|
We've pushed the following changes live:
- Fixed an issue where the Mothership Core's Photon Overcharge ability sometimes dealt an inconsistent amount of damage.
- Fixed an issue where the Cyclone's Lock On ability could sometimes become stuck on a dead unit.
Prion Terraces
- The first expansions have been changed to gold minerals, while the second expansions are now a normal mineral base.
Lerilak Crest
- The rock towers have been replaced with destructible rocks.
Central Protocol
- The four main base's back door ramp and rocks have been removed.
- Vertical spawns have been disabled.
Source
|
Ohhh Central Protocol is playable and Prion is now unplayable as Protoss!
Time to change my vetoes on my Protoss and Random accounts.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
Prion is now unplayable as Protoss
In what world is prion worse for protoss now than before? Zerg used to fast expo to gold often yet it was way harder for protoss to hold. Now you can take gold natural against Z and the natural ramp is actually quite friendly to walls.
|
what exactly is the point of natural base gold? i mean i guess it accelerates the game economically, but 99% of games both players go straight to 2 base, so it just evens out? why not just remove the golds altogether?
it seems like the natural gold is their way of trying to make it look like the map concept didn't fail, they're just "modifying" it. and i'm certainly not normally a blizzard basher. just comes off like they're trying to save face and stubbornly make people think the map is good
|
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely
|
On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely
because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
On February 10 2016 05:48 brickrd wrote:
what exactly is the point of natural base gold? i mean i guess it accelerates the game economically, but 99% of games both players go straight to 2 base, so it just evens out? why not just remove the golds altogether?
it seems like the natural gold is their way of trying to make it look like the map concept didn't fail, they're just "modifying" it. and i'm certainly not normally a blizzard basher. just comes off like they're trying to save face and stubbornly make people think the map is good
On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely
They don't want standard maps and have admitted as such, they want interesting maps. The problem comes when "interesting" directly translates to "imbalanced in certain matchups"
|
On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch
the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting?
it's interesting when it's a third or fourth base with risk associated because harassment starts becoming involved and builds diverge into aggressive, defensive, etc. but everyone is going to take the gold natural, so..?
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting?
It's different
The relative power of 2 base compared to 3 base play is increased and there's a little more incentive to take a more aggressive natural (like cc first)
|
On February 10 2016 06:09 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting? It's differentThe relative power of 2 base compared to 3 base play is increased
not accurate. a 3 base player will have already received the exact same benefit as the 2 base aggressor by the time the attack comes because they had the gold natural too, so the 3 base player is able to build and saturate a third more quickly than normal due to the mineral boost.
it's the same as 2 base aggression vs 3 base play without a gold.
if minuscule, forced differences in builds that affect both players equally are interesting and different for you then... good for you, i guess
|
On February 10 2016 05:56 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting.
What a dumb question. Have you even seen them? They're GOLD.
|
I believe the idea was to make the map more balanced for PvsZ. Since zerg could more easily take the gold, they made it so all races can take it equally. It might flip the balance as now 2 base all ins vs Z may be more powerful especially for T.
|
On February 10 2016 05:56 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting? it's interesting when it's a third or fourth base with risk associated because harassment starts becoming involved and builds diverge into aggressive, defensive, etc. but everyone is going to take the gold natural, so..?
I'm guessing that on this map Blizzard really wanted to push for a gold base to be included in a player's first 3 bases (probably for "variety" purposes). A gold 3rd base didn't work out because it benefited Zerg more than Terran or Protoss, so they switched the natural and 3rd bases to keep the boosted 3 base dynamic while shifting the gold to be more accessible to T and P.
They really want to push mass gold expos as the focal gimmick on the map, so it makes sense that giving an early gold expo follows this theme. Whether or not that's a good idea is a different story.
|
On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely
Because there's 3 blizzard employees working on SC2 and it take times making maps.
|
why tweak shitty maps when you can just give good ones blizz...
oh right u cant do that. sry.
|
Prion terraces would be an interesting map even without gold minerals. As it is right now, they might as well make all the expansions gold.
