|
On November 15 2018 11:45 Solar424 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 08:46 MarcDaKind wrote:On November 15 2018 08:33 Tyrhanius wrote:On November 15 2018 08:19 MarthTV wrote:
So why does the thor get 1 armor removed?
He is not that strong anyways.
A lot of Cracklings deal with thors, no problem, and what Immortals do vs them is against the Geneva convention. To allow zerg to build mutas in ZvT The splash damage nerf should already solve that issue. Mutas are not meant to be a Thor "counter''. They aren't meant to be a counter, but Thors having 2 armor made Mutas basically unplayable in ZvT.
muta is still viable on big maps, in current patch zergs can play pure ling bane into hive and be fine too, and in new patch terrans will more often make +1 armor for mines instead of +1 attack for tanks like now, so thors will get that armor back quickly anyway
|
On November 15 2018 18:31 MockHamill wrote:
The basic problem is that Carriers will now do 33% more damage to Thors due to Thor having 1 less armor.
That combined with the 12.5% more hitpoints for Carriers means that Thors will perform worse in a 1v1 battle vs Carrier even though they fire faster and hit harder.
The intresting thing to investigate once the patch goes live is the impact of blowing up interceptors.
Basically if trying to blow up the interceptors for the first part of the battle and then switch to single Target mode will be more effective.
you have probably missed that Blizz increased Thor damage against massive by an additional ~14% according to yesterdays note.
|
On November 15 2018 11:45 Solar424 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 08:46 MarcDaKind wrote:On November 15 2018 08:33 Tyrhanius wrote:On November 15 2018 08:19 MarthTV wrote:
So why does the thor get 1 armor removed?
He is not that strong anyways.
A lot of Cracklings deal with thors, no problem, and what Immortals do vs them is against the Geneva convention. To allow zerg to build mutas in ZvT The splash damage nerf should already solve that issue. Mutas are not meant to be a Thor "counter''. They aren't meant to be a counter, but Thors having 2 armor made Mutas basically unplayable in ZvT.
What made Mutas "unplayable" was when they increased the splash damage to 6, now they reduced it to 5 so they should be fine again. You don't want to engage Thors with Mutas anyway, but getting hit by a few volleys wont be as devastating anymore.
|
On November 15 2018 19:12 bela.mervado wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 18:31 MockHamill wrote:
The basic problem is that Carriers will now do 33% more damage to Thors due to Thor having 1 less armor.
That combined with the 12.5% more hitpoints for Carriers means that Thors will perform worse in a 1v1 battle vs Carrier even though they fire faster and hit harder.
The intresting thing to investigate once the patch goes live is the impact of blowing up interceptors.
Basically if trying to blow up the interceptors for the first part of the battle and then switch to single Target mode will be more effective. you have probably missed that Blizz increased Thor damage against massive by an additional ~14% according to yesterdays note.
No I included that in the calculation.
Carriers do 33% more damage to Thors.
Carriers have 12.5% more hitpoints.
Thors do 10% more damage (55 compared to 50) if the fire rate was the same.
Thor fire 25% faster.
So Thor will be weaker vs Carriers in a 1v1 battle post patch, mostly due to the extreme difference in damage output from the interceptors.
Thor may still work as a counter though, if you get the interceptor count down.
|
I love that they announced (first in a very long time) buffs to protoss and nerfs to other races, only to slowly withdraw from them altogether. Solid
|
On November 15 2018 20:13 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 19:12 bela.mervado wrote:On November 15 2018 18:31 MockHamill wrote:
The basic problem is that Carriers will now do 33% more damage to Thors due to Thor having 1 less armor.
That combined with the 12.5% more hitpoints for Carriers means that Thors will perform worse in a 1v1 battle vs Carrier even though they fire faster and hit harder.
The intresting thing to investigate once the patch goes live is the impact of blowing up interceptors.
