|
On December 22 2012 08:50 {ToT}ColmA wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 07:08 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 07:03 aksfjh wrote:On December 22 2012 05:56 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 03:28 -Kyo- wrote:[quote] 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.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On December 22 2012 09:32 -Kyo- wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2012 08:50 {ToT}ColmA wrote:On December 22 2012 07:08 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 07:03 aksfjh wrote:On December 22 2012 05:56 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 05:47 ZjiublingZ wrote:On December 22 2012 05:06 -Kyo- wrote:On December 22 2012 04:36 Hider wrote:On December 22 2012 04:30 Plansix wrote:On December 22 2012 04:23 Hider wrote: [quote]
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?
|
|
|
|