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
not accurate. a 3 base player will have already received the exact same benefit as the 2 base aggressor by the time the attack comes because they had the gold natural too, so the 3 base player is able to build and saturate a third more quickly than normal due to the mineral boost.
True enough for P and T but less so for Z and ZvP was the problem matchup on the previous version of the map.
|
- Fixed an issue where the Mothership Core's Photon Overcharge ability sometimes dealt an inconsistent amount of damage.
Just had an evil idea. Imagine if PO damage was random. Madness!
|
|
|
On February 10 2016 05:48 brickrd wrote:
what exactly is the point of natural base gold? i mean i guess it accelerates the game economically, but 99% of games both players go straight to 2 base, so it just evens out? why not just remove the golds altogether?
it seems like the natural gold is their way of trying to make it look like the map concept didn't fail, they're just "modifying" it. and i'm certainly not normally a blizzard basher. just comes off like they're trying to save face and stubbornly make people think the map is good
Blizzards want to help non-zergs on that map without having to remove the golds altogether (since that's what makes the map "different"). I think it probably does help the map's balance a little, though I'm not convinced it's a great idea design wise.
|
I really dislike the idea of a gold natural, don't see the cool factor of that. Anyway, it seems Lerilak and Protocol are now playable, so I'll take that.
|
On February 10 2016 06:15 pure.Wasted wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:56 brickrd wrote:On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. What a dumb question. Have you even seen them? They're GOLD.
Yeah! He should get banned for shitposting!
We just need a couple island maps added to the pool, and it'll be a neo-paradise for SC2.
EDIT: I just realized: We need Platinum and Diamond bases. I should start a petition.
|
Sounds like a good update. Prion will be interesting in particular.
|
Hmmm, with the gold expansion closer now on Prion, I can assume that both players will scout earlier to choose the proper build order (if player takes gold, then either take gold too or be aggressive before they can fully saturate expansion with workers). If both players take the fast expand, then I guess there could be imbalance issues. Excited to see how the new changes play in Bo1 for SPL!
If only Life wasn't in his situation, he would take the gold and mass lings for days and kill you.. GSL Champ 1 easy.. 
PS: Hope Terrans just fly to the expansion right off the bat lol
|
No changes on Orbital Shipyard? I thought they recognized the abusive reaper play on that map
|
On February 10 2016 07:41 [PkF] Wire wrote:
I really dislike the idea of a gold natural, don't see the cool factor of that. Anyway, it seems Lerilak and Protocol are now playable, so I'll take that.
Why is Lerilak more playable now? From my (protoss) perspective it might actually be ever so slightly worse because scouting time - never good on a 4 player map - just got slightly worse.
|
On February 10 2016 05:48 brickrd wrote:
what exactly is the point of natural base gold? i mean i guess it accelerates the game economically
Your guess is as good as anyone's. The game is already sped up economically because of the economic changes in general. This just puts it at ludicrous speed.
|
i love all these changes! lookin' forward to try them out..
|
I wonder if matchup specific maps is a good idea. Server auto veto imbalanced maps based on which race you match up against, and in tournament diff match up have a diff map list
|
Too much negativity before anyone has seen GSL players play with the map changes or even played on the maps themselves. I'm beginning to understand why having aggressive moderation is necessary. People are just complaining instead of offering constructive feedback with their statements. Can we at least try to understand something before we provide our thoughts on it? I would now like to offer myself as sacrifice to the mods to bring more attention to the issue of rampant negativity on these forums.
|
"{Prion Terraces
- The first expansions have been changed to gold minerals, while the second expansions are now a normal mineral base."
I wonder how this will change the current meta. Does this mean that zergs will have an advantage when it comes to droning? i do not see benefiting the other two races.
Not to be that guy but i really want a balanced game, is that too much to ask after spending more than 100 dollars in a game and waiting more than 5 years?
|
United Kingdom20285 Posts
I wonder how this will change the current meta. Does this mean that zergs will have an advantage when it comes to droning? i do not see benefiting the other two races.
