Starcraft 2: Legacy of the Void

[quote name='kilm']His number 2 includes using hotkeys, that's part of "select your warpgates"

His point is still valid that it takes more steps to create units via warpgates than it is via barracks[/QUOTE]
It isn't about steps, it's about speed. How long doe sit take to produce a marine? I can warp in lots of units and kill a barracks faster than a marine can be built.
 
[quote name='Clak']It isn't about steps, it's about speed. How long doe sit take to produce a marine? I can warp in lots of units and kill a barracks faster than a marine can be built.[/QUOTE]

Actually, it is about steps, which is why okt said its apm intensive. Of course when you place a barrack vs warpgate at time = 0 the warpgate wins in 2 seconds.

In the span of say 10 minutes, terran player only has to hotkey his barrack, and hit ddddd, and look back ~4 minutes later to refresh the queue, and doesnt even have to look back at his base.
Protoss need to remember every 30seconds to look back and warp in units, while also taking his eye away from a potential battle. Its clear which player then has the easier time to produce in terms of steps.
 
How is that so difficult? I mean I guess terran is more "set it and forget it," but I don't see how that really helps too much. In an equal fight, I can send in reinforcements way faster than a terran player. If I'm losing in their base and i have a pylon right outside, I can bring more units in instantly. I've held off base attacks by terrans simply by bringing more units in right away. they think I have nothing, and in a few seconds I have an army.
 
Again you seem to be missing the concept. I never said it was difficult, rather you need to expend more clicks to warp in an equal amount of units in a large time frame than the terran took.

By the way, in your scenerio, if you warp in a set of units right outside and push them into an already losing battle, its still going to be a losing battle if the terran has queued up units, which you seem to be neglecting to mention. In an equal fight, there's no way you can outproduce a terran in his own base if you're already losing.
 
Don't even need a pylon....just bring a Warp Prism in and have it do it's power matrix thing. That's one of the things I love about 'toss - I can create an army just about anywhere...at an offensive front, at an expo, anywhere. Whereas with Terran, I'm stuck marching units across the map. With Zerg, with proper queen larva production, you can replace an army in an instant, with proper resources. All seemed fairly balanced to me.
 
[quote name='KhaosX']Again you seem to be missing the concept. I never said it was difficult, rather you need to expend more clicks to warp in an equal amount of units in a large time frame than the terran took.

By the way, in your scenerio, if you warp in a set of units right outside and push them into an already losing battle, its still going to be a losing battle if the terran has queued up units, which you seem to be neglecting to mention. In an equal fight, there's no way you can outproduce a terran in his own base if you're already losing.[/QUOTE]
I never said how badly I was losing. If he's down to a few units against say my last stalker and I warp in a whole new group, that still works. Plus I can have a few groups waiting if the battle takes a few minutes. I could probably destroy a few of his buildings while his units are building afterward anyway. I've done this, it works.
 
[quote name='Clak']I never said how badly I was losing. If he's down to a few units against say my last stalker and I warp in a whole new group, that still works. Plus I can have a few groups waiting if the battle takes a few minutes. I could probably destroy a few of his buildings while his units are building afterward anyway. I've done this, it works.[/QUOTE]

You're really missing what the point Khaos is conveying.
 
[quote name='KhaosX']Again you seem to be missing the concept. I never said it was difficult, rather you need to expend more clicks to warp in an equal amount of units in a large time frame than the terran took.

By the way, in your scenerio, if you warp in a set of units right outside and push them into an already losing battle, its still going to be a losing battle if the terran has queued up units, which you seem to be neglecting to mention. In an equal fight, there's no way you can outproduce a terran in his own base if you're already losing.[/QUOTE]
if the terran is queuing up units it's... not good macro.
 
I just don't get what you guys are trying to argue... I random exclusively, so I play all races a about equally, and no one race requires less attention to what I'm doing to win - Terrans are NOT easymode.

The races play different; That is a good thing. Terran's different isn't superior to the other races. Effective use of hotkeys mitigates a whole lot of this "billion extra clicks" nonsense that keeps coming up.
 
[quote name='BattleChicken']I just don't get what you guys are trying to argue... I random exclusively, so I play all races a about equally, and no one race requires less attention to what I'm doing to win - Terrans are NOT easymode.

