So, the last patch nerfed the widow mine...what was the reasoning for this? The widow mine cannot even take out a single zealot now, nor a roach, etc.
Was this unit nerfed because of casuals and certain pros complaining? Was it nerfed because of a low sample size of games like this game?
After these games?
The widow mine was finally coming into it's own and proving to be somewhat viable late in the game...and it was nerfed with a very high lack of reasoning and a very low sample size of games.
My question is, why were things like blinding cloud, another ability shown to be just as "OP" not also tweaked for lategame? Why was the widow mine (a Terran unit, the only new one) singled out suddenly as being OP?
There should be some consistency here. You cannot just nerf one race's unit because it's OP, and leave the other "OP" things untouched. The widow mine was a balancing factor against the other "imba stuff" from the other races.
Widow mines at this point are broken in TvP, (not useful, or cost effective), and in TvZ I believe it takes x2 of them now to deal with a roach, not sure if it can kill a viper, but considering vipers are currently showing they can make siege tanks quite obsolete...once again, asking the question, why are all things Terran nerfed so quickly with such a low sample size of games, yet things like viper cloud, swarm host health, etc are arbitrarily buffed and not tweaked with corresponding Terran nerfs?
Terran at this point in the beta basically has no new units. There was hope after that one Terran "buff" patch, but they almost immediately re-nerfed everything.
Widow mines too tough to deal with, raising the skill cap? Nerf them. Viper cloud too tough to deal with on siege tanks? Terrans learn to deal with it.
There is a problem here. Not just in consistency, but Terran in general has nothing to look forward to in this expansion. I'm sure i'm echoing a lot of players's thoughts.
The latest "widow mine nerf" basically killed any other hopes of mech TvP as well.
So my question right now, and the community's should be "what incentive is there for Terran to buy this game?" Mech TvP is still not viable, the only new unit is nerfed to hell and already was teetering on "useless," and old units like the raven have been made worse in the last "buff" patch.
And to promote main discussion, how are people handling the widow mine nerf specifically? Do you feel the unit now is bad for the 2 supply cost? Are you using it in late game a lot? Early game? Discussion for widow mine efficienty post-nerf would be great.
Me personally, it seems like it's still decent in TvZ, but TvP the unit is basically terrible. TvT it got worse as well. Overall, it feels like it needs something else, it's underwhelming again.
The only time I used it in TvAnything was for early harass. A fast 2 hellion 2 WM drop, or 4 mine drop across 2 bases. After that, it either became too easy to spot or too ineffective (without a huge gamble).
Facing it in TvT, it wasn't effective enough. I would just have a leading troop or 1-2 ravens and it would nullify nearly every mine on the map unless I was EXTREMELY careless.
Agree with much of the OP, the mine is still good vs Zerg and its okay vs Terran but its pretty shit vs protoss. I can be fine with the damage nerf if something is done that can make it useful vs protoss like making them 1 supply or shortening the recharge time or reducing the build time... theres a lot of things they can do to make it good again without touching the damage.
It is pretty fucking sad Blizzard is counting the hellbat as a new unit, its just a transformation ffs. If terran is really only getting 1 new unit it better be fucking good.
EDIT- Mech vs Bio TvT I find that just going mass factory old style BW mech with hellio/tank/mine is actually pretty damn good if you can position and control your units well.
Protoss Just laughs even harder at the mine than they did before... its infuriating.
The mine still feels okay vs Zerg, but it could be better without breaking anything thats for sure.
I agree, HotS is looking pretty grim for Terran. Unless it improves a lot by the time it's released, I don't think I'll be buying it. It's a shame. I got into BW just before SC2 came out. I sucked at it big-time, but it was loads of fun and it just felt really, really balanced. I got the impression that whoever made it really knew what they were doing when it came to game balance. What happened to the Blizzard that made BW? The more live-streams and pro-games I watch, the more it seems like Blizzard's radio just isn't quite picking up all of the channels. Here's to hoping they fix their antenna by the time Legacy of the Void comes out.
On December 20 2012 14:12 codonbyte wrote: I agree, HotS is looking pretty grim for Terran. Unless it improves a lot by the time it's released, I don't think I'll be buying it. It's a shame. I got into BW just before SC2 came out. I sucked at it big-time, but it was loads of fun and it just felt really, really balanced. I got the impression that whoever made it really knew what they were doing when it came to game balance. What happened to the Blizzard that made BW? The more live-streams and pro-games I watch, the more it seems like Blizzard's radio just isn't quite picking up all of the channels. Here's to hoping they fix their antenna by the time Legacy of the Void comes out.
yea they just need to be 1 supply and should revolve more around splash. it should be, 1 supply, target unit is the center of the splash but no primary target damage, and it does 65(whatever is balanced) splash damage, range is the same. Maybe a upgrade for the 1 supply on the fusion core so you could only really get it late game.
I don't even think it's a numbers issue with widow mines. Lower the supply/buffing damage makes it way too cost effective while lowering the damage/keeping it as it makes it pretty bad. The problem is there's not a whole lot of player control in maximizing the potential of widow mine, you just technically set it and forget it so to speak.
I think widow mines need some sort of rework to introduce "skill" to the unit. Maybe return the big damage numbers but with the added factor of like a 3 sec. attachment before detonate (sorta like how the old WOL seeker missles were). Giving opponents a "safety switch" would justify its damage, but since WOL shows us that super slow seeker missles are easy to dodge, give the widow mine player the ability to detonate the attached mine. Auto-detonate will exist for the lower league players, but a huge micro battle will exist at higher leagues. Basically you get a race between the widow mine player trying to manually detonate vs the opponent trying to eliminate/isolate the bomber unit.
Obviously I've only been playing this latest patch for a day, but I will share my initial experiences with the Widow Mine nerf.
It's not so hot for positioning alone vs any race as much as it was - to deny Medivac/warp prism drops, warp in harass, roach runby's. To elaborate, before you could put just Widow Mines on common drop locations, common runby paths, and on XNT's, and be content with the fact that this was a good investment of supply, because even if it didn't stop the harassment completely, it would at least trade supply/cost efficiently vs these things, and so you could be content with the fact that if the opponent did harass this area your supply invested was worth it, and if the opponent didn't move his units to these harder to defend/control areas, they were indeed defended/controlled (an important advantage, for Mech at least.). Now that Widow Mines tend to not trade supply efficiently (still good against Zergling harass ofc) by themselves, positioning them alone isn't a good investment of supply. Damaging units but not killing them isn't very useful as a Mech player trying to defend far away areas, because the units can do their damage or control a XNT if they are damaged, and if you have to move your army units to defend this harassment anyways, you aren't particularly concerned with how weak the units are as your strong Mech army is going to clean them up easily anyways. It's having to move it out of position and the time it takes to move in general that is what hurts you. So the Widow Mine not fulfilling this role as well as it did actually hurts quite a bit as a Mech player trying to use them to offset your weakness in mobility. That said, the Widow Mine still does weaken the units, so pairing it with something like a Siege Tank, or a Bunker, or a Missile Turret, or a Planetary Fortress achieves about the same result as it did pre-patch. The units are softened up a good amount and the other defenses can clean them up much easier. vs Protoss this is less true, because they usually harass with less, stronger units, so splash isn't as important, and not taking one unit out initially per Widow Mine is a pretty big hit to their usefulness. In general, I really don't think they are a worthwhile investment to defend against Protoss harassment anymore, because all you are ever going to do is weaken the units and not prevent them from getting in there and doing the damage in the first place. I would rather just use Vikings, or Turrets, or PF's, or Siege Tanks, or Battle Hellions to actually just stop the harassment I expect to come to that location.
A couple extra notes: It's not really useful to defend from early air harassment from T or P early on anymore, another Turret and saving some gas+supply is way better than just damaging the unit and watching it do it's damage afterwards with a Widow Mine.
It's still good for Bum Rushing the opponents army with, where the Splash is the big deal and where Overkill negated the big single target damage anyways. Would have liked to see that aspect nerfed instead of their strength in being a worthwhile investment of supply/resources away from your army.
1. Mines suck defensively against zeals, since they splash your hellions. 2. They are extremely cost efficient against stalkers/immortals, which is what they need to be targeted on. These are the units that the rest of the T army (tanks/hellions) are not efficient against.
IMPORTANT 3. In order to do so, you need to mass them and run them in. This is what Blizzard meant when they said "1s cooldown is for offensive mines". You use them like speedlings, run them in and burrow them right on top of the stalkers/immortals, so that they target only them. BARELY ANY mines should be preburrowed (except maybe like 3-4 to splash zeals as they run in).
Tanks/Vikings are only used in minimal numbers to poke/force engagement (like Tempest). Ghost is necessary against Archon. The point is that mines/hellions are cost efficient against everything P has, given proper targeting, EXCEPT that they have no range, so they require high ranged units to provoke fights.
As a separate point the nerf is not a huge deal with this use case of mines:
120 + 40 splash = dead stalker. So 2 mines still kill 2 stalkers, but 1 mine won't kill 1. 2 mines + 2*40 splash = 320 = dead immortal (300), so immortals are slightly buffed against mines (only needed 2 mines no splash before).
I believe this sort of use of offensive mines is what DKim means when he says people haven't figured out how to use mines/the new meta.
On December 20 2012 14:12 codonbyte wrote: I agree, HotS is looking pretty grim for Terran. Unless it improves a lot by the time it's released, I don't think I'll be buying it. It's a shame. I got into BW just before SC2 came out. I sucked at it big-time, but it was loads of fun and it just felt really, really balanced. I got the impression that whoever made it really knew what they were doing when it came to game balance. What happened to the Blizzard that made BW? The more live-streams and pro-games I watch, the more it seems like Blizzard's radio just isn't quite picking up all of the channels. Here's to hoping they fix their antenna by the time Legacy of the Void comes out.
They got old and retired. BW is 15 years old
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Metzen He's doing quite well, Metzen is currently the Senior Vice President of Story and Franchise Development at Blizzard Entertainment and has assisted the company's projects by providing voice talent for a number of characters, as well as contributing to artistic character design.
James Phinney has gone onto develop Guild Wars series.
don't you all think that one shotting drops and warp prism was pretty overpowered? (or in the sense that it makes drop play not so viable considering the risk and return) I reckon the nerf is too strong against toss but it is a good nerf against terran and zerg because nothing much has changed. It's good to have drop play back as well.
Blizzard just needs to figure out what changes are needed to buff it against the toss
The widow mine was a 20s build time originally, then they nerfed, buffed, and renerfed certain stats... i think the 125 damage is reasonable now, but it needs to be 30s build time and 1 supply if it is going to be weak.
what role is blizzard designing the mine for offensive or defensive? because i mostly use mines for defence(i put 2-5 mines at chokes around expansions and 1-2 with turrets at drop/harass spots in base), i only use them offensively when I'm going mech and doing a siege push have a bunch of mines available.