The gold base was at the third before, which was taken more often by zerg than the other races. Any race can easily take the natural expansion in legacy - defending your first expansion at that third was way harder.
|
Hallelujah to Prion and Cyclone changes! Well done pushing this out so quick!
|
|
|
Some people seem to think the gold natural will benefit Zerg, this makes no sense to me as the Zerg could already easily take the 3rd whereas the other races couldn't do that as safely or as easily. This is a benefit to Protoss and Terran against Zerg in the early stages of the game.
what exactly is the point of natural base gold? i mean i guess it accelerates the game economically
This is somewhat untrue. It doesn't accelerate the economy as it was, it accelerates minerals while not accelerating gas. This changes build orders significantly off of two bases. Looking for two base protoss and terrans to change their strats accordingly.
|
On February 10 2016 06:19 JackONeill wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely Because there's 3 blizzard employees working on SC2 and it take times making maps.
Browder says its 80+ on SC2 and 140+ on HotS.
|
Norway839 Posts
Loving these changes, they promote defender's advantage, remove the impact of spawn randomness (ever so slightly) without harming early midgame and lategame designs of these maps. It's great. You won't notice a difference between maps if all your games end on 2 bases right? lol.
Very surprised by the developer's actions here given their new design philosophy though. since crazy maps are supposed to be part of the new image, kinda.. but it's totally the right call. Variable rush distances on a 4p map like Central in combination with a big ramp from nat and down, and NO RAMP between main and nat + back door rocks turned out to be a bit too much... :D
The rock change on Lerilak is a nerf to Protoss scouting early game but for the most part, again, a welcome change for anyone who wants to have a game going beyond 2 bases.
LOTV was designed around players having to expand sooner: it would be nice to see continued efforts towards promoting maps where players are actually encouraged to do this  turtle games on 3 bases aren't as likely to happen, so i think it's fine to relax a little and actually be okay with having 'ordinary' bases early on. I'm not saying every map should be like Dusk Towers even if it is a great map. It's just that there are many ways to design an interesting midfield that still has aggro potential. Hammering in backdoor rocks or a steppes of war rush distance won't help with showing the diversity that maps can potentially offer in LOTV.
|
On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch
Masszealot all ins aren't that interesting
|
I'm not a fan of generic builds on maps that are basically all the same. Therefor I like the idea of "non-standard" maps.
I want more situations where pros players can distinguish themselves by having more build orders/counter/counter-counters etc... This is one of the big draws of PL.
However, there is an issue doing this before standard play exists! I would have liked season 1 (or season 0 if you like) to use more standard maps.
I think going with such a varied map pool and brand new meta creates too many issues - especially when one of the biggest LotV changes was economy and then you have a map that's major change is (gold base) economy...
|
On February 10 2016 06:13 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 06:09 Cyro wrote:the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting? It's differentThe relative power of 2 base compared to 3 base play is increased not accurate. a 3 base player will have already received the exact same benefit as the 2 base aggressor by the time the attack comes because they had the gold natural too, so the 3 base player is able to build and saturate a third more quickly than normal due to the mineral boost. it's the same as 2 base aggression vs 3 base play without a gold. if minuscule, forced differences in builds that affect both players equally are interesting and different for you then... good for you, i guess
If you were right every match would play out exactly the same with exactly the same build orders.
They don't, even standard maps produce a variety in build orders and strategies (altough not varied enough) so the logical leap to conclude that different maps with diffent properties (even slightly different ones) will help to show an even greter variety in build orders and strategies is honestly quite obvious.
