On December 04 2013 03:04 MorroW wrote: changing a units attack speed and damage to same dps makes a huge difference in almost all situations. for lower damage units armor is a huge deal for higher damage units kiting ability is a huge deal tanks cant kite obviously but they are a huge damage burst unit and a change like this would change that dynamic of the tank. example of damage burst; if you put out all damage in front every few seconds compared to smaller damage over time makes you destroy units of your opponent before they are able to fire.
there are many things like this just few examples of that you cant simply change a units fire rate and damage even if it has same dps because it changes so many things
I think you missinterprete what he suggested.
- The idea is to have it like a Zealot who attacks twice (once with each hand ) when he attacks and does 8*2 damage. Which also does not trigger hardened shields, despite it being 16damage! - Or a Colossus that fires two LAZORZ at once. - Or a Phoenix that fires two lasers at once.
So the attack periodes and the damage would stay the same. In essence you still do 35+15 every 2.8seconds.
I'd rather that instead of changing the basic tank functionality, there be a techlab researchable upgrade that makes the tank stronger by giving it extra attacks. Something like what the warhound had that is good at bringing down shields in multiple parts.
200/200 70s Cluster Shards -- Each shot in siege mode releases 4 additional very small AoE detonations of 5 damage each.
^ The shards would be randomly dispersed around the target so you'd probably hit only 1 or 2 on the actual unit that the tank was shooting at. Gets much stronger against masses with multiple tanks shooting. This allows for smart engagement micro to minimize the boost of the upgrade. (Flanking with some solitary units to draw shots... like BW.)
On December 04 2013 03:04 MorroW wrote: changing a units attack speed and damage to same dps makes a huge difference in almost all situations. for lower damage units armor is a huge deal for higher damage units kiting ability is a huge deal tanks cant kite obviously but they are a huge damage burst unit and a change like this would change that dynamic of the tank. example of damage burst; if you put out all damage in front every few seconds compared to smaller damage over time makes you destroy units of your opponent before they are able to fire.
there are many things like this just few examples of that you cant simply change a units fire rate and damage even if it has same dps because it changes so many things
im surprised by the amount of people who think this is a good idea or think that this wouldnt change situations outside immortal vs tank
even if this change would go through immortal shields would still be a hard counter to siege tanks and be terrible inefficient to fight immortals without emp. emp would still be the absolute best choice against immortal shields
How shooting twice at the same firerate will change everything ? It's not like Goody said to divide the attack by 2 double the firerate but hitting twice at the same time, like the banshee actually. It won't change a thing in other situation, at least I don't see any.
On December 04 2013 03:04 MorroW wrote: changing a units attack speed and damage to same dps makes a huge difference in almost all situations. for lower damage units armor is a huge deal for higher damage units kiting ability is a huge deal tanks cant kite obviously but they are a huge damage burst unit and a change like this would change that dynamic of the tank. example of damage burst; if you put out all damage in front every few seconds compared to smaller damage over time makes you destroy units of your opponent before they are able to fire.
there are many things like this just few examples of that you cant simply change a units fire rate and damage even if it has same dps because it changes so many things
im surprised by the amount of people who think this is a good idea or think that this wouldnt change situations outside immortal vs tank
even if this change would go through immortal shields would still be a hard counter to siege tanks and be terrible inefficient to fight immortals without emp. emp would still be the absolute best choice against immortal shields
I agree it's not a good change, but I think you misunderstand. He's saying same attack speed and same damage, but the attack damage is split in 2 hits... unless I misunderstood yours or his post lol
On December 04 2013 03:04 MorroW wrote: changing a units attack speed and damage to same dps makes a huge difference in almost all situations. for lower damage units armor is a huge deal for higher damage units kiting ability is a huge deal tanks cant kite obviously but they are a huge damage burst unit and a change like this would change that dynamic of the tank. example of damage burst; if you put out all damage in front every few seconds compared to smaller damage over time makes you destroy units of your opponent before they are able to fire.
there are many things like this just few examples of that you cant simply change a units fire rate and damage even if it has same dps because it changes so many things
im surprised by the amount of people who think this is a good idea or think that this wouldnt change situations outside immortal vs tank
even if this change would go through immortal shields would still be a hard counter to siege tanks and be terrible inefficient to fight immortals without emp. emp would still be the absolute best choice against immortal shields
How shooting twice at the same firerate will change everything ? It's not like Goody said to divide the attack by 2 double the firerate but hitting twice at the same time, like the banshee actually. It won't change a thing in other situation, at least I don't see any.
