P.S. if you want to see good pro games and not mine dominated games where the terran wins everything and THEN blizzard nerfs mines then you wouldn't mind this nerf too much because 1 mine will defend against EVERY HARASS and it will make it so people won't harass except with hellions if mines aren't nerfed....so games will be stale and boring
Widow mine cost efficiency, what new unit T get? - Page 3
Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
Cloudshade
91 Posts
P.S. if you want to see good pro games and not mine dominated games where the terran wins everything and THEN blizzard nerfs mines then you wouldn't mind this nerf too much because 1 mine will defend against EVERY HARASS and it will make it so people won't harass except with hellions if mines aren't nerfed....so games will be stale and boring | ||
Sissors
1395 Posts
Mines are completely overrated as anti-harass units. You cannot put two mines in every spot someone might harass you. If you lose banshees to them in most cases you should have just payed attention/researched cloak/scanned. | ||
nucleo
292 Posts
i know zealots are not the main and only issue but that nerf still seems way off. actually i think that if it did less direct dmg but a little more splash and cost 1 supply it would do ok. or maybe even keep it at two supply if the dmg\splash numbers feel good | ||
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
| ||
nucleo
292 Posts
i said that zealots are not the only issue, but right now you need to spend a chunk of supply for something that an MsC and a few stalkers totally negate and it only gets easier as the game goes on. edit: im not saying the mine was good and perfect as it was. but its definatly far away from it now. All that being said, it is true that there is no real "meta" to this game yet, no real tried and true compositions and no bank of go to BOs. it goes for both buffs and nerfs. but not much time was given to the previous patch neither. Right now these are all opinions for all sides, I can rant if i want to (: time will tell how this all works (or doesn't) out. | ||
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
just make them spidermine like ground only with 0,5 supply and its fine. | ||
one-one-one
Sweden551 Posts
On December 20 2012 17:11 ledarsi wrote: Blizzard is deliberately trying to get terran players to run their mines directly into enemy forces and burrow them. This is ridiculous. Blizzard should be actively trying to discourage using mines like banelings. The baneling never was a very interesting unit, and now they want to make another one that functions slightly differently? No. The mine should be a powerful positional defensive unit. And it should hurt a LOT. Failing that, just scratch the mine entirely and give the siege tank the kind of damage it needs to do the same job of controlling area. On December 20 2012 20:56 Decendos wrote: yeah agree they are too high in supply. and its also stupid they negate air harrass so hard. which btw is the main reason why they are 2 supply... just make them spidermine like ground only with 0,5 supply and its fine. This, this and fucking this a million times. A mine is supposed to be a simple dumb unit which costs almost nothing so you can use it where your army is not. Lower the supply cost. Remove ability to hit air and decrease its range. Make it target cloaked units. Buff splash damage too 100-125 damage. And yeah, a mine is supposed to explode itself together with the enemy. It is the very definition of a suicide unit. It is not a unit that you burrow in front of the enemy while they can see it for gods sake. Right now they are trying to find a way to justify its 2 supply by giving it various random properties, which is completely retarded. We want a mine! Give us a mine. | ||
Zorgaz
Sweden2951 Posts
TvZ: I'd say mech works in this matchup, still my favorite matchup. TvT: Mech does work, but since the reaper buffs it's much harder to open up mech without getting behind, reaper openings always get the CC out earlier. TvP: Mech is still pretty bad since Immortals hard counters every single unit. With the buffs to medivacs, bio just feels way more viable. And the widow mine shouldn't have a anti-air attack, it creates to many problems. Want to see them try making it costs 1 supply and removing it's anti-air capabilities. | ||
Alex1Sun
494 Posts
On December 20 2012 13:44 RavenLoud wrote: Nerfed damage but with 1 supply is ideal imo. I also support this change. Lower damage and lower supply would be far better solution IMHO. | ||
Marticus
United Kingdom14 Posts