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 15:27 ETisME wrote: don't you all think that one shotting drops and warp prism was pretty overpowered? (or in the sense that it makes drop play not so viable considering the risk and return) I reckon the nerf is too strong against toss but it is a good nerf against terran and zerg because nothing much has changed. It's good to have drop play back as well.
Euhm, what?
Widow mines were never capable of one-shotting warp prisms. I don't know where you got that idea. They were capable of one-shotting medivacs, but with the improved medivac, especially boost, I really didnt think that drops werent possible anymore, still dropped in TvT opponents to death.
And how would it be a good nerf against erran and zerg if nothing changes? Now you are saying that the nerf isnt needed against toss, and doesnt do anything against zerg and terran. Well in that case just dont do the nerf.
Anyway the main problem is that blizzard first needs to define the role of the widow mine. They don't have a clue which role it should fulfill, so the balance changes are going all over the place. Initially we had the shredder. The shredders role was defending outlying positions, but was removed because surpringly everyone dropped them in enemy mineral lines.
Now we got widow mines, they are pretty bad at defending outlying positiongs, and still dropped into enemy mineral lines. Blizzard claimed it was to help siege tanks with defending flanks, similar to mines in BW. However they are not practical for that. You can use them en mass on your flanks to slow down an enemy, but while that is fine for essentially free mines, you arent going to make large minefields when they cost money and population.
With the recent changes I get the idea blizzards wants them used as shown a few times: Select all mines, run into enemy army, burrow. Single target nerf is pretty big if you use that against toss air for example, less if you do it against a zerg army. But the main question should first be: Do you want that to be the primary role of the widow mine? I dont, not that anyone cares about what I think . That imo it shouldnt be the primary role, doesnt mean it never should be possible, but should they be optimized for that?
It really wasnt that bad. People were starting to figure out how to deal with them and they were becoming less and less effective. Only problem that people were complaining about was it hitting mutas beside that it fine and it is STILL 1 shot mutas so I dont understand this change at all.
The mine is grossly overpowered in a lot of situations, and too strong against zerg in general. They're not going to completely break a match up just so that you can chose your favourite unit composition everytime.
I think the splash damage is what needs to go. Make it stronger, with less splash, and it'll be easier to balance towards usefulness vs P, without it being overpowered vs Z.
On December 20 2012 17:58 Arco wrote: Not even Spider Mines one shot units like the Dragoon in SC:BW. I really like the change. I'd like to see them up the splash damage, though!
Or down the supply to 1 and down the damages to 80. This way, more mines field, less random 1 hit shot mutas, and gives a better map control... it's just so much better.
On December 20 2012 17:55 MilesTeg wrote: The mine is grossly overpowered in a lot of situations, and too strong against zerg in general. They're not going to completely break a match up just so that you can chose your favourite unit composition everytime.
I think the splash damage is what needs to go. Make it stronger, with less splash, and it'll be easier to balance towards usefulness vs P, without it being overpowered vs Z.
The widow mine is only overpowered if you dont get or dont know what detection is and like to clump units into one big ball before a-moving.
they should finally remove the luckbased single target damage completely and give the mine 2 splash modes:
ground splash: sth. like 60 dmg so that 3 mines kill all zealots, stalker, roaches, marauder etc.
and air splash: sth. like 30 dmg to that mines severely damage mass air units without negating airplay.
while reducing the supply cost to 1 supply and removing the upgrade that lets them burrow in 1 sec...they are mines and for defensive purposes. not to shift-click-burrow 20 mines under a super expensive opponent army.
On December 20 2012 17:55 MilesTeg wrote: The mine is grossly overpowered in a lot of situations, and too strong against zerg in general. They're not going to completely break a match up just so that you can chose your favourite unit composition everytime.
I think the splash damage is what needs to go. Make it stronger, with less splash, and it'll be easier to balance towards usefulness vs P, without it being overpowered vs Z.
The widow mine is only overpowered if you dont get or dont know what detection is and like to clump units into one big ball before a-moving.
That's not OP. OP is when a unit is able to shut down entire tech trees, think Gatling gun vs. Viking horde. Example, widow mines hitting cloaked units and range 12 for 500 damage.
The drilling claw upgrade give the widow mine unparalleled flexibility to use as either an offensive, defensive or support role. I love Ryung's dynamic use of widow mines to ambush, assault and contain his opponents.
On December 20 2012 17:58 Arco wrote: Not even Spider Mines one shot units like the Dragoon in SC:BW. I really like the change. I'd like to see them up the splash damage, though!
Spider mines in BW were essentially free (or at least part of a package deal) and didnt take population. Are you really comparing them 1 on 1 to HotS spider mines?
On December 20 2012 17:11 ledarsi wrote: 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.
Come on, Blings are super-cool, and can cause so much tension in a match. Absolutely awesome unit. Just listen to the reaction of the crowd when some bling-bombs explode under a whole group of marines...
i wont use them just because they destroy my own units and this happends not because of me. i just cant give my opponent ability to destroy my own units. well, they're pretty good alone, but this is not "core" unit, as blizzard wanted.. funny that only mines cant be added to deathball, since hellbats, vipers, oracles, tempest and locusts is designed right for improve deathball power
On December 20 2012 17:58 Arco wrote: Not even Spider Mines one shot units like the Dragoon in SC:BW. I really like the change. I'd like to see them up the splash damage, though!
Spider mines in BW were essentially free (or at least part of a package deal) and didnt take population. Are you really comparing them 1 on 1 to HotS spider mines?
this!
you had 3 of them and a vulture for just 75 minerals and no gas at all
I think the only way to save the Widow Mine conceptually at this point is to make it an effective tool against Protoss, while making it less effective against Zerg. The Mine is far too powerful at shutting down Zerg harass, while very weak against Protoss harass. The best compromise to me seems to make it deal more damage, removing the splash, and making it more mass-able.
-Reduce to 1 supply -Buff primary target damage to a number high enough to kill all protoss gateway units (170-ish) -Remove the splash damage -Remove ability to hit air -Possibly return the ability to hit air through an upgrade at the same tech level as Drilling Claws. Possibly swap Drilling Claws with this upgrade.
Widow mines are currently terrible. They do nothing to promote positional play. The 1 second burrow upgrade just allows them to be used in a deathball...yay.
The Widow Mine was overly powerful before, and now is just powerful. They said in their explaination that they didn't like it 1 hitting things like the Banshees. Now it still does a ton of damage. After the patch it still (1 shots mutas, 1 shots huge groups of lings, 1 shots Banelings, 1 shots Infestors, 1 shots hydras, 1 shots all workers, 1 shots Sentries, 1 shot observers, 1 shots High templar and Dark templar, and it 1 shots interceptors). I don't really see why the OP of this thread and many others think that this unit needs to 1 shot everything in the game. They are still strong. Your argument about sample size can also be used against you, there isn't a big enough sample size to say one way or the other. Blizzard is just trying stuff out, they are making a ton of changes. Expect more to come.
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
1 mine will defend against every harass if it would be from terran (since warp prism already survived widow mines), who goes right over the single mine every time. Realistically you have to ring your entire base with mines if you want to do this, meaning you simply lose the game.
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.
or you need two mines that are 4 supply 150 minerals and 50 gas to kill one 1 supply 100 minerals unit. 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
why does everybody compare 1 mine to 1 zealot? you can also compare 5 mines to kill 15 zealots. everybody forgets the splash (which imo should be raised while removing the luckbased singletarget damage and removing air hitting from the mine).
its because with detection mines are not hard to deal with for protoss and the supply of the mine is too high. 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.
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.
Yeah I'm kinda disappointing with HOTS at the moment since Bio once again seems to be the better choice in all match-ups really.
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.
I'm a casual player and I was lucky enough to get onto the beta.
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.
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.
at the moment I don't see any reasons to buy hots as terran (maybe the single player is fun ^.^). We got no units who will solve any of the terran problems: - 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!
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.
Just a note to people asking for a splash damage increase. While it does seem like a better role for the unit, due to the fact that T splash damage hurts friendly units, any decent splash upgrade will not only help clear out your hellions/hellbats/buffer units in engagements, but it also means you cant use mines anywhere near your mineral line... SCV's barely survive atm, but if they buffed splash, 1 banshee/muta/phoenix would drag a mine into you scv's for a great trade.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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?
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.
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.
people were asking for the lurker and the spider mine in hots, and browder thought it would be "cool" to come up with a mix and introduced that bullshit widow mine (which isn't even a mine as you pointed out). It's so flawed, random and poorly thought that I wouldn't mind to see it completely removed, because at this point they hurt terrans more than protosses.
On December 20 2012 17:11 ledarsi wrote: 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.
lol when was last time you watch a tournament ? Baneling is prolly the most exciting unit in the game for a viewer. As for the player : shrug, it take micro to use properly to get good hits, isnt a A move unit.
As for the window mine, I could suggest one or both of these change : 1. I would also give the mine a range upgrade (either research and just buff) but dont touch their burrow vision. So if your mine is burrowed, it will have an actual fire range of 3 (or w/e it is now), but with support or a scan that give you vision, your burrowed mine would have a much bigger range. 2 .I would lower the dmg, increase the fire rate and keep the same dps.
I dont play terran so maybe I am way off, but I think key to this unit balance is range vs vision. Pretty much like siege tank, where they need vision from something else to reach their full range.
I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
The widow mine is shit against every unit. 40 second cooldown on the missle. Less range than anything that actually has a ranged attack. Very slow unit. Very bad unit. Very bad design.
Make it powerful, but able to be dodged like a seeker missile.
I made a thread a while ago about reusing the seeker missile mechanic for the widow mine, allowing you to pull out the targeted unit to minimize the splash. If you give it its un-nerfed damage, and increase splash to 60, but allow the opponent to split out the targeted unit, you can let it hit air because stuff like mutas and dropships would be able to either dodge the mine by dragging it out of range as soon as it activates (which would slow down the drop allowing the defender to respond) or drag it into the mineral line, creating a risk/reward for putting it near your workers.
Im envisioning a speed that can be dodged by most units and a drag range of ~2 or 3 after the mine triggers from range 5. The mine would start very slow, but would speed up a tiny bit as it approached its target. So if a zealot saw a widow mine activate when it got within 5 range, the zealot could turn and run immediately and get to range 8 before the mine got to the zealot, causing the mine to fizzle and do no damage.
Try dodging 6-10 mines in the middle of an engagement though.
If the opponent doesnt micro, they will lose big time, as it should be.
Blizzard needs to realize that micro can be a balancing factor and not just an unbalancing factor. Having units be dependent on good control is good for the game.
agree shouldn't focus on 1 Zealot but 1 hallucinated Zealot, taking down 4 supply for some time if you don't pay attention. Bit to late now though, they will need those 3 month to solidify the balance by tweaking some stats and analyzing a stable meta game.