oh im sorry i misunderstood what he was suggesting, ill edit my main post
On December 03 2013 21:55 Green_25 wrote: Why not just give tanks some kind of upgrade which boosts damage versus protoss shields?
because they already really strong vs every protoss unit expect the immortel, and then it would be totaly broken
Huh? Chargelots demolish tanks if controlled properly, colossus with lance can kite them easily. Void rays take them out in seconds. Tanks are very shaky against protoss overall.
I thought the point of this idea was on using tanks in an army composition, not just mass tank. There's this unit which you might consider getting as part of a mech composition called a Hellbat and its pretty good against Zealots. Sieged Tanks are range 13 whilst Colossi are range 9 with thermal lance. Not sure where the whole "kite them easily" is coming from; hell even unsieged they're range 7, which outranges non-thermal lance colossi (6 range).
Hellbats can't cover every angle, only a couple of Zealots getting into melee-range of the tanks can completely change the outcome of an engagement to the protoss side, all it takes is a bit of flanking, and this is why you have to posture yourself defensively at all times as a meching player if you want an even/favourable engagement. Check out's MVP's mech game on WW vs Hero, all it took was a few zealots coming from the side to completely negate hellbats.
Welcome to the wonderful world of "powerful but positionally vulnerable" compositions. Similar to that of virtually every Protoss composition since the release of WoL. Something crucial slightly out of position? Boom, there it goes.
Mech is a fundamentally defensive composition given its slow speed and the nature of siege tanks. If the enemy manages to get units into your defensive position then: 1. You screwed up somewhere and 2. Its going to hurt
Same reason Medivac drops in your base are really effective if you don't have something already in place to deal with it (as any race, incidentally).
Edit: That being said I think avilo's got a good point with respect to the armoury. Perhaps a cost reduction and even a build time buff would help there?
I've actually felt for a while the tank needs a buff. But I'm not sure that going after special cases like "two shots to kill immortals better" or "anti-shield shells" is the way to go. I think a flat increase in damage across the board would help. Or perhaps a boost in splash damage within the radius?
I still think my Factory upgrade that gives tanks more armor and hp but prevents them from siegeing is the way to go. Unsieged tanks look really freakin' cool, and it kind of sucks how a TANK is completely useless unless it's stationary.
That, plus Avilo's point about upgrade disadvantage. That's a really solid point.
On December 03 2013 21:55 Green_25 wrote: Why not just give tanks some kind of upgrade which boosts damage versus protoss shields?
because they already really strong vs every protoss unit expect the immortel, and then it would be totaly broken
Huh? Chargelots demolish tanks if controlled properly, colossus with lance can kite them easily. Void rays take them out in seconds. Tanks are very shaky against protoss overall.
I thought the point of this idea was on using tanks in an army composition, not just mass tank. There's this unit which you might consider getting as part of a mech composition called a Hellbat and its pretty good against Zealots. Sieged Tanks are range 13 whilst Colossi are range 9 with thermal lance. Not sure where the whole "kite them easily" is coming from; hell even unsieged they're range 7, which outranges non-thermal lance colossi (6 range).
Hellbats can't cover every angle, only a couple of Zealots getting into melee-range of the tanks can completely change the outcome of an engagement to the protoss side, all it takes is a bit of flanking, and this is why you have to posture yourself defensively at all times as a meching player if you want an even/favourable engagement. Check out's MVP's mech game on WW vs Hero, all it took was a few zealots coming from the side to completely negate hellbats.
Welcome to the wonderful world of "powerful but positionally vulnerable" compositions. Similar to that of virtually every Protoss composition since the release of WoL. Something crucial slightly out of position? Boom, there it goes.
Mech is a fundamentally defensive composition given its slow speed and the nature of siege tanks. If the enemy manages to get units into your defensive position then: 1. You screwed up somewhere and 2. Its going to hurt
Same reason Medivac drops in your base are really effective if you don't have something already in place to deal with it (as any race, incidentally).
Edit: That being said I think avilo's got a good point with respect to the armoury. Perhaps a cost reduction and even a build time buff would help there?