Basically if trying to blow up the interceptors for the first part of the battle and then switch to single Target mode will be more effective. you have probably missed that Blizz increased Thor damage against massive by an additional ~14% according to yesterdays note. No I included that in the calculation. Carriers do 33% more damage to Thors. Carriers have 12.5% more hitpoints. Thors do 10% more damage (55 compared to 50) if the fire rate was the same. Thor fire 19.5% faster. So Thor will be weaker vs Carriers in a 1v1 battle post patch, mostly due to the extreme difference in damage output from the interceptors. Thor may still work as a counter though, if you get the interceptor count down.
Thors fire 25% faster post-patch.
|
On November 15 2018 22:06 Athenau wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 20:13 MockHamill wrote:On November 15 2018 19:12 bela.mervado wrote:On November 15 2018 18:31 MockHamill wrote:
The basic problem is that Carriers will now do 33% more damage to Thors due to Thor having 1 less armor.
That combined with the 12.5% more hitpoints for Carriers means that Thors will perform worse in a 1v1 battle vs Carrier even though they fire faster and hit harder.
The intresting thing to investigate once the patch goes live is the impact of blowing up interceptors.
Basically if trying to blow up the interceptors for the first part of the battle and then switch to single Target mode will be more effective. you have probably missed that Blizz increased Thor damage against massive by an additional ~14% according to yesterdays note. No I included that in the calculation. Carriers do 33% more damage to Thors. Carriers have 12.5% more hitpoints. Thors do 10% more damage (55 compared to 50) if the fire rate was the same. Thor fire 25% faster. So Thor will be weaker vs Carriers in a 1v1 battle post patch, mostly due to the extreme difference in damage output from the interceptors. Thor may still work as a counter though, if you get the interceptor count down. Thors fire 25% faster post-patch.
You are right. But even then Thor will still do worse in 1v1 fight against Carrier compared to pre-patch.
|
the best "counter" to carriers are warp ins and mass yamatos, thors are laughable and will never help you.
|
On November 15 2018 23:15 IshinShishi wrote:
the best "counter" to carriers are warp ins and mass yamatos, thors are laughable and will never help you.
In a mono battle BC works great. But with the new improved Tempest I doubt BC will work vs Protoss.
I think Thors+widow mines or Thors+liberators will work better vs Protoss air, but it remains to be seen.
|
On November 15 2018 23:32 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 23:15 IshinShishi wrote:
the best "counter" to carriers are warp ins and mass yamatos, thors are laughable and will never help you. In a mono battle BC works great. But with the new improved Tempest I doubt BC will work vs Protoss. I think Thors+widow mines or Thors+liberators will work better vs Protoss air, but it remains to be seen.
I think BC + Vikings with raven and WM support can be very good against Protoss even with the new Tempest (the style TY played vs Creator) but transitioning into it will be very difficult.
|
On November 16 2018 00:12 MrWayne wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2018 23:32 MockHamill wrote:On November 15 2018 23:15 IshinShishi wrote:
the best "counter" to carriers are warp ins and mass yamatos, thors are laughable and will never help you. In a mono battle BC works great. But with the new improved Tempest I doubt BC will work vs Protoss. I think Thors+widow mines or Thors+liberators will work better vs Protoss air, but it remains to be seen. I think BC + Vikings with raven and WM support can be very good against Protoss even with the new Tempest (the style TY played vs Creator) but transitioning into it will be very difficult.
tooting! it will be difficult indeed.
|
I ran some numbers on the thor vs carrier scenario. There were some things I did not take into consideration:
* The attack point (warm up for attacks). I only took the base attack rate.
* The interceptor release time. I assumed all interceptors were out at the start of the fight.
* The shields of the carriers got counted as hull instead, gaining the 2 armour from hull instead of the armour of shields (that is a buff to carriers).
Results:
1. On average, both the new carrier and the new thor takes more damage per second compared to the old ones, no matter the upgrades.
2. With 0/0 upgrades, the new thor loses. With armour on thor and attack on carrier, the thor loses. Thor loses hard with less armour than carrier attack. If thor has got more armour than carrier has got attack, thor wins. Ergo, thor should prioritize armour and carrier should prioritize attack.
3. The armour upgrade on carriers had almost no impact. The attack upgrade on thor is noticable. If thor doesn't lose on armour, thor wins because of attack upgrades.
