 4 oracles (4 oracles can kill turrets in 4 seconds, just like 12 mutas). They self heal at the same rate for shields (so 60hp instead of 120). They dont have a bounce attack but are just as useful as mutas in straight up fights they just have different armies with them and usually not in as many numbers which makes them look weaker since they disappear more quickly. Oracles are going to be the same speed with more total hp and kill workers faster.

Mutalisk: 9 damage 1.5246 cooldown
DPS: 5.9
Range: 3
120 HP (regen at 1 point per game second)
Speed: 4

Attacks to kill a turret with 1 muta: 43 (65.56 seconds)
Attacks to kill a turret with 12 mutas: 3 (4.5738 seconds)
Attacks to kill a turret with 24 mutas: 2 (3.0492 seconds)
28 mutalisks to kill a turret in 1 hit

Oracle: 15 damage .86 cooldown
DPS: 17.4 (bonus 10 dmg vs light armor yielding 29 dps vs light)
Range: 4
100 hp 60 shields (regen at 2 points per game second after 10 seconds of no damage)
Speed: 4

Attacks to kill a turret with 1 oracle: 17 (14.62 seconds)
Attacks to kill a turret with 4 oracles: 5 (4.3 seconds)
Attacks to kill a turret with 8 oracles: 3 (2.58 seconds)
17 oracles to kill a turret in 1 hit
9 oracles to kill a turret in 2 hits (8 leaves it with 10hp)
Sissors
Profile Joined March 2012
1395 Posts
September 26 2013 06:24 GMT
#235
On September 26 2013 14:48 Pontius Pirate wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 13:33 larse wrote:
The BW tank dealt 70 (75% vs medium, 50% vs small) damage with a cooldown of 75 in siege mode. In SC2 time, that would mean a cooldown of 4.3 and brings us to the dps:

0 attack: 16.3/12.2/8.1
1 attack: 17.4/13.1/8.7
2 attack: 18.6/14.0/9.3
3 attack: 19.8/14.8/9.9

The SC2 tank deals 35 (+15 armored) damage with a cooldown of 3 (currently) in siege mode, which means a dps of:

0 attack: 11.7/17.7
1 attack: 12.7/18.4
2 attack: 13.7/20.1
3 attack: 14.7/21.8

As you can see, it's already much higher then the BW tank in nearly every respect. With the attack speed change from 3 to 2.7 though:

0 attack: 13.0/18.5
1 attack: 14.1/20.4
2 attack: 15.2/22.2
3 attack: 16.3/24.1

Now it's even higher, the normal damage being higher then the medium damage with the BW tank. The SC2 tank also has 10 more health, 1 more range, and waaaay more dps in tank mode. So if you asked me, I'd say the Crucio Siege Tank is better then the Arclite Siege Tank.


That's surprising.

Source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/10093119229?page=1#4

Just quickly mathing out the 0 attack upgrades and 3 attack upgrades, BW tanks did 22.4 dps at 0 and 27.2 dps at +3. This compares somewhat similarly, but noticeably higher than SC2 tanks at 18.5 dps at 0 and 24 dps at +3.

SC2 tanks would have to do at least 73 damage per shot at +3 in order to stack up with BW tanks if their cooldown was to stay at 2.7. 35 + 23 armored damage could do it pretty comfortably, and would have the bonus of having extremely similar dps to BW tanks at +0, at 21.5.

I never played BW, but weren't for example speedlings there significantly slower than in SC2? If so then the attack speed calculation is erronous and should for comparison be alot higher in BW.
TheRabidDeer
Profile Blog Joined May 2003
United States3806 Posts
September 26 2013 06:26 GMT
#236
On September 26 2013 15:24 Sissors wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 14:48 Pontius Pirate wrote:
On September 26 2013 13:33 larse wrote:
The BW tank dealt 70 (75% vs medium, 50% vs small) damage with a cooldown of 75 in siege mode. In SC2 time, that would mean a cooldown of 4.3 and brings us to the dps:

0 attack: 16.3/12.2/8.1
1 attack: 17.4/13.1/8.7
2 attack: 18.6/14.0/9.3
3 attack: 19.8/14.8/9.9

The SC2 tank deals 35 (+15 armored) damage with a cooldown of 3 (currently) in siege mode, which means a dps of:

0 attack: 11.7/17.7
1 attack: 12.7/18.4
2 attack: 13.7/20.1
3 attack: 14.7/21.8

As you can see, it's already much higher then the BW tank in nearly every respect. With the attack speed change from 3 to 2.7 though:

0 attack: 13.0/18.5
1 attack: 14.1/20.4
2 attack: 15.2/22.2
3 attack: 16.3/24.1

Now it's even higher, the normal damage being higher then the medium damage with the BW tank. The SC2 tank also has 10 more health, 1 more range, and waaaay more dps in tank mode. So if you asked me, I'd say the Crucio Siege Tank is better then the Arclite Siege Tank.