Its barely worth discussing, if you think that different and varied maps wont produce different builds and strategies compared to standard ones than you really need to reflect on your reasoning.
|
I love those changes. Blizz, don't listen to the haters, anyways, nothing short of making BW-HD would ever please them.
|
On February 10 2016 05:56 brickrd wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch the question is what in the world makes gold naturals interesting. ok, both players save minerals and have a few more marines and a few more zerglings as well as fewer workers. what makes this interesting? it's interesting when it's a third or fourth base with risk associated because harassment starts becoming involved and builds diverge into aggressive, defensive, etc. but everyone is going to take the gold natural, so..?
I bet you, not everyone is gonna do it. Reason: You think your opp will 100% do it. :D
|
rofl "gold natural" what is this even
|
On February 10 2016 19:10 boxerfred wrote:
rofl "gold natural" what is this even
Don't roll on the floor yet, hold it in until.... gold main =D
|
I really like the idea of gold natural, it promotes some different and creative styles. Players are definitely encouraged more to think about the composition they will go for on this map.
Id also like the idea of giving less efficient naturals, or even crazy stuff like double inbase naturals.
Anything that shakes the game up is good for me.
Remember, it doesnt have to be balanced fully for it to be fun. I actually enjoyed the 2 gold bases as my 3rd and 4th, i found that to be interesting and fun to play on.
And if youre one of those whiny internet haters, then just veto the map.
|
|
|
I think I gangnam terran every game now when I get the map with gold base natural. go for a double rax wall off and you get a pocket, safe "natural" too.
|
havent been here for a while, also havent played, so i got a question. did that balance patch (with photon overcharge more energy costs etc.) went live?
|
Prion definitely getting a veto from me now. Not trying to fully memorize a new build order per match up because of a gold natural.
This map pool is so bad. To people saying we need different and this dumb shit on maps, do you remember Overgrowth? Yeah.
|
On February 10 2016 21:33 KOtical wrote:
havent been here for a while, also havent played, so i got a question. did that balance patch (with photon overcharge more energy costs etc.) went live?
Yea.
|
Looks good! Well I am gold league but still.. I think the Prion Terraces change could make it easier for me vs Zerg? Maybe.
|
back to lifting my cc at the start again thanks blizzard <3.
|
Awesome to see Blizzard making some good changes to the game. Anyone know when they intend to launch the next balance test map to try to better balance the units/game?
|
On February 10 2016 05:53 LongShot27 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2016 05:50 Topdoller wrote:
Baffled by Gold base naturals, i just dont see any point . why not just remove gold from the map completely because making boring maps with nothing interesting is one of the reasons HOTS died 3 months after launch
So gold bases make for interesting gameplay? Making stuff different for the sake of difference?
Or we could try to make more interesting gameplay by rewarding more unit diversity. Like tank-based mech instead of air based mech?
|
remember bois, gold bases give the same mineral income, but at higher worker efficiency, this just speeds up early game economy
|
Just saw Hui 3 pylon blocked a Zerg on Central Protocol...
Well... guess I will veto this map anyway
|
On February 10 2016 17:36 fezvez wrote:
I love those changes. Blizz, don't listen to the haters, anyways, nothing short of making BW-HD would ever please them.
Because you think people would be happy with that ? Of course they'll find something to hate too...
On February 10 2016 22:41 Yiome wrote:
Just saw Hui 3 pylon blocked a Zerg on Central Protocol...
Well... guess I will veto this map anyway
Has pylon blocked Jaedong on Polar night. Did you vetoed that map ?
|
|
|
Good changes i think, but i don't understand the fascination with gold bases. They just beg for unnecessary balance problems.
|
On February 11 2016 04:05 Sapphire.lux wrote:
Good changes i think, but i don't understand the fascination with gold bases. They just beg for unnecessary balance problems.
It's for science....you monster.
OP: Can we have destructible rocks to wall off the gold bases too? Destructibles for days.
|
I also worry that map diversity (including Gold bases) will indirectly lead to balance issues because you add another unnecessary variable to the already complex 3 race RTS equation. Map diversity is not required for SC2 to become the ultimate competitive esport, and even casual RTS of choice. I must have played hundreds of BW games with my friends on our single favorite map, over and over. No problem. Fantastic game.
|
On February 11 2016 04:44 DSK wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 04:05 Sapphire.lux wrote:
Good changes i think, but i don't understand the fascination with gold bases. They just beg for unnecessary balance problems. It's for science....you monster. OP: Can we have destructible rocks to wall off the gold bases too? Destructibles for days.