Still tanks basically do 1 or 2 shots in starcraft 2, so the mine is basically a more supply efficient tank and especially works against air.
Would have liked the mine being single use and costing no supply.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
The widow mine is shit against every unit. 40 second cooldown on the missle. Less range than anything that actually has a ranged attack. Very slow unit. Very bad unit. Very bad design.
It has range 5, which is the exact same range as a marine, sentry and more than a roach. It moves almost as fast as a stalker or the same speed as a worker. WTF are you talking about?
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
How about we give the Hellion a cloak ability that needs it to be stationary.
That way, with blueflame, the Hellion could become a cloaked line aoe unit that deals 20 concussive damage.
We could call it a lurker
I remember BW, lurkers were awesome at controlling space. Just give Hellions cloak and they'll be exactly like the lurker--except cheaper!
TLDR:
Numbers can always be tweaked--the problem with the widow mine is that lack of commitment. If the point is single target damage--then commit to balance around that. If the goal is to have decent short range cloaked AoE--commit to balancing that.
This wishy washy high, not too high single target with good, not too good, is it too good, aoe crap is just stretching the unit in too many directions. It also needs a name change to stop people whining about it being a mine.
I agree the widow mine nerf was stupid and makes it far too weak. They need to completely remake the unit and focus it to be better against single units but not so good against groups of small units...
The unit is silly now, it's good against lings and marines etc. but terran already dominates those with hellions/hellbats... Terran doesn't need board control agianst them.. Terran needs a bit of board control against high hp amored units like roaches and stalkers!
Widow mine should really just be 25m25g 1 supply and die on being used. High damage to single target (enough to kill stalker/zealot) but little splash. I don't think it should be hitting air either as terran has enough options agianst that but that wouldn't be too bad. The widow mine role is completley silly now, it only works as board control agianst units you don't need it... The terran updates so far have really been the proof David Kim is terrible at improving this game..
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
While this is a good point, the more mines you burrow the more investment it is, especially in supply tied. Cluster 4 mines in one place, you might deal a lot of damage or he might spot them with an observer and clear them with a few colossus shots. Losing 8 supply for nothing is a big deal, especially since mech isn't as supply efficient as it used to be in BW. Previously even 1 mine had the potential to make a difference, and it wasn't that much of an investment either.
The way Blizzard is balancing mines, its becoming clearer that their main purpose will be to be used as part of the deathball, to ambush in the middle of the fight and deal as much splash damage as possible. While they are really strong when used like this, its kinda lame how little utility mines end up providing. They're just a part of your main army that works a little different.
Lots of people aren't considering that the mine takes 2 supply and only attacks once per 40 seconds. It's a terrible unit that causes you to outright lose engagements for what you're paying as far as supply and cost.
It needs to be turned into an actual mine like the spider-mine.
On December 21 2012 03:59 Markwerf wrote: Widow mine should really just be 25m25g 1 supply and die on being used. High damage to single target (enough to kill stalker/zealot) but little splash. I don't think it should be hitting air either as terran has enough options agianst that but that wouldn't be too bad. The widow mine role is completley silly now, it only works as board control agianst units you don't need it... The terran updates so far have really been the proof David Kim is terrible at improving this game..
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
the problem is that it will always be a lame unit as long as you have to take production time from your factories to build it. disposable mines can't use up production time, wish is why widow mines don't suicide. but if they make them suicide units, they have to make other units produce them, which is too similar to brood war. they have pretty much designed themselves into a corner.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
Space or area control is a really vague term that people use to describe how they feel the unit function. When people say area control, I think envision a unit that kills a lot of units for minimal supply cost, rather than a unit that provides information, damages small groups of units or delays impending attacks.
If you think about it, a pylon can control space for a protoss if used correctly. It can be use to spot expansion, armies and deny drops if the protoss is willing and able to warp in enough units. The widow mine can still do that by providing vision and maybe damaging a drop on a well known drop path(think that path on cloud kingdom, you know the one). Controlling space is more of a vague term in which the player is givin the ability to respond to an army or makes it so the his opponent has to really be careful how they move.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
Space or area control is a really vague term that people use to describe how they feel the unit function. When people say area control, I think envision a unit that kills a lot of units for minimal supply cost, rather than a unit that provides information, damages small groups of units or delays impending attacks.
If you think about it, a pylon can control space for a protoss if used correctly. It can be use to spot expansion, armies and deny drops if the protoss is willing and able to warp in enough units. The widow mine can still do that by providing vision and maybe damaging a drop on a well known drop path(think that path on cloud kingdom, you know the one). Controlling space is more of a vague term in which the player is givin the ability to respond to an army or makes it so the his opponent has to really be careful how they move.
Your definition is wrong actually; by space control he means zone control. Something providing zone/board control makes it dangerous to go within a certain area. A Python will never provide zone control, as there's no reasonable threat for walking near it. By your definition every unit in the game with a sight radius (all of them) and every building with a sight radius (all of them) would provide zone control. This is 100% wrong.
Additionally you really need to stop defending the Widow Mine. It's been the worst new unit in a game for a long time now ever since they fixed the Oracle months ago. It's badly conceived in an attempt to distance itself from it's predecessor, more useful during all-ins and the early-mid game where Terran doesn't need help, and invites you to lose every engagement after 20 minutes.
As a part of fixing Terran if Blizzard were to change the Widow Mine to how it should be (disposable) and to fix the Tank you'd see the quality of the matchups and esports go up substantially overall. Why? Because the return of proper zone control would be back which makes significantly more interesting games as opposed to the current situation of "There's a tank line? I'll just make another round of Zealots and a-move through it" or "He made mines to defend his expansions? I'll just a-move his main and he loses automatically".
Anyways back on solely the Widow Mine even a baby could understand the concept of the mine causing supply indirectly promotes deathballing from both sides ("mines cost significant supply, so if I a-move his main I automatically win", and "Despite naturally I could use mines to defend my expansions if I don't keep my mines with my army then I might lose'"), so this is all really sad on Blizzard's part for not understanding, or not caring.
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
Space or area control is a really vague term that people use to describe how they feel the unit function. When people say area control, I think envision a unit that kills a lot of units for minimal supply cost, rather than a unit that provides information, damages small groups of units or delays impending attacks.
If you think about it, a pylon can control space for a protoss if used correctly. It can be use to spot expansion, armies and deny drops if the protoss is willing and able to warp in enough units. The widow mine can still do that by providing vision and maybe damaging a drop on a well known drop path(think that path on cloud kingdom, you know the one). Controlling space is more of a vague term in which the player is givin the ability to respond to an army or makes it so the his opponent has to really be careful how they move.
Your definition is wrong actually; by space control he means zone control. Something providing zone/board control makes it dangerous to go within a certain area. A Python will never provide zone control, as there's no reasonable threat for walking near it. By your definition every unit in the game with a sight radius (all of them) and every building with a sight radius (all of them) would provide zone control. This is 100% wrong.
Additionally you really need to stop defending the Widow Mine. It's been the worst new unit in a game for a long time now ever since they fixed the Oracle months ago.
Typing I am wrong does not prove me wrong, though if wishing made it so. Plyons allow the protoss to warp in units, which allow them to deny movement around the map if they make good decisions with their warp ins. We have all seen the warp in wars in professional games, where a terran send 3 marines to kill a proxy pylon, the protoss warps in 2 stalkers to counter them and so on. It is not the best area control, but it is a level of control of a specific space.
And I will continue to defend the widow mine. I have always felt it was a unit with a lot of potential if used well, in the hands of intelligent, creative players with the mechanics to back it up. I have seen it used well and think it has a lot of potential.
PS: I don’t have time to keep up with your re-editing of your post. Clearly you feel strongly about the matter. I don’t agree with you in any way, but you’re entitled to think what you think.
On December 20 2012 13:30 avilo wrote: So, the last patch nerfed the widow mine...what was the reasoning for this? The widow mine cannot even take out a single zealot now, nor a roach, etc.
Blizzard are beyond reasoning. They buffed the strongest unit- the infestor by adding a +1 range to it WHILE buffing the other t2/3 zerg unit - the mutalisk WHILE buffing a t3 unit - the ultralisk. Seems like we haven't seen enough zergs. To the ones who are still going to play the game: cheers.
not build a single widow mine since patch, i dont see it worthwhile building a 2 supply unit, that gets outranged by everything that has a long cooldown, vs zerg it can still be useful at times, vs p its a joke, stellar addon for terrans =)
On December 20 2012 13:30 avilo wrote: So, the last patch nerfed the widow mine...what was the reasoning for this? The widow mine cannot even take out a single zealot now, nor a roach, etc.
Blizzard are beyond reasoning. They buffed the strongest unit- the infestor by adding a +1 range to it WHILE buffing the other t2/3 zerg unit - the mutalisk WHILE buffing a t3 unit - the ultralisk. Seems like we haven't seen enough zergs. To the ones who are still going to play the game: cheers.
It's really quite humorous, and some people are actually surprised as to pre-orders being canceled and the community being in an uproar.
On December 21 2012 05:19 {ToT}ColmA wrote: not build a single widow mine since patch, i dont see it worthwhile building a 2 supply unit, that gets outranged by everything that has a long cooldown, vs zerg it can still be useful at times, vs p its a joke, stellar addon for terrans =)
Excellent choice on your part. You're more likely to lose the game if you have Widow Mines on the map past the early game, because it's advertised as being zone control, but if you don't have them with your army you outright lose.
I'm kind of torn with the mine. I feel like the 2 supply is to much for a unit that has a 50/50 chance not to do anything at all. At the same time though, it's hard to judge the unit when Tanks perform so bad in TvP (play mech). If tanks were better, then maybe 2,3 tanks with 3 or so mines might make for decent space control.
In TvT and TvZ they are good i think. T/Z units have lower HP so mines are more supply efficient, but also Z and T don't have invisible detectors so mistakes in control with Raves and Overseers are punished.
I dont understand the aversion to buffing the battlecruiser. Especially v.s. Air. It absolutely sucks vs mutas and corruptors. Yamato also takes fucking forever to cast.
On December 21 2012 06:02 krell wrote: I dont understand the aversion to buffing the battlecruiser. Especially v.s. Air. It absolutely sucks vs mutas and corruptors. Yamato also takes fucking forever to cast.
I'd rather have an iconic unit like the BC get over buffed than the freaking infestor .
On December 21 2012 05:43 raf3776 wrote: The only change that needs to be done is reduce the supply cost.
it would still suck.. Needs supply cost and prrice reduce
They need to be cheaper and more efficient that marines, with the supply of zerglings, but keep the same stats! It the only way for them to be viable! 1.5 worth supply in units destroying colossus if they hit directly…
On December 21 2012 06:02 krell wrote: I dont understand the aversion to buffing the battlecruiser. Especially v.s. Air. It absolutely sucks vs mutas and corruptors. Yamato also takes fucking forever to cast.