That's surprising.

Source: http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/10093119229?page=1#4

Just quickly mathing out the 0 attack upgrades and 3 attack upgrades, BW tanks did 22.4 dps at 0 and 27.2 dps at +3. This compares somewhat similarly, but noticeably higher than SC2 tanks at 18.5 dps at 0 and 24 dps at +3.

SC2 tanks would have to do at least 73 damage per shot at +3 in order to stack up with BW tanks if their cooldown was to stay at 2.7. 35 + 23 armored damage could do it pretty comfortably, and would have the bonus of having extremely similar dps to BW tanks at +0, at 21.5.

I never played BW, but weren't for example speedlings there significantly slower than in SC2? If so then the attack speed calculation is erronous and should for comparison be alot higher in BW.

Siege tanks in BW overkilled, which honestly nullifies almost any argument about DPS of tanks in SC2 being weaker than BW. The units of other races is the main problem.
Fearlezz
Profile Joined April 2010
Croatia176 Posts
September 26 2013 07:04 GMT
#237
loving the carbot icons ^^
NarutO
Profile Blog Joined December 2006
Germany18839 Posts
September 26 2013 07:09 GMT
#238
On September 26 2013 04:12 sigm wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 26 2013 04:07 ZAiNs wrote:
DTs :/


Yeah, unfortunately it seems like someone from Blizz read the TL thread and saw all the whiners, and instead of changing the proposed buff like they did with the Oracle, they just scrapped it altogether. Shame about that.


Because DTs don't need a buff. They are perfectly viable, often seen and powerful.
CommentatorPolt | MMA | Jjakji | BoxeR | NaDa | MVP | MKP ... truly inspiring.
nimdil
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
Poland3765 Posts
September 26 2013 07:38 GMT
#239
More tanks is better starcraft.
saltis
Profile Joined September 2012
159 Posts
September 26 2013 07:38 GMT
#240
I am a zerg player and i blame myself for not having good enough micro vs Terran. I would agree with WM nerf but not to that extend. Would say 1.35 would be optimum nerf of mines, 1.1 or 1.25 makes mines useless in general. 1.25 = %50 radius nerf.
Prev 1 10 11 12 13 14 32 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Replay Cast
00:00
SEL Masters #7 - Day 1
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
WinterStarcraft585
ViBE271
Nina 152
RuFF_SC2 139
Ketroc 29
StarCraft: Brood War
Rain 3823
GuemChi 3245
Free 183
HiyA 116
Noble 77
Mind 72
Sharp 30
Bale 28
Terrorterran 16
yabsab 11
[ Show more ]
Purpose 6
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm163
Counter-Strike
taco 477
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox1004
Other Games
summit1g9564
C9.Mang0632
PiGStarcraft459
Maynarde139
UpATreeSC51
JuggernautJason21
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1239
BasetradeTV366
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream163
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 132
• Adnapsc2 4
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Rush861
• Stunt360
Upcoming Events
CrankTV Team League
7h 55m
Bombastic Starleague
16h 55m
The PondCast
1d 6h
HomeStory Cup
1d 7h
Replay Cast
1d 20h
HomeStory Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
2 days
HomeStory Cup
3 days
OSC
3 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
4 days
[ Show More ]
WardiTV Weekly
5 days
The PondCast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

YSL S3
Douyu Cup 2026
Murky Cup 2026

Ongoing

IPSL Spring 2026
Acropolis #4
CSL Season 21: Qualifier 2
SCTL 2026 Spring
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
IEM Rio 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S3: W1
CSL 2026 Summer (S21)
Escore Tournament S3: W2
ASL Season 22:Wild Card Qualifier
CSLAN 4
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Revival: Season 6
CranK Gathers Season 4: BW vs SC2 Team League
HSC XXIX
Light Tournament 2026
Eternal Conflict S2 Finale
Heroes Pulsing #3
Eternal Conflict S2 E1
FISSURE Playground #5
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual
Stake Ranked Episode 3
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.