I've actually felt for a while the tank needs a buff. But I'm not sure that going after special cases like "two shots to kill immortals better" or "anti-shield shells" is the way to go. I think a flat increase in damage across the board would help. Or perhaps a boost in splash damage within the radius?
Yeah, because just like Protoss, my mech army can wander around the map and if something goes wrong I just recall to the nearest command center....oh wait!
Also this "powerful but positionally vulnerable" is not as powerful as it's vulnerable, as it stands, it either needs to be more powerful or less vulnerable, being "strong" only if you are behind a wall of Barracks, PFs, sensor towers and a multi-layer turret ring is not very good design, don't you agree?
Highly amusing comment. You're comparing apples to oranges. A mech army doesn't NEED to "wander around the map". Hell, Terran as a race doesn't need to "wander around the map" with the whole army. Small Terran forces tend to comfortably outmatch any similarly sized small force from either Zerg or Protoss, which makes them very cost effective. On the other hand pretty much the only way to move around the map as Protoss is with your entire army or, as you put it, "wander around the map". Alternatively you could peel parts off your Protoss army to send them out and lose them in grossly cost-ineffective engagements that they have little to no chance to run away from (no medivacs, remember?).
Terran is good in small supply fights only with bio. Mech needs a critical mass to be able to even move out from the base. If you want to attack, mech basically has to move round like a protoss deathball except it is less mobile (since tanks need to be sieged) and it is less powerful in direct engagement than protoss army.
On December 03 2013 21:55 Green_25 wrote: Why not just give tanks some kind of upgrade which boosts damage versus protoss shields?
because they already really strong vs every protoss unit expect the immortel, and then it would be totaly broken
Huh? Chargelots demolish tanks if controlled properly, colossus with lance can kite them easily. Void rays take them out in seconds. Tanks are very shaky against protoss overall.
I thought the point of this idea was on using tanks in an army composition, not just mass tank. There's this unit which you might consider getting as part of a mech composition called a Hellbat and its pretty good against Zealots. Sieged Tanks are range 13 whilst Colossi are range 9 with thermal lance. Not sure where the whole "kite them easily" is coming from; hell even unsieged they're range 7, which outranges non-thermal lance colossi (6 range).
Hellbats can't cover every angle, only a couple of Zealots getting into melee-range of the tanks can completely change the outcome of an engagement to the protoss side, all it takes is a bit of flanking, and this is why you have to posture yourself defensively at all times as a meching player if you want an even/favourable engagement. Check out's MVP's mech game on WW vs Hero, all it took was a few zealots coming from the side to completely negate hellbats.
Welcome to the wonderful world of "powerful but positionally vulnerable" compositions. Similar to that of virtually every Protoss composition since the release of WoL. Something crucial slightly out of position? Boom, there it goes.
Mech is a fundamentally defensive composition given its slow speed and the nature of siege tanks. If the enemy manages to get units into your defensive position then: 1. You screwed up somewhere and 2. Its going to hurt
Same reason Medivac drops in your base are really effective if you don't have something already in place to deal with it (as any race, incidentally).
Edit: That being said I think avilo's got a good point with respect to the armoury. Perhaps a cost reduction and even a build time buff would help there?
I've actually felt for a while the tank needs a buff. But I'm not sure that going after special cases like "two shots to kill immortals better" or "anti-shield shells" is the way to go. I think a flat increase in damage across the board would help. Or perhaps a boost in splash damage within the radius?
I still think my Factory upgrade that gives tanks more armor and hp but prevents them from siegeing is the way to go. Unsieged tanks look really freakin' cool, and it kind of sucks how a TANK is completely useless unless it's stationary.
That idea just creates warhound 2.0, epitome of a-move type unit.
IMHO the unit to change should be the Hellbat and not the Siegetank. A while ago I posted a few suggestions in the battle.net forum.
"I think it is save to say that the introduction of the Hellbat with HotS has not worked as intended. The unit was meant as damage-tank but was and is mainly used as a gimmicky damage dealer and as harassment unit. I think with a few adjustments the Hellbat could be the key unit to make mech a valid play-style in TvP and also in TvZ.
The idea behind this is to create a stronger synergy between Hellbats and Siegetanks without making the units in isolation stronger. The biggest problem of mech in TvP right now is that tank+HB is just not strong enough in straight up fights against chargelot, archon, immortal.