The races play different; That is a good thing. Terran's different isn't superior to the other races. Effective use of hotkeys mitigates a whole lot of this "billion extra clicks" nonsense that keeps coming up.[/QUOTE]

No one is talking about how different the races play, that's a given. The main point is that Terran production is the easiest. No one is saying "Don't touch the keyboard/mouse and you build units ezmode," just comparatively, easier than the other two races with regard to APM. Hotkeys, as you might not know, factor into APM, and what Oktober was saying is that the other two races are more APM (hotkeys, keyboard strokes, clicks) intensive than Terrans when trying to match production.

The issue isn't whether or not Terrans are superior or which race requires more attention, the whole point is that to match Terrans' production, you need to be more on the ball with your APM with Zerg and Protoss than with Terrans.
 
BC you know i play random exclusively also. I'm not talking about race superiority, nor a large macro game. I'm talking about how terran essentially need to press two buttons to populate 4 barracks to create 20 units for the time frame of a few minutes vs 4 warpgates and your ws(click)s(click)s(click)s(click) every 20-30 seconds for that same time frame.
 
So what?

Protoss can do the same thing as terrans and just queue units by not building into warp gate tech.. yet every decent protoss does it anyway because there is a HUGE bonus that comes along with the extra work. Its a choice: build things like terrans using the gateway buildings and queue stuff up OR get warpgates and the ability to build any gate unit anywhere you have power bringing in as many units at once as you have warp gates. If it's such a better method, why does nobody just use gateways?

Zerg don't HAVE to use queens. A hatchery generates larvae every 7 seconds, and building multiple hatches gives higher production - vigilant queen use allows the zerg to produce dozens of units or seed expansions in an absurdly quick span of time. There is a choice: Build lots of hatches OR use queens, reduce overall building costs and allow for higher burst unit creation.

Mules are optional on the terran side. You can build PDF or just ignore the comsat.. yet good Terrans have at least one early in the game. Using mules right requires vigilant monitoring of the comsat energy, but the bonus for paying attention is well worth it... and its needed because Terrans have one way to up their unit production - make more buildings. Terran queueing is a hamstring, not a boon.

So, again.. I just don't get what this is about. The races play differently. Ignoring the amazing advantages that come along with the extra clicks is just silly.
 
Who cares which race takes fewer APM? As a protoss I really don't care that I have to click and place every warped in unit, the advantage to it is great.
 
[quote name='KhaosX']BC you know i play random exclusively also. I'm not talking about race superiority, nor a large macro game. I'm talking about how terran essentially need to press two buttons to populate 4 barracks to create 20 units for the time frame of a few minutes vs 4 warpgates and your ws(click)s(click)s(click)s(click) every 20-30 seconds for that same time frame.[/QUOTE]
and i said queuing units is dumb

look, if you queue units... (20 marauders) that means you need to have 2000 minerals on hand.

and if you have 2000 minerals on hand, that's bad macro. might as well build 4 extra barracks.
 
[quote name='kainzero']and i said queuing units is dumb

look, if you queue units... (20 marauders) that means you need to have 2000 minerals on hand.

and if you have 2000 minerals on hand, that's bad macro. might as well build 4 extra barracks.[/QUOTE]

Oktober's main point is lost, no one understood it, move on.
 
i wanted to complain about how 9/10 of the last 1v1 games i played were against diamond players and they bump me to diamond :) not sure if this is true for anyone else but i have never been favored in a single game; whether its 1v1 or team.
 
[quote name='jarvis307']i wanted to complain about how 9/10 of the last 1v1 games i played were against diamond players and they bump me to diamond :) not sure if this is true for anyone else but i have never been favored in a single game; whether its 1v1 or team.[/QUOTE]

Same here, never favored
 
So like i was saying, I'm don't really understand this placement system. We went 3-2 and placed plat, yet I've won 4-1 once and placed bronze. I use to think 5 wins = plat, 4 = gold, 3 = silver, 2/1/0 = bronze because that was how it ranked me earlier when the game just came out. Now I'm thinking its some combination of opponent rank, teammate rank, and collective in game score.
 