In a heavily upgraded scenario thor is superior. In a barely upgraded scenario carrier is better.
New thor is slightly worse vs new carrier compared to what old thor was vs old carrier.
While I hade the calculations up I changed a few numbers and made a quick calculation of other massive flyers:
Generally, things die faster. Thor takes more damage and deals more damage vs everything massive in the air.
Thor got better vs the following units:
- Brood lords are worse vs new thor, that was a surprise. The damage buff vs massive along with the increased attack speed more than makes up for the loss in armour. The broodlings aren't as good as I thought vs new thor.
- The speed tempest can easily kite thors, but loses big time in a straight up fight. New tempest is so fragile.
- The new battlecruiser is slightly worse vs new thor, but it still beats the crap out of them cost for cost and supply for supply. Some upgrade interactions (high armour thor vs low attack BC) makes the new BC way better than the old one.
- The yamato nerf is not taken into consideration in my calculations. Damage difference of old yamato vs new yamato corresponds to less than 1.4 seconds of regular attacks, tilting the fight even more.
- Thor vs mothership has become a better 1v1 for the thor, so long as the
Thor got worse vs the following units:
- Only variations of upgrades is making the new thor bad. The low innate armour makes it vulnerable vs fast attacks. If you upgrade armour first, you'll be fine, the exception being vs brood lords. The first upgrade should be +1 attack, then go full +3 armour before continuing the +2 attack.
In short, new thor is way worse vs most stuff and better vs massive flyers. Thor should prioritize armour.
Sidenote: the new interceptor release takes twice as long for the carrier. The difference is more than half a volley of 16 attacks with 5 damage each. The old carrier sends out its 4th interceptor when the new carrier releases its 2nd. The first interceptor is doing its second attack about the same time as the last interceptor gets out of the new carrier.
With the difference in interceptor release time, the new thor wins a 1v1 vs the new carrier as long as the thor's armour upgrade is equal to or higher than the carrier's attack upgrade.
I did not save my numbers. There is no use asking for them.
|
Players who care more about Thor vs Carrier than 3rax in TvT ...
|
On November 16 2018 08:58 DieuCure wrote:
Players who care more about Thor vs Carrier than 3rax in TvT ...
Why worry about a mirror matchup?
You can easily hold a 3 rax by going 2 rax factory or even 1-1-1 if you have good worker micro.
|
Btw, i don't get this carrier rant. Carrier is not getting nerfed, it's actually buffed.
It took 110 seconds to build a carrier with 8 interceptors. It will take 108 after the patch. But you will have the first 4 interceptors 20 seconds earlier to defend timing attacks - > a straight BUFF.
More HP -> BUFF.
Minus 150/150 for upgrade -> BUFF
MInus 1 stargate (another 150/150) due to decreased build time -> BUFF
0,1875 average launch time (0,125*4 + 0,25*4) vs 0,27 is ofc a nuisance, but it's almost completely negated in long fights.
It's obvious that carriers will be abused even more and will be nerfed within 1-2 months after the patch.
edit: with the new tempest (and i as a protoss fail to understand the reasoning behind this change) protoss air would be on a complete new level. Why would blizzard do such thing is a mystery to me. As if it wasnt good enough.
|
On November 16 2018 15:12 insitelol wrote:
Btw, i don't get this carrier rant. Carrier is not getting nerfed, it's actually buffed.
It took 110 seconds to build a carrier with 8 interceptors. It will take 108 after the patch. But you will have the first 4 interceptors 20 seconds earlier to defend timing attacks - > a straight BUFF.
More HP -> BUFF.
Minus 150/150 for upgrade -> BUFF
MInus 1 stargate (another 150/150) due to decreased build time -> BUFF
0,1875 average launch time (0,125*4 + 0,25*4) vs 0,27 is ofc a nuisance, but it's almost completely negated in long fights.
It's obvious that carriers will be abused even more and will be nerfed within 1-2 months after the patch.
edit: with the new tempest (and i as a protoss fail to understand the reasoning behind this change) protoss air would be on a complete new level. Why would blizzard do such thing is a mystery to me. As if it wasnt good enough.