Changes to Hellbat:
remove Biotag +no medivacs needed, more gas for other stuff +takes less damage from archons -Less effective drops
Increase health and armor, reduce DPS +the hellbat will stay alive for longer -the hellbat itself will kill less The hellbat should be a unit that stands in front of other units to eat damage while the other units are able to deal damage. This creates an interesting dynamic that forces both sides to micro and think about their positioning
Give Hellbats an immunity to friendly splash damage +call it "shin guard" or "spall liner" +creates synergy with tanks
Split the attack in two attacks +more damage to the shields of immortals -less damage against armored units
Give Hellions an out of combat health regeneration similar to reapers +will enable hellbats to regenerate health out of combat between army clashes Maybe this should require the transformation upgrade if it is too powerful in the early game.
Reduce the time needed for the transformation from HB to hellion form +will make it possible to retreat with hellbats
I do not understand why the hellbat once again has to be a unit with rather low health (compared to roaches and zealots) and high damage. All terran units seem to be like that. IMHO terran could really use a unit to stand in front of the otherwise rather fragile army.
I'm looking forward to hear your opinion on this! "Link
Overall the Hellbat could be a unit that deals with the weaknesses of the siegetank in direct confrontations.
On December 03 2013 21:55 Green_25 wrote: Why not just give tanks some kind of upgrade which boosts damage versus protoss shields?
because they already really strong vs every protoss unit expect the immortel, and then it would be totaly broken
Huh? Chargelots demolish tanks if controlled properly, colossus with lance can kite them easily. Void rays take them out in seconds. Tanks are very shaky against protoss overall.
I thought the point of this idea was on using tanks in an army composition, not just mass tank. There's this unit which you might consider getting as part of a mech composition called a Hellbat and its pretty good against Zealots. Sieged Tanks are range 13 whilst Colossi are range 9 with thermal lance. Not sure where the whole "kite them easily" is coming from; hell even unsieged they're range 7, which outranges non-thermal lance colossi (6 range).
Hellbats can't cover every angle, only a couple of Zealots getting into melee-range of the tanks can completely change the outcome of an engagement to the protoss side, all it takes is a bit of flanking, and this is why you have to posture yourself defensively at all times as a meching player if you want an even/favourable engagement. Check out's MVP's mech game on WW vs Hero, all it took was a few zealots coming from the side to completely negate hellbats.
Welcome to the wonderful world of "powerful but positionally vulnerable" compositions. Similar to that of virtually every Protoss composition since the release of WoL. Something crucial slightly out of position? Boom, there it goes.
Mech is a fundamentally defensive composition given its slow speed and the nature of siege tanks. If the enemy manages to get units into your defensive position then: 1. You screwed up somewhere and 2. Its going to hurt
Same reason Medivac drops in your base are really effective if you don't have something already in place to deal with it (as any race, incidentally).
Edit: That being said I think avilo's got a good point with respect to the armoury. Perhaps a cost reduction and even a build time buff would help there?
I've actually felt for a while the tank needs a buff. But I'm not sure that going after special cases like "two shots to kill immortals better" or "anti-shield shells" is the way to go. I think a flat increase in damage across the board would help. Or perhaps a boost in splash damage within the radius?
I still think my Factory upgrade that gives tanks more armor and hp but prevents them from siegeing is the way to go. Unsieged tanks look really freakin' cool, and it kind of sucks how a TANK is completely useless unless it's stationary.
That idea just creates warhound 2.0, epitome of a-move type unit.
Yes and no. It is a strategic decision that completely prevents you from making tanks able to siege for the rest of the game. So yes, it creates an A-move unit, but at what cost? Against Protoss, not much. Against Zerg? Could be a very bad decision. Additionally, you could offer a "siege-only" upgrade that further increases the capabilities of a sieged tank but prevents them from becoming battletanks.
Sort of like a mutually-exclusive talent tree for tanks.
On December 04 2013 03:24 submarine wrote: IMHO the unit to change should be the Hellbat and not the Siegetank. A while ago I posted a few suggestions in the battle.net forum.
"I think it is save to say that the introduction of the Hellbat with HotS has not worked as intended. The unit was meant as damage-tank but was and is mainly used as a gimmicky damage dealer and as harassment unit. I think with a few adjustments the Hellbat could be the key unit to make mech a valid play-style in TvP and also in TvZ.