More like magic rather then science.
I don't see the positives here. If they are naturals, then everyone gets them. So what? There will be more of a focus in mineral only units? With the mineral only units being so different to the 3 races this just screams potential and unnecessary balance problems to me.
It was cool when gold bases were tried as a central or far of base, but it turned out that you needed to be a bit ahead to take one and after it made you be even more ahead, so it made comebacks even harder then they usually are in SC2.
So the idea of gold bases just seems like a failed one that we should just move on from.
For gameplay diversity there are a lot of other things they have to focus on. Like FUCKING MECH in TvP/TvZ that they failed on for 6 years now. Even TvT lost all diversity and, gold bases or slightly smaller or slightly bigger chokes are not to do anything here.
Map diversity is cool don't get me wrong, but there are still a lot of basic unit interactions that should take priority to unlock strategies and gameplay diversity.
|
Well, natural gold base will favourite even more Z & P. At least this map offers something different and it is enjoyable. Though it would be good to reintroduce some maps from wol (early wol as far as actual mappool is crap) for example shakuras plateaus or lost temple.
|
One question, and please answer this. Will Swarm Hosts, Ravens, BCs, Carriers ever be relevant in competitive play? Please answer as to what your intentions are with those units.
|
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map.
|
On February 12 2016 06:25 Loccstana wrote:
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map.
Destructible rocks blocking a natural make the game basically unwinnable as Zerg. 1-base builds are stupid and if the opponent knows that you are going to take a far away base as your first expo, he will prepare accordingly and run you over.
|
On February 12 2016 07:06 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 06:25 Loccstana wrote:
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map. Destructible rocks blocking a natural make the game basically unwinnable as Zerg. 1-base builds are stupid and if the opponent knows that you are going to take a far away base as your first expo, he will prepare accordingly and run you over.
Who says rocks at natural = 1 base build? Build some units and destroy the rocks, then build natural. Your opponent has to do it too anyways.
|
On February 12 2016 11:39 Loccstana wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 07:06 opisska wrote:On February 12 2016 06:25 Loccstana wrote:
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map. Destructible rocks blocking a natural make the game basically unwinnable as Zerg. 1-base builds are stupid and if the opponent knows that you are going to take a far away base as your first expo, he will prepare accordingly and run you over. Who says rocks at natural = 1 base build? Build some units and destroy the rocks, then build natural. Your opponent has to do it too anyways.
Which would work without any issues in a game balanced about such situation. However for the current instalment of SC2 it is not the case. In a macro game, Zerg is balanced around droning like a mad man. Beuuase of the different mechanisms of making units, the other races are moreorless forced into making units just to hang around, because they can't massproduce them right when they needed, but when Zerg does it, they fall behind. Moreover, killing rocks with lings takes half a year, so it would have to be at least roaches, which is an insane investment, if you don't do anything with them.
|
On February 12 2016 07:06 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 06:25 Loccstana wrote:
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map. Destructible rocks blocking a natural make the game basically unwinnable as Zerg. 1-base builds are stupid and if the opponent knows that you are going to take a far away base as your first expo, he will prepare accordingly and run you over.
Half the zergs were already taking their third first on that map. Half of those were even taking their fourth before taking their natural. So really, a blocked natural wouldn't be the end of the world for zerg.
|
On February 12 2016 17:55 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 07:06 opisska wrote:On February 12 2016 06:25 Loccstana wrote:
I dont mind a gold base natural, however, there should be a destructible rock blocking it. Dustin Browder would be proud of this map. Destructible rocks blocking a natural make the game basically unwinnable as Zerg. 1-base builds are stupid and if the opponent knows that you are going to take a far away base as your first expo, he will prepare accordingly and run you over. Half the zergs were already taking their third first on that map. Half of those were even taking their fourth before taking their natural. So really, a blocked natural wouldn't be the end of the world for zerg.