All of that is true but destroying the interceptors will be much more efficient.
For instance if you have 1.5 times as many widow mines as they have Carriers you can often destroy 50-75% of their interceptors almost instantly. Previously they could just retreat and rebuild the interceptors very fast.
Now if takes 44 seconds to rebuilt 4 interceptors and 88 if they lost all 8. That gives you an opportunity to either focus down the Carriers or if they teleport back, go and destroy an expansion.
|
On November 16 2018 16:40 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2018 15:12 insitelol wrote:
Btw, i don't get this carrier rant. Carrier is not getting nerfed, it's actually buffed.
It took 110 seconds to build a carrier with 8 interceptors. It will take 108 after the patch. But you will have the first 4 interceptors 20 seconds earlier to defend timing attacks - > a straight BUFF.
More HP -> BUFF.
Minus 150/150 for upgrade -> BUFF
MInus 1 stargate (another 150/150) due to decreased build time -> BUFF
0,1875 average launch time (0,125*4 + 0,25*4) vs 0,27 is ofc a nuisance, but it's almost completely negated in long fights.
It's obvious that carriers will be abused even more and will be nerfed within 1-2 months after the patch.
edit: with the new tempest (and i as a protoss fail to understand the reasoning behind this change) protoss air would be on a complete new level. Why would blizzard do such thing is a mystery to me. As if it wasnt good enough. All of that is true but destroying the interceptors will be much more efficient. For instance if you have 1.5 times as many widow mines as they have Carriers you can often destroy 50-75% of their interceptors almost instantly. Previously they could just retreat and rebuild the interceptors very fast. Now if takes 44 seconds to rebuilt 4 interceptors and 88 if they lost all 8. That gives you an opportunity to either focus down the Carriers or if they teleport back, go and destroy an expansion.
it's a good reason to start another "Turtle Meta".
|
It is not the big bang we were expected isn't?
I still feel creep and queen are annoying in the way it is atm.
|
On November 16 2018 16:40 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2018 15:12 insitelol wrote:
Btw, i don't get this carrier rant. Carrier is not getting nerfed, it's actually buffed.
It took 110 seconds to build a carrier with 8 interceptors. It will take 108 after the patch. But you will have the first 4 interceptors 20 seconds earlier to defend timing attacks - > a straight BUFF.
More HP -> BUFF.
Minus 150/150 for upgrade -> BUFF
MInus 1 stargate (another 150/150) due to decreased build time -> BUFF
0,1875 average launch time (0,125*4 + 0,25*4) vs 0,27 is ofc a nuisance, but it's almost completely negated in long fights.
It's obvious that carriers will be abused even more and will be nerfed within 1-2 months after the patch.
edit: with the new tempest (and i as a protoss fail to understand the reasoning behind this change) protoss air would be on a complete new level. Why would blizzard do such thing is a mystery to me. As if it wasnt good enough. All of that is true but destroying the interceptors will be much more efficient. For instance if you have 1.5 times as many widow mines as they have Carriers you can often destroy 50-75% of their interceptors almost instantly. Previously they could just retreat and rebuild the interceptors very fast. Now if takes 44 seconds to rebuilt 4 interceptors and 88 if they lost all 8. That gives you an opportunity to either focus down the Carriers or if they teleport back, go and destroy an expansion.
Ah, those terran problems i totally forgot about. I do not believe in carrier based TvP, but if someone got issues with that i don't mind it. It just never crossed my mind why on earth i would want carriers in this MU. I guess it's just a sequence of T going mech, as you guys discussed previously... I was talking about PvZ and PvP for the most part, where i can clearly see a much smoother transitoion to carriers in a midgame. And i really don't like it.
|
On November 16 2018 14:46 MockHamill wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2018 08:58 DieuCure wrote:
Players who care more about Thor vs Carrier than 3rax in TvT ... Why worry about a mirror matchup? You can easily hold a 3 rax by going 2 rax factory or even 1-1-1 if you have good worker micro.
You must be trolling.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