[quote name='KhaosX']So like i was saying, I'm don't really understand this placement system. We went 3-2 and placed plat, yet I've won 4-1 once and placed bronze. I use to think 5 wins = plat, 4 = gold, 3 = silver, 2/1/0 = bronze because that was how it ranked me earlier when the game just came out. Now I'm thinking its some combination of opponent rank, teammate rank, and collective in game score.[/QUOTE]

http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=150367

hopefully this makes more sense
 
[quote name='KhaosX']So like i was saying, I'm don't really understand this placement system. We went 3-2 and placed plat, yet I've won 4-1 once and placed bronze. I use to think 5 wins = plat, 4 = gold, 3 = silver, 2/1/0 = bronze because that was how it ranked me earlier when the game just came out. Now I'm thinking its some combination of opponent rank, teammate rank, and collective in game score.[/QUOTE]

Those 3 wins were super tough. There was at least one person with the 500 random win portrait, and the ones we lost were amazing players.

Chances are all our placements were diamond players.. That'd be my guess.
 
the difference between 1v1 diamond and team diamond is so huge

i'm getting scraped pretty bad in 1v1.
team diamond is purely dependent on how bad my teammates are. i'm pretty sure i can 1v2 some team diamond players.
 
[quote name='jarvis307']was neural parasite changed? i see in the online description that it lasts until one of the units die (controller or controllee) but there seems to be a very very short time limit on how long you can control the unit for.

edit: nvm.. guess it was: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=149026

seems pretty useless to me now.[/QUOTE]

Chances are you're not going to have or need whatever unit you're controlling for longer than the duration. It's far from useless.
 
Yeah. Taking one of the big 4 - collosus, battlecruiser, ultralisk, or thor - for 15 seconds is huge. If nothing else, it makes the enemy force-fire on your single unit in order to break control which can have its own advantages.

[quote name='kainzero']the difference between 1v1 diamond and team diamond is so huge

i'm getting scraped pretty bad in 1v1.
team diamond is purely dependent on how bad my teammates are. i'm pretty sure i can 1v2 some team diamond players.[/quote]
1v1 can be really rough, but it's refreshing that every unit matters in 1v1 - micro matters about as much or more than macro does. In 2v2 macro matters more than micro does.. In 3v3/4v4, its usually reasonably safe to just attack move exclusively, so long as 1-2 partners are doing it along with you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
God dammit, I just want to play my game.

So I go to login, says I have bad info. I think damn, maybe my account got hacked so I go through password recovery. Enter my email and name and get the error "Name and email combination do not exist"

wat. Anyway, I've gone through support but they say 2-3 days.
 
StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty - Patch 1.1.0 To get the latest news and interact with the community, visit our StarCraft II website. Be sure to check out our Game Guide for an in-depth look at StarCraft II gameplay. We wish you all the best on your journeys through the embattled Koprulu Sector!


General

  • The Standard (US) and Standard for Lefties (US) hotkey configurations are now available in all regions.
  • A new game clock has been added. Players can now instantly see how long they've been in their current mission or match. This feature can be turned on or off in the Gameplay Options menu.
  • A new Quick Save option is now available for the single-player campaign. Players can now quickly save their mission progress by pressing Ctrl + Q.
  • A new System Panel has been added. Players can now view their local time and FPS while in game by mousing over the Menu (F10) button in the upper-left hand corner of the game screen. Laptop users can also view Wi-Fi signal strength and battery levels.
  • Sight granted by death reveal no longer lifts Fog of War. Units revealed in this manner are not targetable.
  • (Mac only) Moved StarCraft II data files and settings from the Documents folder into the Application Support folder.
  • Support for NVIDIA 3D Vision has been added. To experience StarCraft II: Wings of Liberty in 3D on your desktop or notebook, you will need 3D Vision. For more information, visit www.nvidia.com/Starcraft3D


Balance Changes


  • PROTOSS
    • Zealot
      • Build time increased from 33 to 38.
      • Warp Gate cooldown increased from 23 to 28.


  • TERRAN
    • Battlecruiser
      • Ground damage decreased from 10 to 8.
    • Bunker
      • Build time increased from 30 to 35.
    • Reaper
      • Build time increased from 40 to 45.
    • Siege Tank
      • Siege mode damage changed from 50 to 35 (+15 armored).
      • Upgrade damage changed from +5 to +3 (+2 armored).