Please show me the 1/4 of games on Prion where the second gold is taken before the natural. Using untrue hyperbole is not a very good way to support your argument. Anyway, taking the gold first had enough benefits to outweight the risk.
Is it really that difficult to comprehend the concept that the early game balance is walking on an extremely tight rope and that if you take something away from just one race, you have to make up for it somewhere?
|
On February 11 2016 17:48 huller20 wrote:
One question, and please answer this. Will Swarm Hosts, Ravens, BCs, Carriers ever be relevant in competitive play? Please answer as to what your intentions are with those units.
Swarm Hosts are just bad, Ravens are okay for the lategame and BCs are just bad. Carriers however actually destroy absolutetly everything in the lategame. I still haven't find a unit composition that can destroy 200/200 full upgraded Carriers. Their DPS is just way too much.
|
On February 12 2016 18:10 SiaBBo wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2016 17:48 huller20 wrote:
One question, and please answer this. Will Swarm Hosts, Ravens, BCs, Carriers ever be relevant in competitive play? Please answer as to what your intentions are with those units. Swarm Hosts are just bad, Ravens are okay for the lategame and BCs are just bad. Carriers however actually destroy absolutetly everything in the lategame. I still haven't find a unit composition that can destroy 200/200 full upgraded Carriers. Their DPS is just way too much.
Ravens and BCs probably would do
|
Gold base with destructible minerals like Deck 16 would be fun
|
Ravens are okay for the lategame
Sorry but I don't really see were you've seen that, raven is like the worst cost effective unit in sc2.
|
On February 10 2016 06:57 OsaX Nymloth wrote:Show nested quote +- Fixed an issue where the Mothership Core's Photon Overcharge ability sometimes dealt an inconsistent amount of damage. Just had an evil idea. Imagine if PO damage was random. Madness!
![[image loading]](http://www.hearthcards.net/cards/ffdb5b86.png)
I mean it kinda was before the update, no? Maybe not random, but inconsistent.
|
On February 12 2016 18:29 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On February 12 2016 18:10 SiaBBo wrote:On February 11 2016 17:48 huller20 wrote:
One question, and please answer this. Will Swarm Hosts, Ravens, BCs, Carriers ever be relevant in competitive play? Please answer as to what your intentions are with those units. Swarm Hosts are just bad, Ravens are okay for the lategame and BCs are just bad. Carriers however actually destroy absolutetly everything in the lategame. I still haven't find a unit composition that can destroy 200/200 full upgraded Carriers. Their DPS is just way too much. Ravens and BCs probably would do
Why ravens? PDD doesn't work against carriers, I am not gonna see mass turrets as a real option, and seekers don't do much vs that high hitpoint units. Unless he really on purpose clumps them all up, nothing is gonna happen.
BCs will beat them if it is pure carrier and they got sufficient energy in a straight up fight.
|
On February 14 2016 18:06 Sissors wrote:
Why ravens? PDD doesn't work against carriers, I am not gonna see mass turrets as a real option, and seekers don't do much vs that high hitpoint units. Unless he really on purpose clumps them all up, nothing is gonna happen.
BCs will beat them if it is pure carrier and they got sufficient energy in a straight up fight.
Tbh I don't think that comp can be beaten if it's attained unless it's mass corruptors with vipers for PB or infestors to try and fungal the interceptors. As T I'm not sure anything can deal with that as the DPS is god level, most people I see only really build like 6 carriers to compliment the tempest they're massing as the latter is the better unit tbh.
|
On February 11 2016 17:48 huller20 wrote:
One question, and please answer this. Will Swarm Hosts, Ravens, BCs, Carriers ever be relevant in competitive play? Please answer as to what your intentions are with those units.
Not gonna lie I completely forgot a few of those units you mentioned existed.
Also don't forget about Colossus!
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