I'd rather have an iconic unit like the BC get over buffed than the freaking infestor .
Blizzard wants to promote the NEW units they designed in WOL/HOTS. They probably WANT to see mass infestors... oh wait, then why do they not like the widow mine?
On December 21 2012 05:43 raf3776 wrote: The only change that needs to be done is reduce the supply cost.
it would still suck.. Needs supply cost and prrice reduce
They need to be cheaper and more efficient that marines, with the supply of zerglings, but keep the same stats! It the only way for them to be viable! 1.5 worth supply in units destroying colossus if they hit directly…
One voidray can destroy 100 supply of siege tanks, nerf voidray, or stop theorycrafting impossible situations?
Edit: I remember a TvP where the terran won because the toss managed to get his initial colossi almost killed by a single missile turret while walking right past it, and quickly finished by some stimmed bio (yes that was a pro game): Nerf missile turrets against colossi?
On December 21 2012 03:20 Plansix wrote: I love this thread so much because it focus on a single zealot vs a widow mine. Like somehow doing one way damage is bad or that leaving a zealot with 30 health and still being unable to attack the mine without detection is terrible. Or that the following trades are somehow bad with smart targeting:
1 Zealot vs 1 mine = zealot with 30 health 2 zealots vs 2 mines = 2 dead zealots 3 zealtos vs 3 mines = 3 dead zealots and a ton of overkill.
1 Stalker vs 1 mine = 1 stalker with 40 health 2 stalker vs 2 mines = 2 dead stalkers 3 salkers vs 3 mines = 3 dead stalkers
3 mines vs 1 Colossus = one dead colossus
The only thing the widow mine does not trade super efficently with in a single, high hitpoint unit moving by itself, without detection. Even then, the widow mine has to be solo, with no unit in the area to respond and the unit it hits has to somehow also have detection.
So yeah, the a single mine is terrible against a single zealot backed up by an observer or Baby-core, if you don't unburrow it and run away from the zealot.
Your post needs two big Asterisks
*These ratio's are only true if your opponent doesn't spread his units at all
**Widow Mines will overkill if you try and target units yourself
Nah, it is pretty much implied that AOE damage can be mitigated by spreading out your units. And there is only so much speading can do if the mines are placed is a good spot. Unless you expect them to trade efficently when placed in an open field.
When do you expect them to be effective? How do you use them, or how are people using them against you that makes you feel so strongly that they are great.
They have done some real damage when placed at the top of a ramp at the choke of the natural. I had some zealot stalker pressure pretty much shut down by 2 mines and a bunker at a natural expansion earlier this week. The mines did not kill the everything, but did so much damage to the zealots I did not continue the push.
I also had two mines wreck some oracles earlier this week. They take the wind out of any oracle harass since they cut right through more than half their HP and the splash also hurts.
When the mines are used by themselves they are not really scary, but when backed up by anything at all, they seem to bring the fear of losing a lot more units than you thought you were going to.
I feel the same way. They are more of a "part of the army" unit rather then the space control they were advertised to be.
Space or area control is a really vague term that people use to describe how they feel the unit function. When people say area control, I think envision a unit that kills a lot of units for minimal supply cost, rather than a unit that provides information, damages small groups of units or delays impending attacks.
If you think about it, a pylon can control space for a protoss if used correctly. It can be use to spot expansion, armies and deny drops if the protoss is willing and able to warp in enough units. The widow mine can still do that by providing vision and maybe damaging a drop on a well known drop path(think that path on cloud kingdom, you know the one). Controlling space is more of a vague term in which the player is givin the ability to respond to an army or makes it so the his opponent has to really be careful how they move.
Your definition is wrong actually; by space control he means zone control. Something providing zone/board control makes it dangerous to go within a certain area. A Python will never provide zone control, as there's no reasonable threat for walking near it. By your definition every unit in the game with a sight radius (all of them) and every building with a sight radius (all of them) would provide zone control. This is 100% wrong.
Additionally you really need to stop defending the Widow Mine. It's been the worst new unit in a game for a long time now ever since they fixed the Oracle months ago.
Typing I am wrong does not prove me wrong, though if wishing made it so. Plyons allow the protoss to warp in units, which allow them to deny movement around the map if they make good decisions with their warp ins. We have all seen the warp in wars in professional games, where a terran send 3 marines to kill a proxy pylon, the protoss warps in 2 stalkers to counter them and so on. It is not the best area control, but it is a level of control of a specific space.
And I will continue to defend the widow mine. I have always felt it was a unit with a lot of potential if used well, in the hands of intelligent, creative players with the mechanics to back it up. I have seen it used well and think it has a lot of potential.
PS: I don’t have time to keep up with your re-editing of your post. Clearly you feel strongly about the matter. I don’t agree with you in any way, but you’re entitled to think what you think.
It's actually a very strong form of zone control and is the main defense of drops in PvT, and the main way to prevent runbys in PvZ.
Offensively, "looking the pylon" game is actually an interesting minimap show where you see dots dancing around each other like dog fighting ace pilots trying to get the upper hand.
This is irrelevant to your discourse on Widow Mines--just clarification on the strength of Pylons for zone control.
On December 21 2012 05:43 raf3776 wrote: The only change that needs to be done is reduce the supply cost.
it would still suck.. Needs supply cost and prrice reduce
They need to be cheaper and more efficient that marines, with the supply of zerglings, but keep the same stats! It the only way for them to be viable! 1.5 worth supply in units destroying colossus if they hit directly…
One voidray can destroy 100 supply of siege tanks, nerf voidray, or stop theorycrafting impossible situations?
Edit: I remember a TvP where the terran won because the toss managed to get his initial colossi almost killed by a single missile turret while walking right past it, and quickly finished by some stimmed bio (yes that was a pro game): Nerf missile turrets against colossi?
The more I read discussions about Widow Mines the more I want it to be a lategame building and the less I want it to be a factory unit.
I just wanted to make a comment on the reasons for terran buying the game.
I am VERY dissapointed with heart of the swarm so far, it doesn't even seem like a new game, just a small patch. Terran one the most "diverse" race, is easily just not anymore. With the "addition" of -Hellbats "Isn't really a new unit" -Widow mine "Like the spider mine, so really not new"
Like I would serious like to know what the fuck Blizzard has been doing for two years. They make lack luster patches, and take forever to balance their own damn game. I for one will not be buying HoTs if this is what the finished product looks like.
On December 21 2012 08:16 VPVanek wrote: I just wanted to make a comment on the reasons for terran buying the game.
I am VERY dissapointed with heart of the swarm so far, it doesn't even seem like a new game, just a small patch. Terran one the most "diverse" race, is easily just not anymore. With the "addition" of -Hellbats "Isn't really a new unit" -Widow mine "Like the spider mine, so really not new"
Like I would serious like to know what the fuck Blizzard has been doing for two years. They make lack luster patches, and take forever to balance their own damn game. I for one will not be buying HoTs if this is what the finished product looks like.
Not saying that you're wrong--but Widow mine is more similar to a lurker than a spidermine. Just because its called a mine doesn't mean it acts like it. So it is "new" but it's also "not really"
On December 21 2012 08:16 VPVanek wrote: I just wanted to make a comment on the reasons for terran buying the game.
I am VERY dissapointed with heart of the swarm so far, it doesn't even seem like a new game, just a small patch. Terran one the most "diverse" race, is easily just not anymore. With the "addition" of -Hellbats "Isn't really a new unit" -Widow mine "Like the spider mine, so really not new"
Like I would serious like to know what the fuck Blizzard has been doing for two years. They make lack luster patches, and take forever to balance their own damn game. I for one will not be buying HoTs if this is what the finished product looks like.
Not saying that you're wrong--but Widow mine is more similar to a lurker than a spidermine. Just because its called a mine doesn't mean it acts like it. So it is "new" but it's also "not really"
Yeah, I agree. Was just trying to get at the whole point of these new "ideas" are just recycled concepts.. Maybe they've been looking at the COD franchise for guidance.. oh wait!
Well the statement that terran gets nothing in HoTs is simply awful.
Even if terran got 0 new upgrades of units in HOTS, you are paying for the complete game. Everyone will be playing HOTS instead of WOL.
Terran players should consider themselves lucky, They dont get anything added because there are no obvious tools terran is lacking. Blizzard is obviously giving mech some serious thought, it will take time for them to find the right approach.
Protoss had NO effecitve way of dealing with Fungal / Broodlord. They also had no decent harassment unit. If protoss had these in WoL i would be content with not getting new units.
On December 21 2012 08:16 VPVanek wrote: I just wanted to make a comment on the reasons for terran buying the game.
I am VERY dissapointed with heart of the swarm so far, it doesn't even seem like a new game, just a small patch. Terran one the most "diverse" race, is easily just not anymore. With the "addition" of -Hellbats "Isn't really a new unit" -Widow mine "Like the spider mine, so really not new"
Like I would serious like to know what the fuck Blizzard has been doing for two years. They make lack luster patches, and take forever to balance their own damn game. I for one will not be buying HoTs if this is what the finished product looks like.
Not saying that you're wrong--but Widow mine is more similar to a lurker than a spidermine. Just because its called a mine doesn't mean it acts like it. So it is "new" but it's also "not really"
Yeah, I agree. Was just trying to get at the whole point of these new "ideas" are just recycled concepts.. Maybe they've been looking at the COD franchise for guidance.. oh wait!
As much as "serious" gamers would like to make fun of CoD, it's still the big dog of game sales much like WoW is the big dog of subscription sales. No amount of LoL viewerships will eclipse how much money Blizz gets from monthly subscriptions, no amount of "quality esports" will outdo CoD's ability to move merchandise.
I agree that Terran is hurting, and I am pained to try to find a good reason to get HotS outside of loyalty and wanting to keep pace with the metagame. But I know, much like you know, that we're all going to get HotS. Not because we think its good--but if we honestly wanted to stop playing we'd not be on Team Liquid talking about SC2 right now.
The Hellion change is good because its them manning the fuck up and actually committing to a Terran identity. Transformational/multipurpose units. If they simply stick with this theme, they will be guided by game flavor into more interesting game mechanics. (Just look at how Wizardsofthecoast does the same with the development of MTG cards)
Stick to a holistic theme, let that determine kernels of ideas, balance those ideas to fit gameplay.
Trying to find ways to "fix TvP" directly is awful. Finding ways to make Terran "more Terran" is awesome. The Widow mine is stuck in this "how do we make it work in TvP without breaking the other matches?" and all we have is this blob of metal that does not feel like a terran unit.
Trying to find ways to "fix TvP" directly is awful. Finding ways to make Terran "more Terran" is awesome. The Widow mine is stuck in this "how do we make it work in TvP without breaking the other matches?" and all we have is this blob of metal that does not feel like a terran unit.