For me I am really dissapointed with the fact terran only has one new unit. There is just nothing new it seems. I really enjoyed TvZ bio but by the sounds of things the infestor is back so I might as well play WoL now. I'd love to play around with cool new units that i barely understand, like the viper, its the reason I play this game. Figuring out how to effectively use a new unit is really fun and cool to me. But in this expansion (so far) I wont be able to do that TvP is so bleh its unbelieveable. The Medivac upgrade is a really cool thing, but again. I'm using exactly the same style of builds as I was in WoL. I WANT to go mech, but its just the same/ worse than in WoL. I dont like the fact that i need to choose which ability i need to use on the thors. The widow mine before this latest patch was a lot of fun in this MU, I could go gas openings and try some funky stuff. Not any more. TvT is reaper vs reaper vs can I defend vs a reaper doing this opening? Not the sort of variation possible in TvT openings usually. I think mech is still quite good in this MU, and i actually enjoy doing it. But the early game openings are very dull. At this stage I'm just like blehhhhhhhhhh. I love this game, but I need something new after 2 years of playing it. I want some new units really badly. | ||
Breach_hu
Hungary2431 Posts
On December 20 2012 20:11 Cloudshade wrote: whoever is complaining about the nerf....just think about this for a second....realistically if you can 1 shot nearly every unit tosses have(remember how freaking expensive they are) now imagine TWO mines sitting there taking out 2 units instead of 1....so basically what blizzard did was make it so you need TWO mines to kill 1 unit for just a cooldown instead of ONE mine to kill ONE ((((((EXPENSIVE))))) unit....seems quite reasonable if you think about it...you're trading a cooldown for a unit....it just means you actually need to put up more than 1 freaking mine to defend against EVERY drop or EVERY harass unit that zergs/tosses can throw at you...actually even terran.... P.S. if you want to see good pro games and not mine dominated games where the terran wins everything and THEN blizzard nerfs mines then you wouldn't mind this nerf too much because 1 mine will defend against EVERY HARASS and it will make it so people won't harass except with hellions if mines aren't nerfed....so games will be stale and boring Still terran is just sucking againts protoss. Just think about it. The "OP" mine was the only reason that Terran could do a little bit greed, while getting mech. The only reason. | ||
EuSpex
Germany73 Posts
- no lategame transition - no viable mech - no space control - I still lose the game if I do just one micro mistake in an engagement - we still need superior micro or multitasking to beat equal skilled players - other races got new units to deal with terran, but terran got nothing new to deal with them - the gameplay in tvp is still: kill P befor deathball or die trying -> no thanks! | ||
EmailFDP
Brazil16 Posts
On December 20 2012 17:11 ledarsi wrote: Blizzard is deliberately trying to get terran players to run their mines directly into enemy forces and burrow them. This is ridiculous. Blizzard should be actively trying to discourage using mines like banelings. The baneling never was a very interesting unit, and now they want to make another one that functions slightly differently? No. The mine should be a powerful positional defensive unit. And it should hurt a LOT. Failing that, just scratch the mine entirely and give the siege tank the kind of damage it needs to do the same job of controlling area. I desagree completely. Banelings are cool and ofensive mines are awsome and micro intensive. | ||
exKid
United Kingdom118 Posts
I'm not suggesting these things are game breaking or a big problem (there was obviously mine dragging in BW), just a bit of food for thought as to how the change would affect the use of mines. | ||
Empirimancer
Canada1024 Posts
| ||
pmp10
3135 Posts
On December 21 2012 01:57 Empirimancer wrote: To the people saying mines shouldn't attack air, how do you deal with the new protoss air composition without mines as mech? I imagine that even bigger problem would be corrupter/broodlord. Thors cannot defend ravens by themselves and mech needs additional air splash now that seeker missile provides none. | ||
ZjiublingZ
