• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 23:46
CEST 05:46
KST 12:46
  • 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
[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt2: All Star10Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists16[ASL21] Ro16 Preview Pt1: Fresh Flow9[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt2: News Flash10[ASL21] Ro24 Preview Pt1: New Chaos0
Community News
2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers19Maestros of the Game 2 announced92026 GSL Tour plans announced15Weekly Cups (April 6-12): herO doubles, "Villains" prevail1MaNa leaves Team Liquid25
StarCraft 2
General
MaNa leaves Team Liquid Maestros of the Game 2 announced 2026 GSL Tour plans announced Team Liquid Map Contest #22 - The Finalists Blizzard Classic Cup @ BlizzCon 2026 - $100k prize pool
Tourneys
2026 GSL Season 1 Qualifiers INu's Battles#14 <BO.9 2Matches> Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament GSL CK: More events planned pending crowdfunding RSL Revival: Season 5 - Qualifiers and Main Event
Strategy
Custom Maps
[D]RTS in all its shapes and glory <3 [A] Nemrods 1/4 players [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 522 Flip My Base The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 521 Memorable Boss Mutation # 520 Moving Fees
Brood War
General
ASL21 General Discussion Leta's ASL S21 Ro.16 review BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Data needed
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues Escore Tournament StarCraft Season 2 [ASL21] Ro16 Group C [ASL21] Ro16 Group D
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers What's the deal with APM & what's its true value Any training maps people recommend? Fighting Spirit mining rates
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Dawn of War IV Diablo IV Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Starcraft Tabletop Miniature Game
Dota 2
The Story of Wings Gaming
League of Legends
G2 just beat GenG in First stand
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia Mafia Game Mode Feedback/Ideas TL Mafia Community Thread Five o'clock TL Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread YouTube Thread
Fan Clubs
The IdrA Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Anime Discussion Thread [Req][Books] Good Fantasy/SciFi books Movie Discussion!
Sports
2024 - 2026 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion McBoner: A hockey love story Cricket [SPORT]
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Strange computer issues (software) [G] How to Block Livestream Ads
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Sexual Health Of Gamers
TrAiDoS
lurker extra damage testi…
StaticNine
Broowar part 2
qwaykee
Funny Nicknames
LUCKY_NOOB
Iranian anarchists: organize…
XenOsky
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 1982 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
Poland3756 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
BSL
19:00
RO16 TieBreaker - Group A
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RuFF_SC2 224
ProTech26
StarCraft: Brood War
ggaemo 91
Nal_rA 43
NaDa 29
Icarus 3
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm508
ROOTCatZ7
LuMiX0
League of Legends
JimRising 720
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King222
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor186
Other Games
summit1g10208
Fnx 1020
WinterStarcraft350
ViBE144
amsayoshi57
kaitlyn46
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1021
BasetradeTV185
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Sammyuel 34
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• RayReign 58
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
League of Legends
• Lourlo1073
Other Games
• Scarra1974
Upcoming Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6h 14m
WardiTV Map Contest Tou…
7h 14m
MaxPax vs SHIN
Clem vs Classic
Ladder Legends
11h 14m
Solar vs GgMaChine
Bunny vs Cham
ByuN vs MaxPax
BSL
15h 14m
CranKy Ducklings
20h 14m
Replay Cast
1d 5h
Wardi Open
1d 6h
Afreeca Starleague
1d 6h
Soma vs hero
Monday Night Weeklies
1d 12h
Replay Cast
1d 20h
[ Show More ]
Replay Cast
2 days
Afreeca Starleague
2 days
Leta vs YSC
Replay Cast
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
KCM Race Survival
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Escore
5 days
Replay Cast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
IPSL
6 days
Ret vs Art_Of_Turtle
Radley vs TBD
BSL
6 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Escore Tournament S2: W4
RSL Revival: Season 4
NationLESS Cup

Ongoing

BSL Season 22
ASL Season 21
CSL 2026 SPRING (S20)
IPSL Spring 2026
KCM Race Survival 2026 Season 2
StarCraft2 Community Team League 2026 Spring
WardiTV TLMC #16
Nations Cup 2026
IEM Rio 2026
PGL Bucharest 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 1
BLAST Open Spring 2026
ESL Pro League S23 Finals
ESL Pro League S23 Stage 1&2
PGL Cluj-Napoca 2026

Upcoming

Escore Tournament S2: W5
Acropolis #4
BSL 22 Non-Korean Championship
CSLAN 4
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
HSC XXIX
uThermal 2v2 2026 Main Event
Maestros of the Game 2
2026 GSL S2
RSL Revival: Season 5
2026 GSL S1
XSE Pro League 2026
IEM Cologne Major 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 2
CS Asia Championships 2026
IEM Atlanta 2026
Asian Champions League 2026
PGL Astana 2026
BLAST Rivals Spring 2026
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.