Agreed. Blizzard seems absolutely obsessed with their new units, even though they are really terrible compared to the old BW units. Roach, Infestor, Immortal, Colossus, Thor, Widow Mine, etc. They took out or nerfed into the ground core, race-defining units like the Siege Tank, Lurker, Defiler, Reaver... And they really, really want everyone to use their new units all the bloody time, even though they suck in terms of gameplay.
Back to the drawing board, Blizzard. You're charging full price for the expansion anyway. For $40 we expect you to do more than add approximately 2 new units. We want you to fix everything we have been dissatisfied with since the WoL beta, but which you were too stuck in your ways to change. If the HOTS Beta isn't the time to make these big changes, then they'll never happen.
This mindset is the reason why people were freaking out over the future of SC2 so much, with the entire "SaveHOTS" debacle. As much as the big patch put a bandaid on Blizzard's PR nightmare, and made it go away temporarily, the underlying, core problem of dissatisfaction with the new design remains.
The mine already made ling/bane/muta completely useless and for that I would much rather see it removed completely in favor of something else. Terran has plenty of area control already.
On December 20 2012 13:44 RavenLoud wrote: Nerfed damage but with 1 supply is ideal imo.
this is just what I thought... I'd rather see minefields zoning out areas, than single mines zoning out. In the current build I dont feel any of two is possible
On December 21 2012 10:13 Cereb wrote: The mine already made ling/bane/muta completely useless and for that I would much rather see it removed completely in favor of something else. Terran has plenty of area control already.
At this point, so close to release, a removal of Widow Mine would just mean 1 fewer unit for Terran in HotS.
On December 21 2012 10:13 Cereb wrote: The mine already made ling/bane/muta completely useless and for that I would much rather see it removed completely in favor of something else. Terran has plenty of area control already.
At this point, so close to release, a removal of Widow Mine would just mean 1 fewer unit for Terran in HotS.
As it did with warhound - that didn't stop Blizzard. And if anything it's hellbat that could use removing. It's whole purpose of existence is now gone with mech TvP apparently not being worked on.
On December 21 2012 10:13 Cereb wrote: The mine already made ling/bane/muta completely useless and for that I would much rather see it removed completely in favor of something else. Terran has plenty of area control already.
At this point, so close to release, a removal of Widow Mine would just mean 1 fewer unit for Terran in HotS.
As it did with warhound - that didn't stop Blizzard. And if anything it's hellbat that could use removing. It's whole purpose of existence is now gone with mech TvP apparently not being worked on.
I thought it was also supposed to be a supplemental unit to late-game bio to help out with the need for chargelot kiting. I haven't had the chance to try it though since every protoss insists on 1 and 2 base all-ins... I seriously have yet to play a game that gets past 12 minutes without something stupid happening.
Widow mines were nerfed because blizzard thought it was dumb that they could 1shot banshees and other harass units, which shut down early game harassment. They mention this in their thoughts on patch 10 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7416062724#1
I don't think it's too big a change. I'm a terran player who plays in masters in HotS, and I still use mines in TvZ and TvT. If protoss are doing 1 base allins mines can be useful there too. Who's going to blink into a base full of mines?
On December 20 2012 14:12 codonbyte wrote: I agree, HotS is looking pretty grim for Terran. Unless it improves a lot by the time it's released, I don't think I'll be buying it. It's a shame. I got into BW just before SC2 came out. I sucked at it big-time, but it was loads of fun and it just felt really, really balanced. I got the impression that whoever made it really knew what they were doing when it came to game balance. What happened to the Blizzard that made BW? The more live-streams and pro-games I watch, the more it seems like Blizzard's radio just isn't quite picking up all of the channels. Here's to hoping they fix their antenna by the time Legacy of the Void comes out.
On December 20 2012 14:15 SuperYo1000 wrote: They got old and retired. BW is 15 years old
Indeed, those guys are gone, we're stuck with some fool from the C&C team. I honestly think someone who loved and understood BW without a background working on lesser RTS games would do a much better job. But the money men look for direct experience first when hiring. It's sold well so they consider them a successful team (it says Starcraft on the box, it was always going to sell...). The game design team is not anything like that that brought us BW. It's a shame as the engine certainly looks and feels the part, but they turn out some terrible units and spells but just don't seem able to comprehend why some of what they're doing is just plain bad. I don't think there's any malice there, they want the game to be great but they don't fully understand what made BW so, they're proud of some of the bad things in WoL and they don't seem to know which of the myriad voices from the community to listen to.
We seem to be back to the early WoL pattern of nerfing or removing anything that's feels difficult to handle in a small sample of games at a relatively low skill level. While on the other-hand terribly designed swiss army knife spell fungal stays but they try to balance the numbers on it. Not to mention wanting to see the end of the mothership so making a baby mother ship an essential part of the Protoss opening... The current design and balance philosophy is going to end up with a relatively easily figured out boring to watch game with a low skill cap that goes stale before LotV can refresh things again, for a while.
Personally I don't think Terran anti-mech/robo weapons are whats needed, I'd rather see a tank siege mode direct damage buff, some Goliaths and a bit more unit spacing in the game (if only because it'll look better). Then they can get on with bringing back arbiters and coming up with an excuse for why Collosus turned back into Reavers for LotV. But they're too attached to the notion that this is their game and isn't Brood War. Look at the sales figures, they're dong well :|
Now I'm afraid the mammoth tank will roll out a month from now and I'll have to start swearing that that's not what I meant by tank buff..... Desperately hoping for a new RTS or a change to the SC team over at blizard.
On December 21 2012 12:39 ManicMarine wrote: Widow mines were nerfed because blizzard thought it was dumb that they could 1shot banshees and other harass units, which shut down early game harassment. They mention this in their thoughts on patch 10 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7416062724#1
I don't think it's too big a change. I'm a terran player who plays in masters in HotS, and I still use mines in TvZ and TvT. If protoss are doing 1 base allins mines can be useful there too. Who's going to blink into a base full of mines?
On December 21 2012 13:38 mostevil wrote: Now I'm afraid the mammoth tank will roll out a month from now and I'll have to start swearing that that's not what I meant by tank buff..... Desperately hoping for a new RTS or a change to the SC team over at blizard.
Ye gods, he's right.
Asking for a tank buff might prompt them to make a giant Siege Breaker that costs a fortune and is a ridiculous 4 supply or something. These guys are just that stupid.
On December 21 2012 12:39 ManicMarine wrote: Widow mines were nerfed because blizzard thought it was dumb that they could 1shot banshees and other harass units, which shut down early game harassment. They mention this in their thoughts on patch 10 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7416062724#1
I don't think it's too big a change. I'm a terran player who plays in masters in HotS, and I still use mines in TvZ and TvT. If protoss are doing 1 base allins mines can be useful there too. Who's going to blink into a base full of mines?
If you make that many mines and the protoss isnt stupid, he will just double expand after taht cause you cant really be aggressive after making so many mines.
On December 21 2012 12:39 ManicMarine wrote: Widow mines were nerfed because blizzard thought it was dumb that they could 1shot banshees and other harass units, which shut down early game harassment. They mention this in their thoughts on patch 10 http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/7416062724#1
I don't think it's too big a change. I'm a terran player who plays in masters in HotS, and I still use mines in TvZ and TvT. If protoss are doing 1 base allins mines can be useful there too. Who's going to blink into a base full of mines?
If you fill your base with mines you lost anyway, so I dont think it matters that much what the toss will do. But with mummycore in detection mode he probably is barely affected.
And we read why they changed it. And it is stupid, if you lose banshees to widow mines it is your own fault, it is not a reason to make pretty much all toss units survive them. If you have a banshee, either scan enough where mines are or easier, research cloak. These days I go for banshees every TvT, and just yesterday my total number of banshees lost to widow mines has reached the one: someone burrowed two widow mines under my banshee when I wasnt paying attention. So I completely deserved to lose that one, also if he even used one. Besides that it is a matter of remembering where the widow mines got burrowed, sometimes using a scan to kill a few, and pressing cloak when you see one activating to stop it.
On December 21 2012 13:38 mostevil wrote: Now I'm afraid the mammoth tank will roll out a month from now and I'll have to start swearing that that's not what I meant by tank buff..... Desperately hoping for a new RTS or a change to the SC team over at blizard.
I'm happy I'm not the only person that thinks the SC team at Blizzard needs to change.
The Widow Mine is a disaster. It has killed Mutas in TvZ, leading to these odds buffs to Mutalisks that serve to make them stronger in ZvZ and PvZ. And now with a Widow Mine nerf, Mines are even worse vs Protoss but Mutalisks are still hard countered by them.
On December 21 2012 13:38 mostevil wrote: Now I'm afraid the mammoth tank will roll out a month from now and I'll have to start swearing that that's not what I meant by tank buff..... Desperately hoping for a new RTS or a change to the SC team over at blizard.
I'm happy I'm not the only person that thinks the SC team at Blizzard needs to change.
The Widow Mine is a disaster. It has killed Mutas in TvZ, leading to these odds buffs to Mutalisks that serve to make them stronger in ZvZ and PvZ. And now with a Widow Mine nerf, Mines are even worse vs Protoss but Mutalisks are still hard countered by them.
Blizzard needs to cut the crap with the gimmicks.
I agree, but you forgot that early mine rushes prompted Blizzard to give mothership core detection. This will make banshee openers worse.
They are so desperate in finding a new unique role for the widow mine that they are blinded by all the things that it breaks,
Just give us a mine.
High splash damage (100-125), only hits ground units (even cloaked ones), smaller range , suicides on impact. 1 supply !
Simple concept, straightforward to implement. With something like this it would be a very strong unit complementing mech play. Carefully placed mines could deal with blink allins etc.
Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
You have no clue what you're talking about, nor did you even understand the points I was making in the OP. Also, no one good is going to say that Terran is favored in the beta.
And FYI, I already had posted on the pro forums that the medivac was too strong having the speed boost with no drawback, so it seems you're the one getting emotional reading my posts rather than the other way around. Or you're being a sheepherder jumping on the "hate avilo" train. Nice try.
Another FYI, if you had read the original post, I'm not talking about bio TvP, i'm talking about mech TvP.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
I assume you didn't read the OP, or the first sentence of my second paragraph, because what I typed is literally a restatement and then a rebuttle+reasoning. Feel free to quote something to prove otherwise.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency, especially post-patch 10 where it has gotten progressively worse in TvP.
I may start posting anonymously on TL with analysis threads/feedback for beta, because everytime i do there are some idiots that like to derail the thread with their own 12 yr old high school girl hate bullshit.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I was originally very excited about the widow mine. Now, however, I'm of the opinion that it needs to be a mine laying caster and that it should have a synergy with the siege tank.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing.