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 20 2012 20:11 Cloudshade wrote: whoever is complaining about the nerf....just think about this for a second....realistically if you can 1 shot nearly every unit tosses have(remember how freaking expensive they are) now imagine TWO mines sitting there taking out 2 units instead of 1....so basically what blizzard did was make it so you need TWO mines to kill 1 unit for just a cooldown instead of ONE mine to kill ONE ((((((EXPENSIVE))))) unit....seems quite reasonable if you think about it...you're trading a cooldown for a unit....it just means you actually need to put up more than 1 freaking mine to defend against EVERY drop or EVERY harass unit that zergs/tosses can throw at you...actually even terran.... P.S. if you want to see good pro games and not mine dominated games where the terran wins everything and THEN blizzard nerfs mines then you wouldn't mind this nerf too much because 1 mine will defend against EVERY HARASS and it will make it so people won't harass except with hellions if mines aren't nerfed....so games will be stale and boring Wow... this is such an incomplete picture of the cost of a Widow Mine in deterring harassment. You are missing 3 HUGE points about using Widow Mines to defend harassment: 1) You don't put a Widow Mine somewhere and 15 seconds later it trades with the opponent, not in most situations. Sometimes it might sit there for 2 minutes before trading. Sometimes it won't trade the entire game. Why does how long it takes to trade matter? Because 75/25/2 supply (widow mine) at 10:00 in the game, when players are at ~50 workers and 120 supply is a larger investment then 125/50/2 supply (Stalker) at 15:00 in the game, when players are at 75 workers, and maxed out. As players economies and armies grow, the investment of these units becomes relatively less significant. So the player investing in Widow Mine defense to take out a single Stalker 5:00 later, even though the Widow Mine itself is a cheaper unit, is actually investing relatively more than the player losing their Stalker (think 9:00 DT rush vs DT harassment at 30:00). If your Widow Mine doesn't trade the entire game, was it a negative investment? I suppose that depends on the value of the 5 range area you were using it to protect... 2) Keeping point #1 in mind, the better the area you put your Widow Mine in (better as in the area where it is more likely to encounter harassment units), the more likely your opponent is to suspect it, and consequently take no damage from it (might have to sac a 25 mineral Zergling if they are Zerg with a low range army) via either avoiding that area or bringing detection. So no spot, no matter how likely it is for harassment units to go, guarantees your Widow Mine to trade well. This would only become more and more true as pro players gained experience in dealing with Widow Mines (and perhaps even experience with their specific opponents in how they use them). At this point it becomes a resource + supply investment just to slow down your opponent or make them invest a bit more APM in their harassment. 3) In regards to deterring harassment, a Widow Mine that only damages units is FAR less useful than a Widow Mine that kills a unit. Defending harassment isn't about how well you can trade with the units harassing (usually), it's about minimizing their time in harassing. If a group of Zealots runs into my natural, and I'm outside my third/4th base, and my Widow Mine just damages them, what does this accomplish for me? 5 injured Zealots kill SCV's just as fast as 5 full health ones. If I have to pull units back to clean this harassment up, do I really care that the Zealots are injured? I was always going to clean it up very cost efficiently, likely without losing anything. If the Widow Mine can't actually weaken the harass of the units harassing me, why should I use them at all in this respect? Why not use a Viking/Turret for drops, a Hellbat or Bunker for Zealot runby's, a Siege Tank for gateway unit harass, or a PF instead of a few Widow Mines to defend a farther away expansion? These things can actually clean up or prevent harass themselves, preventing me from having to pull any units back to clean the harassment up. Why would I use a Widow Mine instead if they can't do this? | ||
Decendos
Germany1338 Posts
On December 21 2012 02:29 ZjiublingZ wrote: Wow... this is such an incomplete picture of the cost of a Widow Mine in deterring harassment. You are missing 3 HUGE points about using Widow Mines to defend harassment: 1) You don't put a Widow Mine somewhere and 15 seconds later it trades with the opponent, not in most situations. Sometimes it might sit there for 2 minutes before trading. Sometimes it won't trade the entire game. Why does how long it takes to trade matter? Because 75/25/2 supply (widow mine) at 10:00 in the game, when players are at ~50 workers and 120 supply is a larger investment then 125/50/2 supply (Stalker) at 15:00 in the game, when players are at 75 workers, and maxed out. As players economies and armies grow, the investment of these units becomes relatively less significant. So the player investing in Widow Mine defense to take out a single Stalker 5:00 later, even though the Widow Mine itself is a cheaper unit, is actually investing relatively more than the player losing their Stalker (think 9:00 DT rush vs DT harassment at 30:00). If your Widow Mine doesn't trade the entire game, was it a negative investment? I suppose that depends on the value of the 5 range area you were using it to protect... 