  • ZERG
    • Ultralisk
      • Ram ability removed. Ultralisk will now use normal attack against buildings.
      • Damage decreased from 15 (+25 armored) to 15 (+20 armored).


  • Maps
    • Desert Oasis
      • Destructible Rocks have been added to make natural expansions easier to protect.
      • Center Xel'Naga Tower area has been narrowed.


StarCraft II Editor Improvements


  • Added new requirement types: Odd, Divide, Mod, Multiply.
  • Added a chance field to effect data.
  • Added support for the Slider dialog control type.
  • Added a trigger to deal damage from a unit.
  • Added a trigger event response to provide the amount a player or unit property changes.
  • Added a trigger event when an effect executes.
  • New Trigger Editor functions:
    • Save Data Conversation State Value (Action).
    • Load Data Conversation State Value (Action).
    • Players On Team (returns Player Group associated with teams in game lobby).
    • Unit Owner Changes (Event).
    • Old Unit Owner (returns player ID in response to Unit Owner Changes).
    • New Unit Owner (returns player ID in response to Unit Owner Changes).
  • XP, Level, and Bounty unit properties can now be modified by triggers.
  • Banks now save/restore XP, learned abilities, and items.
  • Message Window now includes a time stamp for each message.
  • An actor event is now dispatched when a missile cannot hit its target.
  • When loading documents with Battle.net-only dependencies, you will now be prompted to log in and download the dependency data, rather than failing to load.
  • Game variants now automatically use the default melee variants for new maps, without requiring manual generation. This will not take effect for maps created prior to this patch.
  • The Custom game variant is no longer automatically included when other non-default variants are defined.
  • Increased the maximum recharge vital rate for heal effects.


Bug Fixes


  • Battle.net
    • Chat windows no longer vanish when exiting a multiplayer map or campaign mission.
    • Fixed an issue where players would still receive toasts when their status was set to busy.


  • Custom Games
    • Default race in a game lobby is now properly set to Random.
    • Players can now configure the lobby for 1v5 matches.
    • The search functionality for map searches has been improved.
    • Lobby hosts will now receive a toast when an invited player declines an invitation.
    • Custom game lobbies will now remember the game mode chosen under a category.
    • Fixed an issue where changing the category to "Custom" would default the teams to 5v3.
    • Fixed an issue where custom maps could not be reported from the map preview screen.


  • Gameplay
    • General
      • If a unit loads into a transport, missiles targeting it will no longer target similar units in the area.
      • Structures damaged during construction will no longer count towards structures lost.
      • Fixed an issue where builders waiting for an area to clear could block units trying to leave the area.
      • Fixed an issue with inventory drop range checks.
      • Fixed an issue that, in certain cases, allowed a command to be issued that did not appear on the command card
    • Interface
      • Queue tooltips now display information about what is in progress.
      • Fixed an issue where the back button would not always return players to the score screen properly.
    • Terran
      • Marines trained at multiple Barracks will now prefer a Barracks with a Reactor over one with a Tech Lab or no attachment.
      • SCVs will now load into the closest Command Center if multiple are within range.
    • Zerg
      • Creep now recedes properly when an AI-controlled Hatchery, Lair, or Hive is destroyed.