I'm not a BW specialist, but from what I have seen, they were mostly used to put down mines and then sacrifice them trying to take out as many workers as you could. But might be wrong. Still don't see a unit on which to put a mine.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I agree that all zero supply units cause problems in the game. The infested terran has been nothing but trouble since people started using them and adding any other zero supply units would only open up more balance nightmares. Even a mine, which is single use, would still be a problem. Even if the unit costs no supply, it has to be put down by some thing else, which causes that unit to have to be balanced around the zero supply mine.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Then describe how to use them correctly and the correct timings to use them. Just because your are a good player doesn't mean you don't have to support your arguments. Nobody can respond to an argument of "you just aren't using them well enough!".
Saying nobody played Mech vs P as good as Morrow is really a dumb thing to say. He gave it up because he didn't think it was good, so copying how he played it is a recipe for failure. I'm sure Morrow played well because he was far and away the best player consistently playing the Beta, but that doesn't mean HOW he played Mech vs P was solid or a good style to replicate. Morrow beat most players by just being better than them, you are confusing that with his style being solid in and of itself.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing.
I'm not a BW specialist, but from what I have seen, they were mostly used to put down mines and then sacrifice them trying to take out as many workers as you could. But might be wrong. Still don't see a unit on which to put a mine.
"sacrifice" worker kills had a much larger effect on the game in BW than it does in SC2. Being that it takes so much effort to build, rally, then order units to mine. Even causing them to run away for a bit reduced mining time by a lot since simply box selecting them and right clicking on a mineral node would cause 12 to clump in front of a mineral as they waited for their turn to start mining as if there were no other mineral patches in the line.
It was also the main form of scouting, map awareness, and was able to snipe templars, fake attacks, and keep tab of unit movement across the map. Vultures were a pretty big deal for terran play in BW.
On December 20 2012 14:12 codonbyte wrote: I agree, HotS is looking pretty grim for Terran.
You have the strongest early game units, and they got buffed for the late game, not only that going mech is now easier and stronger... how is that grim?
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
I assume you didn't read the OP, or the first sentence of my second paragraph, because what I typed is literally a restatement and then a rebuttle+reasoning. Feel free to quote something to prove otherwise.
You have a simplified understanding of the problems with the widow mine because this unit is a poorly designed unit which makes it becomes "overpowered" in some situations, but actually useless in other situations (which are those situations where it actually should be usefull as it this could create interesting games).
Also Avilo was talking about the widow mine, not about bio tvp.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing.
I'm not a BW specialist, but from what I have seen, they were mostly used to put down mines and then sacrifice them trying to take out as many workers as you could. But might be wrong. Still don't see a unit on which to put a mine.
"sacrifice" worker kills had a much larger effect on the game in BW than it does in SC2. Being that it takes so much effort to build, rally, then order units to mine. Even causing them to run away for a bit reduced mining time by a lot since simply box selecting them and right clicking on a mineral node would cause 12 to clump in front of a mineral as they waited for their turn to start mining as if there were no other mineral patches in the line.
It was also the main form of scouting, map awareness, and was able to snipe templars, fake attacks, and keep tab of unit movement across the map. Vultures were a pretty big deal for terran play in BW.
Yeah. And now imagine a hellion, which does all of those things better +mines. Or a reaper that can hide mines in your base. Point is, that you would have to tune down any unit you put mines on. The vulture? Not so much. It's straigth up worse than similar sc2 units.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Which wasn't justified?
Btw terrans don't really complain about balance, but mostly about design. There is a huge difference, and I critizesed Kyo for his simplified view which didn't seperate these 2 issues accordingly.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
On December 22 2012 02:56 Big J wrote: Stopped reading after avilo - "mines that cost supply cannot be balanced to be good" - wrote that they were getting reasonable in the lategame. Everything I believed in is in shambles... Time to rethink my life.
Well, the last drilling claw upgrade that was added started to allow them to pay themselves off slightly more often. It's still debatable if they're good lategame haha. But you know of course, anytime Terran gets anything that's looking to be remotely viable lategame it's AXED immediately, we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we? At least not on fair terms, they have to work for it through 10 range fungals.
The mine itself still has the same design flaw that it's had since the beginning of the beta - it's supply inefficient, and easy to handle by high calibre players. It can either be really strong vs noobs, or extremely weak vs pros. As the game gets more figured out, a 2 supply mine is going to end up sucking, and Terran gets none the better for it in the expansion.
But yeh, i said when they first started the beta that it was ridiculous to have a mine be any supply cost, it should have been live tested at 0 supply, and 2 supply, with other changes. It never was for some reason, which i mostly think is because they refused to have something so similar to the brood war spider mine, a tried and tested unit for over 12 years.
We all know this isn't brood war, and nor should it be. But come on. You have to be a fool to not live test a 0 supply version of the mine that adds depth to SC2. -_-
The spider mine was on a really crappy unit and in the game from the get-go. If you wanted mines, you had to go for vultures, which weren't all that useful (in later stages of the game) after putting down mines - at least compared to something like a hellion. I think 0 supply units have been proven to be very problematic in WoL by the IT. And that is still limited to 8/infestor. Imagine any ~200/200 stalematesituation and then tell me that the ability to add mines (if built straight by the factory) wouldn't be extremly problematic. And if not built from the factory, which unit to put it on? It would have to be a kind of crappy unit, to balance out the mine-ability - something that isn't in the game currently, as any unit is being designed to work without mines.
Also, the current rocket-launcher design makes any form of 0supply completly impossible
Also, from someone who I see telling opponents to "get out" if he reaches mass Air armies on his stream, I don't really accept comments like "we can't have Terrans winning past the 15 minute mark, can we". The transition into mass hightier T might be questionable in WoL. But it's being adressed with Raven, Upgrade, Thor changes.
I don't really want to join in this argument your having about the Mine--but the Vulture did not ever stop being useful throughout the entire game no matter how long. The only thing they did bad at was killing buildings, the rest of the time they were amazing.
I'm not a BW specialist, but from what I have seen, they were mostly used to put down mines and then sacrifice them trying to take out as many workers as you could. But might be wrong. Still don't see a unit on which to put a mine.
"sacrifice" worker kills had a much larger effect on the game in BW than it does in SC2. Being that it takes so much effort to build, rally, then order units to mine. Even causing them to run away for a bit reduced mining time by a lot since simply box selecting them and right clicking on a mineral node would cause 12 to clump in front of a mineral as they waited for their turn to start mining as if there were no other mineral patches in the line.
It was also the main form of scouting, map awareness, and was able to snipe templars, fake attacks, and keep tab of unit movement across the map. Vultures were a pretty big deal for terran play in BW.
Yeah. And now imagine a hellion, which does all of those things better +mines. Or a reaper that can hide mines in your base. Point is, that you would have to tune down any unit you put mines on. The vulture? Not so much. It's straigth up worse than similar sc2 units.
Hellions have a higher potential to deal damage to worker lines than vultures but due to moving shot the ability to do hit and runs "safely" leans heavily in favor of Vultures. Mostly because vultures don't have to stop moving to deal damage unlike Hellions. (Think Phoenix moving shot but no need for lift and only costs 75 mins)
The lack of splash means that Vultures can't kill workers in clumps--but Vultures deal 20 damage to workers without upgrades (vs the 14 Hellions do without upgrades)
they're different, not better, not worse, just different.
TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
That's pretty subjective. Lots of people are testing/playing mech in the beta, and people play it slightly different. Should prob not start the arguments "he plays mech better than the other guy." I think regardless of how people are playing mech, the mine in tvp is pretty sad right now, and mech tvp in general is pretty bad.
On December 22 2012 04:55 Aquila- wrote: TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good.
I think TvZ Mech is awesome right now, so much better than it was in WoL. I think you are playing it wrong! Don't go for more than 2 Thors AT MOST, until you see the Zerg commit to Mutalisks, a ton. Use Widow Mines + Turrets to defend from them. If the Zerg makes a ton of Mutalisks then this is always a free win for Mech with a good timing push, especially now with Widow Mines. If he is going Swarm Host > Brood Lord you should have map control and a stronger economy then him, and as long as you don't over-react to one Tech (too many Tanks/Banshees or too many Thors/Vikings) then you should be good with a better economy.
In general if you are having trouble with Tech Switches I think Widow Mines are the best as serving as a buffer for this. Having ~16 Widow Mines in a separate control group, using them to flank BL's or Swarm Hosts, or to buffer against Roaches/Lings, to deny expansions and secure expansions you normally wouldn't be able to defend, or to protect from runby's when you move out with your army.
What level do you play at? I could send you a replay if you are Masters or below.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
That's pretty subjective. Lots of people are testing/playing mech in the beta, and people play it slightly different. Should prob not start the arguments "he plays mech better than the other guy." I think regardless of how people are playing mech, the mine in tvp is pretty sad right now, and mech tvp in general is pretty bad.
Player skill, results, and who they can beat are objective. Saying I like his style more than how someone else plays would be subjective. That was not the start of my argument anyway, I was clarifying the apparent misunderstanding from earlier. I really can't help you understand more than that...But, it was a good way to circumnavigate everything I said while throwing in your: obviously it's just "bad" qualifier statement.
If you'd like an instance of using mines correctly to fortify a position while taking into account map geography, spawn locations, and expansions on maps here is one of a number of games I've played against Dragon on HotS: http://drop.sc/286636 (our chatting is obviously a joke lol) and also, this was last patch so omg the mines do like so much more damage! p.s: now you know my beta account if you didn't before avilo! :D
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
The easy solution to me is to make them much cheaper and have them suicide when they go off. They still cost 2 supply so you won't go overboard making them but making them cheap means you're not crippling your main army if you decide to make four of them to defend harass. By making the cost supply based instead of resource based, you encourage the Terran player not to make too many of them.
My suggested cost is 25 minerals. The hidden cost of buying an extra supply depot adds additional mineral cost to the deal. Same damage as this patch (takes two to kill a stalker). Yes, it's like Spider Mines without a vulture. But unlike Spider mines, these have a substantial supply cost built in.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
On December 22 2012 03:07 -Kyo- wrote: You really need to stop posting these Avilo. Really, all you're doing is making yourself out to be a worse and worse player when I know you're at least pretty good, though your actual knowledge of the game seems to be quite far off.
I agree with the problem of consistency for sure, but attempting to say that mines are not good in TvP is just a complete lie to the community through your "popularity". If anyone actually plays beta they can tell you right now how FAVORED TvP is for TERRAN. I can say on the basis of quite a few pros, theognis, drewbie and others I have asked during games all think medivacs and mines are simply too strong right now. To say otherwise is just emotional QQ after losing when you played worse than another player.
Honestly, I wish either you'd stop making threads like this when you literally just don't know what you're talking about with balance or you'd just quit like I guess you're attempting to instigate in your thread? Quite depressing to see these so constantly.
Wow impressive. You managed to demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of the problems Avilo adressed. Please dont make these post again, because you have simplified understand of Starcraft 2.