2) Keeping point #1 in mind, the better the area you put your Widow Mine in (better as in the area where it is more likely to encounter harassment units), the more likely your opponent is to suspect it, and consequently take no damage from it (might have to sac a 25 mineral Zergling if they are Zerg with a low range army) via either avoiding that area or bringing detection. So no spot, no matter how likely it is for harassment units to go, guarantees your Widow Mine to trade well. This would only become more and more true as pro players gained experience in dealing with Widow Mines (and perhaps even experience with their specific opponents in how they use them). At this point it becomes a resource + supply investment just to slow down your opponent or make them invest a bit more APM in their harassment. 3) In regards to deterring harassment, a Widow Mine that only damages units is FAR less useful than a Widow Mine that kills a unit. Defending harassment isn't about how well you can trade with the units harassing (usually), it's about minimizing their time in harassing. If a group of Zealots runs into my natural, and I'm outside my third/4th base, and my Widow Mine just damages them, what does this accomplish for me? 5 injured Zealots kill SCV's just as fast as 5 full health ones. If I have to pull units back to clean this harassment up, do I really care that the Zealots are injured? I was always going to clean it up very cost efficiently, likely without losing anything. If the Widow Mine can't actually weaken the harass of the units harassing me, why should I use them at all in this respect? Why not use a Viking/Turret for drops, a Hellbat or Bunker for Zealot runby's, a Siege Tank for gateway unit harass, or a PF instead of a few Widow Mines to defend a farther away expansion? These things can actually clean up or prevent harass themselves, preventing me from having to pull any units back to clean the harassment up. Why would I use a Widow Mine instead if they can't do this? while you are right in your points you also forget the most important point: your opponent wont go for banshee, mutas, drops, oracles, phoenix in the first place because the risk/reward ratio is way too bad. so just the existence of the mine forces your opponent into other tech just because its too risky to get caught. thats what blizzard realized by lowering single target damage but its stupid overall that the mine hits air. if mech REALLY would have problems with early air, hell lower ebay and turret build time slightly. in BW mech was always played with mass turrets and there is absolutely no problem with that since mech has a lot of overmints anyway. mech having problems against air in later game stages is only true vs P and Z has the same problems vs P air, so P air is just too strong, not T antiair too weak. | ||
ZjiublingZ
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 21 2012 02:41 Decendos wrote: while you are right in your points you also forget the most important point: your opponent wont go for banshee, mutas, drops, oracles, phoenix in the first place because the risk/reward ratio is way too bad. so just the existence of the mine forces your opponent into other tech just because its too risky to get caught. thats what blizzard realized by lowering single target damage but its stupid overall that the mine hits air. if mech REALLY would have problems with early air, hell lower ebay and turret build time slightly. in BW mech was always played with mass turrets and there is absolutely no problem with that since mech has a lot of overmints anyway. mech having problems against air in later game stages is only true vs P and Z has the same problems vs P air, so P air is just too strong, not T antiair too weak. You don't understand how Mines work; It's not a risk/reward scenario, Widow Mines can be consistently scouted/thwarted/avoided. It's an opportunity cost scenario: Is the extra cost of A) Having my detection here instead of there B) spending extra APM focusing on my harassment to avoid Widow Mines (this is possible for faster units, because Mines reveal themselves a couple seconds before detonating) and/or C) spending extra resources for extra detection to avoid/kill Widow Mines (or in the case of Hallucination/Envision, spending energy). It's only a risk/reward scenario if you choose to make it that, and if it's not worth the risk as you say, there is no point in discussing that scenario, because nobody would choose to make it that. | ||
Karpfen
Italy959 Posts
| ||
| ||