  • StarCraft II Editor
    • The Player Leaves Game event now fires when a player leaves or they are defeated/victorious.
    • Loading screen progress bar option now works when using Melee loading screen type.
    • Test Document now works properly on maps with Battle.net-only dependencies.
    • Publishing a new file using Major revision will now properly set the document version to 1.0.
    • Publish dialog now properly remembers the Show Real Name setting from previous publish.
    • File preview panel now displays author's real name if that option was set during publishing.
    • The Import module will now allow importing an override Assets.txt file.
    • Undoing a terrain object modification will now also undo associated terrain changes.
    • Editor will display document text from another locale if no text for the active locale exists.
    • Copying points with custom models will display the model properly on the pasted point.
    • It is no longer possible to have multiple default variants in the Game Variants dialog.
    • Removed icon support for attribute and variant definitions, as Battle.net does not display these.
    • Fixed issues with invalid map bounds when creating 32x32 maps.
    • Fixed issues with poor performance in the Terrain Editor when scroll bars are visible.
    • Fixed issues with drag-and-drop in Trigger Editor when tracking is not enabled.
    • Fixed an issue that would cause a crash if multiple unit forms had too many abilities.
    • Fixed an issue with temporary publish names in the Publish dialog still verifying the original name.
    • Fixed an issue with the Unit Manipulates Item trigger.
    • Fixed excessive delays on some systems when saving files using the Smaller Files option, and also when publishing Locked files.
    • Fixed preview panel display in Terrain Editor palettes.
    • Fixed performance issues in Terrain Editor when modifying terrain with many road tiles on the map.
    • Fixed initial display of variables in the Trigger Debugging Window.
    • Fixed generated script for built-in attribute values, which caused them to not be accessed properly.
    • Fixed action list when modifying a Custom Script action without sub-views enabled.
    • Fixed loading map dependency data.
    • Fixed an issue where loading complex bank files would cause the client to disconnect from Battle.net.


  • Technical Issues
    • Fixed an issue where unplugging headphones could cause the game to freeze.
    • Fixed an issue where XP systems running with Unicode characters enabled could prevent a player from starting a multiplayer game.
 
---Marines trained at multiple Barracks will now prefer a Barracks with a Reactor over one with a Tech Lab or no attachment.

---A new System Panel has been added. Players can now view their local time and FPS while in game by mousing over the Menu (F10) button in the upper-left hand corner of the game screen. Laptop users can also view Wi-Fi signal strength and battery levels.

---A new game clock has been added. Players can now instantly see how long they've been in their current mission or match. This feature can be turned on or off in the Gameplay Options menu.
Click to expand...

Happy to see the balance changes but these 3 are little things that I'm glad to see.
 
[quote name='Hydro2Oxide']Happy to see the balance changes but these 3 are little things that I'm glad to see.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea why they didn't keep the MBS system they used during beta where they actually separated the techlab and reactor.

Now I have to pause and actually think, "Ok, I have a reactor starport and a tech lab starport, to build ravens it's now RVV. If I hit VVR, it'll build a viking and queue the raven in the tech lab." Back then it would take more keypresses and I would do VV*tab*R.

*sigh*

Played a few games last night. Oh man, seriously, anything but 1v1s is so relaxing. I only lost once out of around 8 games of 3v3/4v4, and I only did horribly in 1 game. Held off a dual protoss proxy 2gate by myself. yeah!

Oh well... too bad it doesn't matter.
 
I agree with you about the reactor/tech lab split. I wish it was the old way again, as it gives more control over what you're building and makes it easier to avoid mistakes in what you're building.

When you have a control group of buildings, you just see that stuff is queued, not WHAT is queued.. its annoying when I'm terran as I often accidentally queue a few too many marines, so my tech lab picks up 1, then queue marauder behind them - which is a waste of the tech lab, and annoying.

Good call on that one.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If I'm understanding the issue correctly, their cleave operates off of the size of the unit they're attacking + some number. This means the larger the unit they attack, the larger an area their cleave AOE's. So, when an Ultra attacks, say, a Command Center, it's able to cleave every SCV that's repairing it.
 
Huh.. it sounds like this impact is only against buildings.. it sounds like a bug they'll have a difficult time working around.. I know they change tank blasts a while back to focus on the center of the unit, and eminate outward.. maybe they'll have to put the old tank logic into play with ultra hits - rather than emanating out from the edges of the building, have it affect point of impact.

Meh. Change one thing, break two others... the sign of a bad QA process. I'm amazed they didn't catch something like the total circumference of the AOE in testing.
 
[quote name='kainzero']i know how to fix it.

add a visual effect! then it'll make sense.

seriously though, PFs are retardedly strong[/QUOTE]

Yes, because they shoot in to the air (?)
 
One of my next terran games I think I may try an insane defensive build... 1 rax, gas up early, expand to gold with a second PF... build some missile turrets and get the range increase upgrade and all that, then focus on the unit production after both expands are seeded. It could theoretically cost map control, but PF repells most early aggression.

It might even work against skilled players.. For kicks I'm going to do it the next time I roll terran.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top