Well he is top 100 GM and in the Complexity Academy, so I am going to assume is his kinda good as SC2 and knows what he is talking about. Much like the Zerg QQ of early SC2, I think some people are annoyed with the Terran QQ of 2012.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
That is the issue. There are different ways to balance them, but if you want one-shot mines, they need to be more expensive. If you look at Scourge, they weren't as ridiculously cheap as Widow Mines (25/75 to 75/25), they only did 110 damage, without any splash (IIRC), and suicided themselves. If you want one-shot mines, they either need to suicide (which I don't think is for the best) or need to be more expensive than units that they one-shot.
I'd rather have them be AOE type units. Siege tanks don't cut it. And if you want burst damage, just focus fire with Stimmed Marines. Now, this obviously makes them weaker against Protoss, but so what? Do you realize what sort of ridiculous type of ability it would have to be to be an effective AOE against Protoss?
I'd save trend towards decreasing direct damage, but buffing AOE damage.This focuses more on positional play and utilizing threats, rather than derpy "I hope it doesn't one-shot my really expensive unit."
On December 22 2012 04:55 Aquila- wrote: TvZ Mech is a fucking joke right now. Zerg opens mutas, terran has to go thors, then he makes swarmhosts, thors die, terran needs to make tanks, then zerg goes hive, uses the spire and makes broodlords, once again the tanks are useless, you need to mass viking. Oh you make vikings? 10 range fungal sup. Even if you somehow someway survive all that then he switches to something else like ultras, guess what, vikings useless now. These techswitches are ridiculous, combined with the fact that against swarmhosts you just need to sit there behind tanks and can never move out makes it literally impossible to win. Free units are pretty good.
I think TvZ Mech is awesome right now, so much better than it was in WoL. I think you are playing it wrong! Don't go for more than 2 Thors AT MOST, until you see the Zerg commit to Mutalisks, a ton. Use Widow Mines + Turrets to defend from them. If the Zerg makes a ton of Mutalisks then this is always a free win for Mech with a good timing push, especially now with Widow Mines. If he is going Swarm Host > Brood Lord you should have map control and a stronger economy then him, and as long as you don't over-react to one Tech (too many Tanks/Banshees or too many Thors/Vikings) then you should be good with a better economy.
In general if you are having trouble with Tech Switches I think Widow Mines are the best as serving as a buffer for this. Having ~16 Widow Mines in a separate control group, using them to flank BL's or Swarm Hosts, or to buffer against Roaches/Lings, to deny expansions and secure expansions you normally wouldn't be able to defend, or to protect from runby's when you move out with your army.
What level do you play at? I could send you a replay if you are Masters or below.
No thanks play against a decent Zerg at high master and you will see ...
I encourage everyone to watch the replay -Kyo- posted, a game between him and Dragon (http://drop.sc/286636) if you respond to me or him about this game in question!
@-Kyo-
I don't see any of the attributes you talk about in that replay that make the Widow Mine seem too strong. If anything, it was an example of how a Mech player can finish a Protoss they have a HUGE economic advantage on, when the Protoss makes nothing but Immortals/Archons/Chargelots (what most assume to be the anti-Mech composition).
Prior to getting a huge lead against you in income, the first ~20 minutes of the game, he uses a total of 3 Widow Mines.
They kill:
1 Stalker poking early on (which wouldn't happen now post patch).
1 Hallucination
And then Dragon kills your third (the first time), and get's a huge lead against you. Primarily because you make 2 Colossus and Storm + 4 Templar, but only 5 Immortals, against 15 Tanks. You just have a bad composition against his nearly maxed out Mech push, and he is able to push you around and kill your third.
But you end up repelling his attack, where he has a big army supply advantage against you, after getting some more Immortals and catching some of his units out of position at what was your third. He is down 2000 resources lost at this point, but ahead overall because of better economy.
From there, with Dragon's huge economic lead (doubling your mineral income at some points, tripling it at others), he goes to Tank Widow Mine with Raven/5Viking to deny your Observers. He secures a 4th, denies your "normal third" again (Mech has a good advantage in those close positions in denying that normal third). You get up a third eventually south of your main, and are able to mine a bit again. Your income is still half or 1/3 of his at this point. He is in a sieged up location at his 4th with Widow Mines as well, and with Immortal/Archon you are able to attack into this position, trade efficiently with his army, tanking Widow Mines and wiping out nearly all of his Tanks. After this attack into his very solid position, and you just tanking Widow Mine shots, you have now increased your resource lost advantage by another 1k resources, to give you a 3k resource lost lead. You have traded very efficiently by simply ignoring his mines. Unfortunately for you, you simply do not have a good enough income to make an air transition to something like Tempests or even Carriers to deal with his very small air force (5 unupgraded Vikings and a Raven) to deal with his denying detection tactic. And so you cannot push into him, he sits on his economic lead, and eventually just overpowers your Immortal/Archon composition.
I have no idea how you think this game shows Widow Mines are too strong. You as a Protoss, vs a Mech player, are way down in income. Surely you realize this isn't a normal situation for a Protoss vs Mech? Still you are able to trade cost efficiently vs this composition, by simply ignoring Widow Mines. If anything, this shows how pathetic Mech vs Protoss would be without Widow Mines. And shows us that Widow Mines are a good way of forcing Protoss from creating a pure anti-ground composition with no anti-air, a composition that in WoL is very, very strong against Mech. Can you imagine if you had defended his push that originally denied your third, before he used Widow Mines really at all, and you hadn't fallen behind so far in Income? You could have continued to trade efficiently and been in a very good position against Dragon.
I think now at least they are in a position to have the mine be 1 supply and for it to be reasonable. But in general, yeah, I'm not happy with them nerfing the widow mine, cause it such and awesome unit.
I like the mine in its current form, although I admit that perhaps they could be 1 supply, keeping everything else as it is. There are some players who are even using the mine well even in its current state HTOMario, Dragon etc.
@ZjiublingZ the whole point of that replay was to show after he secures the 4th that in those spots I cannot attack into him at all because of continued denial of observers with vikings, raven and scans. I'm not sure what you were looking for in that game but I'll help you by noting that I lost at least 10++ observers in that game while microing the large majority of them in fights(just look at our FPVs or apm @_@;; ). All the while, he secures a gold base and splits the map diagonally into a very favorable map arrangement.
To say there are things I could have done better is one thing, but there are plenty of things Dragon could have done differently as well, so this doesn't really prove anything. Therefore, I assume you're completely pushing what I'm saying while trying to justify a conclusion you've already predetermined while simply adding "well if this happened" or "it's possible to do this" and neglecting the examples I'm providing.
So tl;dr the whole point of the replay was to show you can strategically place mines and tanks in certain geographical locations while denying detection = very strong. This goes back to my very original argument: If mines are used correctly, and during the right times they're incredibly good.
the whole point of that replay was to show after he secures the 4th that in those spots I cannot attack into him at all because of continued denial of observers with vikings, raven and scans.
How can you say this, when in my post I very clearly stated that you increased your resource lost lead by doing just that. You attacked into a field of Widow Mines and Siege Tanks, and traded very cost efficiently, by simply ignoring the Widow Mines. If you had simply not had such a economical disadvantage to Dragon's prior, game deciding push, which involved no mines (and prior to that, Mines had ~0 effect on the game at all).
It has nothing to do with me saying "oh you could have done something better so your game is invalid". I am saying that you were WAY behind in the game before Widow Mines even played a role in the game, before Dragon made more than 3 of them in fact (and those 3 weren't even cost efficient...). You still traded cost efficiently vs his army by simplywalking over the Mines, and if you had even been on even income you could have dealt with his anti-detection Raven/Viking hit squad very, very easily. Once again, if you had just not gotten so far behind in economy from a timing push that was in no way effected by Widow Mines, you would have easily had the income to make some anti-air.
This is like a Terran Bio player showing how, when behind in economy significantly to a Protoss player, they can't afford to make both Anti-Colossus and Anti-Templar tech, and then concluding that one of those things are too strong. Are they strong? Yes. Are they too strong? This game certainly doesn't show it.
Unless your argument is that a Mech player should consistently have an income advantage against a Protoss? I won't even touch that one though :D
If you buff tanks up to 70 dmg right now, then the major problem we will see is mass PF+Tank, which will result in ultra turtley games and thats the last thing anybody wants even if you suddenly can use your "mech" units.
I think the following changes could make it possible.
Remove PF
Buff tank dmg to 70 per shot and allow overkill
Change viking so that when it is in ground form it has an AA attack(but weaker)
Change immortal so that hardened shields are an activated mechanic rather than permanent.
As long as Blizz makes it so Terran actually has more difference in play then im not to worried about the new units. If I can play a nice positional mech game vs toss and a and insane micro fest with bio vs Z, I will be very happy even tho we only got the widow mine new. The two differances of the MU will be very satisfying and interesting.
However,
If I am still forced to go bio vs toss, marine tank vs Z, and marine tank vs T with only one new unit. Yea thats going to suck.
Thread is not about me, don't let kyo try to derail it. Thread is about widow mine efficiency.
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
watched replay, horrible upgrades, weird engagements, only warpprism held u in the game, anything else pretty much sucked from your pov
hilarious, u r the only 1 i ve seen cry about widowmine, like ever ~_~
To which I replied I disagree(about mines), and many others pro players do as well. Every time I've played you in HotS you've never once utilized widow mines correctly as other players such as Morrow have. In fact, I still have not seen another play Mech as well as he has and that was nearly a month ago :/
So the point I'm making here is: If you actually know how to use the unit correctly, and at the right timings it's incredibly good.
I do suggest, similarly, that mines shouldn't have a supply cost. Honestly, I think they should just use BW mines... @_@
Edit: I think you're missing my point. I only called you out specifically because.. again... the information you bring to the community is incredibly skewed. Essentially, your argument is valid, but not sound. @_@ + Show Spoiler +
http://www.iep.utm.edu/val-snd/ here is some simple logical reasoning you can reference if you'd like to understand the above
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
watched replay, horrible upgrades, weird engagements, only warpprism held u in the game, anything else pretty much sucked from your pov
hilarious, u r the only 1 i ve seen cry about widowmine, like ever ~_~
More like I'm just one of the few who does not mind actually putting in time to explain to people without as much understanding why something shouldn't be the way it is in a current build. However, I guess you simply cannot convince certain people of anything even when evidence is right in their face, which I find quite depressing in this community. I figured I'd be able to help weigh in on this subject as I was top 16 in HotS for like a month and had been playing all sorts of different players; some who could utilize mines well and others who couldn't use them at all.