The idea behind this is to create a stronger synergy between Hellbats and Siegetanks without making the units in isolation stronger. The biggest problem of mech in TvP right now is that tank+HB is just not strong enough in straight up fights against chargelot, archon, immortal.
Changes to Hellbat:
remove Biotag +no medivacs needed, more gas for other stuff +takes less damage from archons -Less effective drops
Increase health and armor, reduce DPS +the hellbat will stay alive for longer -the hellbat itself will kill less The hellbat should be a unit that stands in front of other units to eat damage while the other units are able to deal damage. This creates an interesting dynamic that forces both sides to micro and think about their positioning
Give Hellbats an immunity to friendly splash damage +call it "shin guard" or "spall liner" +creates synergy with tanks
Split the attack in two attacks +more damage to the shields of immortals -less damage against armored units
Give Hellions an out of combat health regeneration similar to reapers +will enable hellbats to regenerate health out of combat between army clashes Maybe this should require the transformation upgrade if it is too powerful in the early game.
Reduce the time needed for the transformation from HB to hellion form +will make it possible to retreat with hellbats
I do not understand why the hellbat once again has to be a unit with rather low health (compared to roaches and zealots) and high damage. All terran units seem to be like that. IMHO terran could really use a unit to stand in front of the otherwise rather fragile army.
I'm looking forward to hear your opinion on this! "Link
Overall the Hellbat could be a unit that deals with the weaknesses of the siegetank in direct confrontations.
I like this guy's idea. Remove the friendly-damage immunity and maybe make the upgrade a slow to the hellbat fire? Could be super OP though.
For 2), I have one unorthodox and major suggestion. What about a mechanic that allows the player to dynamically tell their units what units should be prioritized in a battle? I don't know exactly how it would work, but for example you could select your units and view their unit type targeting priority list (say where the unit portraits currently are) and then drag and drop unit types within the list. I think this mechanic would add a lot of interesting gameplay across all races.
Yes, let's add another button to the command card called "Attack Move". You can quickly set the priority of what you're attacking by clicking on the unit itself! Focus firing is a thing of the past!...... oh wait.
This is getting a little off topic, but I think this is one type of change that would help address the immortal issue so I'll respond.
Manual focus firing would still be important in order to take units out one at a time, or shoots units in clumps, etc.
Is having to manually focus your units on units of a particular type (e.g. carriers) and otherwise rely on the built-in AI an interesting mechanic? I think being able to specify that more precisely would add a higher strategic skillcap to the game. It would reward players more for watching and micromanaging a battle by constantly updating unit attack priorities instead of the current clunky and effectively impossible method of manually targeting individual units throughout a battle (and hence it's often best to just let the AI do its thing... relating to day9's classic video about how micro in sc2 isn't that rewarding). I think a player that is capable of effectively managing a battle this way would have to be very fast and think quickly, but would be able to decimate a lesser player's army (similar to how effective good micro was in bw).
It might make sc2 too different to be worth considering, I'm not sure. But let me emphasize this point. I think adding these types of dynamic strategic commands would give players back the ability to strongly influence the course of a battle, which sc2 neutered when unit AIs became so much better as compared to bw. That is, this type of direct strategic control over units to override the AI's stupid tendencies is analogous to effectively moving units around in bw to overcome the AI's stupid pathing.
Here's an example of the sort of play that could happen. A terran player brings scvs with their mech army to repair their units during the battle. The protoss player selects a group of oracles and tells them to prioritize scvs, then attacks with the whole army. Now oracles can be used as assasination squads that make an impact before dying instead of trying to attack other units that laugh at them. But the terran player can observe this and tell their thors or ghosts (for example) to attack oracles first. But now if the protoss observes this the oracles can be spread and microed at a safe distance to distract the thors while the rest of the army moves in. Etc etc...
On December 03 2013 21:55 Green_25 wrote: Why not just give tanks some kind of upgrade which boosts damage versus protoss shields?
because they already really strong vs every protoss unit expect the immortel, and then it would be totaly broken
Huh? Chargelots demolish tanks if controlled properly, colossus with lance can kite them easily. Void rays take them out in seconds. Tanks are very shaky against protoss overall.
I thought the point of this idea was on using tanks in an army composition, not just mass tank. There's this unit which you might consider getting as part of a mech composition called a Hellbat and its pretty good against Zealots. Sieged Tanks are range 13 whilst Colossi are range 9 with thermal lance. Not sure where the whole "kite them easily" is coming from; hell even unsieged they're range 7, which outranges non-thermal lance colossi (6 range).
Hellbats can't cover every angle, only a couple of Zealots getting into melee-range of the tanks can completely change the outcome of an engagement to the protoss side, all it takes is a bit of flanking, and this is why you have to posture yourself defensively at all times as a meching player if you want an even/favourable engagement. Check out's MVP's mech game on WW vs Hero, all it took was a few zealots coming from the side to completely negate hellbats.
Welcome to the wonderful world of "powerful but positionally vulnerable" compositions. Similar to that of virtually every Protoss composition since the release of WoL. Something crucial slightly out of position? Boom, there it goes.
Mech is a fundamentally defensive composition given its slow speed and the nature of siege tanks. If the enemy manages to get units into your defensive position then: 1. You screwed up somewhere and 2. Its going to hurt
Same reason Medivac drops in your base are really effective if you don't have something already in place to deal with it (as any race, incidentally).
Edit: That being said I think avilo's got a good point with respect to the armoury. Perhaps a cost reduction and even a build time buff would help there?
I've actually felt for a while the tank needs a buff. But I'm not sure that going after special cases like "two shots to kill immortals better" or "anti-shield shells" is the way to go. I think a flat increase in damage across the board would help. Or perhaps a boost in splash damage within the radius?
I still think my Factory upgrade that gives tanks more armor and hp but prevents them from siegeing is the way to go. Unsieged tanks look really freakin' cool, and it kind of sucks how a TANK is completely useless unless it's stationary.
That idea just creates warhound 2.0, epitome of a-move type unit.
Right which then would be the Terran equivalent of a Colossus.... we don't want that
At this point I just want Blizzard to some something drastic to encourage mech play so people can really start figuring out the TvP mech meta. Its been 3 years and its never actually been viable to the point where timings and counterstrats could be really figured out.
With the combined upgrades it feels mech is getting pretty close to being viable, but its still ridiculously unforgiving and doesnt feel like it packs the punch that it gives up in mobility compared to bio.
I would not call that a good thought^^ He is just saying he has to scaut, if both options are possible and toss has a lot of different options to scaut: MSC, Obs, hallu, Oracle and it is very easy to scaut what composition the terran player is using, if there are 2+ Fax it is mech and if there are 2+ Rax its bio and then toss has still a lot of time to react^^ And you cant just tech switch like a zerg and fake a 5 rax opening and then go for mech^^
The cost of health and dps is much less for protoss units than for terran units across the board. This is why mech has always been bad against protoss. A protoss simply can produce units which do more dps and have more hp than any mech army a terran can make at any early phase in the game until Terran can use the entire tech tree and sacrifice workers to have a larger army supply than the opponent.
The most obvious example of this is the need for terran bio armies to kite protoss units. Despite having much higher DPS than an equivalent Mech army the Bio player has to kite in order to prevent from being steamrolled by zealots. (which have insane dps/health for cost) It makes sense that the meching player, who cannot kite, will just get steamrolled even worse because it does less damage and only has slightly better resiliency.
As long as Protoss retains their economic unit efficiency advantage. By not losing units before the main battle. (Every mineral and gas a protoss spends is better in most aspects than a terran mineral or gas on meching units) They are completely fine. The type of unit really doesn't matter all that much.
The worst part of meching is that the Terran has little ability to make up for this disadvantage in micro during battles and multitask between battles. Its counterpart, 3M gives plenty of opportunities and probably is the greatest factor in who wins a normal looking TvP. How much good multitask/micro did the terran do? The terran has to do an increasing amount of good stuff here to beat better protoss opponents.
This is glaringly obvious in all match-ups for all races, but when talking about mech, something that has little to no micro/multitaks opportunities. Against a race who's units are "inherently" more cost effective (without micro/multitask) there isn't really much that Mech can do. Increasing the effectiveness of the tank against a single protoss unit is a good suggestion. It also gives the terran more micro opportunities/decisions in battle. Do I target-fire the immortals with tanks? That's not a decision we even can think about making in the current balance.
EPT
) when he attacks and does 8*2 damage. Which also does not trigger hardened shields, despite it being 16damage!