Somehow you managed to have missed what I said though, I've talked to many other players about these patches during our games. Honestly, how many pros do you see posting publicly about such a thing?(balance that is) If you go back and read this in chronological order I simply gave an explanation for a question someone raised, but apparently giving evidence and reasoning is not enough for them - even with a specific example of what I was talking about(sorry I don't save evidence and wait around to argue this stuff haha). I'm not complaining or crying about the mine. I'm simply providing an objective standpoint on something that should be fixed; though you seem to think there isn't enough evidence to warrant such a change while accepting an argument from someone who provides a much less developed argument ... because..? Everything I've seen in this thread from Avilo is poorly constructed and hardly resembles sound reasoning. Other than him, I have no clue who any of the other posters are, especially the above, and have no clue how much you've even played HotS so I have no basis for accepting or pushing away the arguments being put forth. I've attempted to be respectful in at least replying to you like you understand what you're talking about, but when someone posts something like "your pov sucked" when it's close pos on antiga PvT you really have to wonder >.>
With that said, I've presented the argument. Whether you choose to accept the things I've put forth is up to you but it seems quite straight forward to me >.> !
listening to avilos crying is as usefull as punching yourself in the face - we played in the beta, just as u i just dont use my tl id for ladder.
i dont follow your discussion, i find it pointless, i just pointed out that your so called "evidence" is a joke cuz what good is evidence when u play like shit? dont be silly to say u r objective, thats just silly (just as silly as people who state opinions and sell them as facts -_-)
so i say, widow mine is not worth its supply, the nerfs itself are good, dmg wise it was stupid to ve it kill like anything harass orientated straight, its the attack speed with its supply plus it gets hit or miss vs zerg (protoss not so much cuz of the hp), that is too coinflippy without requiring skill (aka bad game design at least in my pov)
There isn't any incentive to play as Terran in HOTS. I preordered after the big balance patch and have since cancelled my pre order. This is just pathetic, they finally give Terran players big changes that we need and then they nerf us 2 patches in a row. That and we STILL don't have a 2nd brand new unit (Hellbat is NOT a new unit whatever way Blizzard wants to spin it), while they also nerf our ONLY completely new unit into the ground. Whatever its their loss, many Terran won't be getting this expansion in its current state.
Actually, I'm thinking of switching from protoss to to terran in HotS, because I like the direction blizzard is taking them. The WM looks really fun to play with, and it looks like terran will have more options lategame. Is this new nerf sad for WM play, yes, but i trust that blizzard will figure out a nice balance with it in the end. I have seen vods of WM completely dominating games in its previous form, so i understand the nerf, but I've also heard a lot of people have problems with not getting value out of them. Still, they look like a blast, and I look forward to using them.
Morrow didn't (when he played hots) use widow mines except for early games gimmicks.
Also Kyo have you even read the most recent patch notes?
He is a GM Protoss player who stream says “Playing HotS” and is in the Complexity Academy, so we can safely assume he has read the patch notes. One might say he is better at the game than any of us.
I am just shocked that one could think mines are OP against toss in the current state. I think anyone but Kyo acknowledged that they are useless vs toss. Especially when he references to Morrow (who barely used mines btw), who played HOTS pre-widow mine nerfs. Doesn't make a lot of sense to refer to prenerfs as a "proof" that mines are usefull.
Okay, lets calm down on the over exaggerations so we are all on the same page. I simply said morrow was using mech the best of the players I've seen/played against, that's all.
Now, if you'd like to know why I think the mines are too strong, along with many other people, it's quite simple. It's just how the unit itself operates. Unlike in BW this current mine attacks both ground and air. This mine also is untargetable once it attacks(there is absolutely no reason for assured damage), the unit is not disposed of once it activates, the unit will not splash other mines that activate at the same time(they are on route to hitting), and most importantly the 'real' cost effectiveness of the unit; this last one being the biggest issue I see with the mine.
Surely, I agree with the notion that with the mines now not hitting observers automatically that this has been remedied quite a bit, but the problem still exists. The problem is this: Once the unit has activated once (Now you need 2 mines to kill, lets just say a stalker, for the sake of an example) it has paid for itself, more or less; however, upon the next trade for units it is at a 100% or even MORE than 100% cost trade efficiency. Now, scale this to something like immortals, or colossus... in the event you're able to scan and constantly snipe observers if the game goes into ground vs ground armies(which is incredibly reasonable if you're going mech this should be your ideal goal in holding new positions so you cannot be rushed into) you're trading so effectively that it doesn't even matter what happens to the number of mines you create at that point. If you're trading 2 mines for an immortal(an example..) during combat the mines have done much more than what your initial payment of them was as compared to the immortal protoss paid for. This is because of the TIME factor it buys you, let alone the economic trade. You're trading a unit that can be produced out of mass factory(which you'll have if you're going mech) versus a single, or perhaps at most 3, robotics facilities of a protoss player. Obviously remaxing on mines and putting them back into their placements is much, much faster than protoss building up their main, bulky army units. Because of this, I believe there is an issue with how strong the mine can be assuming you have it correctly placed in your mech lines.
You can scale this higher, I think, if you continue to apply the same goal I mentioned above. That is to say, you can continually place a few mines around the map, and attempt to pick off observers even if the game goes much longer and the toss gets air. The same logic applies: once you trade a few mines for even just damage on something like a carrier it has paid for itself because it has reduced the overall effectiveness of a much pricier unit that takes a much longer duration to build and mass up.
And this is all just economics and time factors of the game. If you'd like, we could talk about the effectiveness of mines+medivacs and also their ability to hit workers which is a whole other tangent
edit 1 since I forgot this mention this: I played morrow quite a bit and he used mines every game all the way through until the late game. Yes, pre-nerf, but you're missing out on he whole other side of the coin about strategic locationing+detection denial with them and the effectiveness this can have even with the current patch we have.
Of course Morrow was the best Mech player you played against, he was probably the best player on the Beta period. Not to mention he played the beta exclusively. Once again, that doesn't mean his style of Mech was solid or what people should be using right now. Case and point: he gave it up because he didn't think it was good. Now you are facing Mech players who aren't using the same style for months like Morrow did, because they are experimenting with new styles, trying to find something that is solid.
Your examples are cherry picked and it's hard to discuss a unit this way: 2 Widow Mines killing 1 Stalker and then getting cleaned up afterward is a bad trade for a Mech player. They are even resource investments (slightly more minerals for Widow Mine and more supply), but it is two 40 second build time units out of a 150 gas production facility, vs 32 second build time from a 150 mineral production building, and in Mech vs P Protoss should have economy lead anyways. But of course if they aren't cleaned up it's a good trade. 2 Widow Mines cannot kill an Immortal anymore either (4 Widow Mines can kill 2 Clumped up Immortals if that's what is confusing you).
Widow Mines are such a positional unit, they become so much better if they are in good position defensively or if they flank their opponent really well, and they can also be absolutely worthless if the opponent catches them out of position or protects their army from being flanked. The same concept goes for harass, they are hard to defend but technically you can take no damage but denied mining time from them if you have very good control.
If you want to upload a replay of a game where you felt like shows that Widow Mines were clearly too strong and there wasn't anything you could do (outside of play considerably better than your opponent mayb), then that would be a reasonable discussion point. Talking about situations where they can be cost efficient is too abstract to lead to a fair discussion (same goes for talking about situations where they can be cost innefficent).
I assume you typed all of this before noticing my new post. I included a replay. And again, these are just EXAMPLES. Of course they're not going to be applicable to all cases, but the point was that well placed widow mines in addition to a player continuing to deny detection allows for a much higher potential of good trades if you include the factors I mentioned.
How can you deny detection to a Protoss that has cloaked detection? Can't you just keep one with your army or a scout group of stalkers or voids?
Watch the replay for an example of a very easy way to do this with ground vs ground armies.
watched replay, horrible upgrades, weird engagements, only warpprism held u in the game, anything else pretty much sucked from your pov
hilarious, u r the only 1 i ve seen cry about widowmine, like ever ~_~
More like I'm just one of the few who does not mind actually putting in time to explain to people without as much understanding why something shouldn't be the way it is in a current build. However, I guess you simply cannot convince certain people of anything even when evidence is right in their face, which I find quite depressing in this community. I figured I'd be able to help weigh in on this subject as I was top 16 in HotS for like a month and had been playing all sorts of different players; some who could utilize mines well and others who couldn't use them at all.
Somehow you managed to have missed what I said though, I've talked to many other players about these patches during our games. Honestly, how many pros do you see posting publicly about such a thing?(balance that is) If you go back and read this in chronological order I simply gave an explanation for a question someone raised, but apparently giving evidence and reasoning is not enough for them - even with a specific example of what I was talking about(sorry I don't save evidence and wait around to argue this stuff haha). I'm not complaining or crying about the mine. I'm simply providing an objective standpoint on something that should be fixed; though you seem to think there isn't enough evidence to warrant such a change while accepting an argument from someone who provides a much less developed argument ... because..? Everything I've seen in this thread from Avilo is poorly constructed and hardly resembles sound reasoning. Other than him, I have no clue who any of the other posters are, especially the above, and have no clue how much you've even played HotS so I have no basis for accepting or pushing away the arguments being put forth. I've attempted to be respectful in at least replying to you like you understand what you're talking about, but when someone posts something like "your pov sucked" when it's close pos on antiga PvT you really have to wonder >.>
With that said, I've presented the argument. Whether you choose to accept the things I've put forth is up to you but it seems quite straight forward to me >.> !
It's disappointing you respond to the guy who is flaming you but not my post which is a solid rebuttle of the claims you are making. And then you complain about not being able to convince people when evidence is in their face? And then you go on to bash Avilo for having poorly constructed arguments, when you aren't even willing to hold your own up to scrutiny? But nothing you said pisses me off more then this:
I have no clue who any of the other posters are, especially the above, and have no clue how much you've even played HotS so I have no basis for accepting or pushing away the arguments being put forth.
Are you serious? You think you need to know how many games someone is played or how good they are to have some basis for accepting or pushing away their arguments? Here's a novel an idea: Judge an idea on it's merits, not on the person who came up with it. Once again I've given you a very solid argument as to why the things you are claiming, if true, weren't demonstrated at all in the replay that you said was an example. If you think you are being objective, while ignoring any criticism to your argument, wow.
Anyways... to get back to having some discussion. I've found Widow Mines are only a good idea vs Protoss when bum-rushing his army. They are actually a big improvement on the composition. Just enough Battle Hellions to beat the chargetlots, and then you flank with the Widow Mines to get into their higher tech/ranged units. The only thing is, if you want to do this style, I think you have to get some Siege Tanks, or you are vulnerable to mass Blink Stalkers kiting your army everywhere.
I haven't found a successful way to "control space" with the Widow Mine vs Protoss, outside of burying them at potential Protoss' expansions. Taking the watch-tower with them isn't really worth it I've found, they have map control and can easily take it back.
I don't see the need for the widow mine. Vs ground it somehow overlaps with the siege tank, vs air it's an unnecessary addition with the presence of viking, thors, turrets, seeker missiles and marines. I suggest doing some changes to the siege tank and just removing the widow mine.
give them to my siege tanks for free, 3 per piece and they don't cost supply now siege tanks make sense at 3 supply now siege tanks actually worth building did i just fix mech?