Lmao. We’re gonna cry about the baneling when they are one time use, melee, and hyper vulnerable to splash; as we ignore the siege tank that is siege range, not one time use but rather fires every 2 seconds, and has the sight range of an overseer? This is a flagrant double standard.
The AOE comparison is 40 versus 20-26 and 35-47 against light. Yes, it does more than make up for the cost.
Once again, if you are talking about the splash then no, Widow Mines are not likely to deal more damage than 2 Banelings. The range also cancels out whenever you are moving because of the distance that Banelings can travel in the same time that it takes Widow Mines to shoot or burrow+shoot.
The normal speed was used to show the exact time that a Widow Mine takes. If you are distracted by that then you are missing the point entirely.
All projectiles that target a unit chase that unit after they are fired. Widow Mines are no exception, they just need 1.07 (1.5) seconds before they can fire.
Furthermore, it is absurd to assume that the opponent will not build detection when faced with Widow Mines. If you are going against a stealthed unit without detection, then you need to damn well compensate for it by paying close attention to your army or by pre-splitting so that you suffer minimal damage from the mines.
No, they do not.
Just like the lack of more than 6 (5 if you exclude Mutalisks, and I am not including Spores either) anti-air options from Zerg would not make anti-air Banelings balanced, the existence of 8 other anti-air options from Terran (if you are really generous and include Raven Auto-Turrets) does not make the Widow Mine’s ability to attack air broken.
The Widow Mine’s anti-air is fine because most air units can easily avoid it or have decent counter-play against it. It would definitely not be fine if Widow Mines could move and shoot like Banelings without that transformation and cast time, or if Widow Mines had more range (which would prevent Void Rays, Banshees, and Battlecruisers from attacking from outside of their range).
Banelings were incredibly strong in Wings of Liberty. They were more or less kept in check by the map sizes/designs. Otherwise Zergling/Baneling would have consistently wrecked Terran, like it usually does today on the current map pool.
Marines, Marauders, and Medivacs suffer friendly-fire from Widow Mines all the time. I don’t think you play or even watch this game; because it is a consistent issue in just about every TvX match-up where Widow Mines are used.
Widow Mines are less likely to deal friendly-fire than Siege Tanks because the Terran army only needs to avoid one shot from each; but they still splash their own units on a regular basis if the opponent is half-way competent.
Tank/Widow Mine is not a common strategy because it is relatively easy for a competent player to abuse or stop; but that one does have a lower risk of friendly-fire though because the Widow Mines are usually placed too far away from the Tanks to hit them with friendly-fire.
That only delays the mine’s shot and does nothing to change the fact that you need to know where a unit is going to be 1.5 seconds in advance in order to get a good shot.
That assessment is both wrong and dishonest.
First of all, any Terran player who a-moves units without paying any attention to them deserves to lose. That is not how a competent Terran player plays in any match-up.
Second, as I pointed out earlier, the only units with the same or less range than a Widow mine (Hellions/Hellbats, Cyclones without lock-on, and Marines) will still beat Widow Mines with minor micro, rendering the Widow Mines useless even against those units.
Siege Tanks are not necessary to deal with Widow Mines in TvT. Widow Mines would still be near useless in the match-up without them.
It absolutely does not when you factor in the 125 burst and the bonus vs shield, which you conveniently disregard, despite the fact that being able to one-shot most units in the game is a huge determinant of cost effectiveness.
Why do you keep using 2 banelings as a point of comparison when that is literally double the gas cost of a widow mine? In addition, the widow mine needn’t even shoot to be more cost effective in isolation than a baneling, as 1-2 banelings in by themselves will die before reaching their target, provided that their target is ranged as is the vast majority of terran units. My point was never exclusively about splash, but about the many advantages the mine has over the baneling including splash, burst, ability to hit air, cloak, and rechargeability, making these suggested nerfs to the baneling utterly ridiculous, yet you defend them nonetheless.
No, the normal speed is just something you use to inflate the numbers. Every calculation for timing in lotv has been through faster, which was the entire point of changing the ingame clock, so that we wouldn’t have 2 different times.
Yes, but no other projectiles in the game chases for 125 burst and 40 splash.
Why is it absurd? Frequently in pro games overseers are sniped or killed during mid game fights causing mines to be forgotten, and practically invisible on creep. This was evidenced many times over in hots where even though zerg had overseers, cloaked mines would still find their find their way to recharge and deal additional damage without the zerg even being able to spot them on creep.
6 anti air options? I count 2: corruptors and hydras, 3 if you include mutas, which suck in straight up fights, 4 if you include queens which are incredibly immobile, and 6 if you include vipers and infestors both of which deal limited aoe damage over time. The very fact that you are considering to include spore crawlers as an anti air unit proves even you subconsciously understand zerg’s lack of aa units. Even the widespread use of queens is proof of zerg’s lackluster aa.
By all means, let’s compare with terran, which has 7 solid options depending on the situation: marines, mines, cyclones, thors, liberators, bcs, and vikings. 3 of these deal splash on auto attack, one is a tier 1 mineral only unit that scales incredibly with upgrades, and another has a global teleport and 240 damage burst ability without energy requirements. Zerg doesn’t even have a single unit that deals aoe to air on auto attack. This also isn’t factoring in the raven and ghost, 2 terran casters that both have a place vs air comps, albeit on lower numbers.
Yea, ok, mines shooting air don’t break the game, that was bad wording on my part, but my point is that it is a huge advantage the widow mine has over the baneling, and one zerg players would kill for.
They really weren’t, if banelings were so strong in wings how come it saw next to no play in zvp? How come zerg players started phasing them out to go heavier into ling infestor comps in the broodlord infestor era? How come zerg results were so lackluster playing the dominant lbm style before infestor broodlord became meta? If you need proof of this you need only to look at the first 2 years of gsl results in wings.
It is you who I doubt has ever touched this game besides watch the odd pro game so you can find something about the other 2 races to complain about. I’ve been m1 since lotv came out, had gm mmr briefly, and have gotten masters with every race multiple times, and still play. Meanwhile you remain the gold level terran since wings whose bias has only become more blatant over the years.
I never claimed friendly fire didn’t exist, but that its effect was minimal compared to what terran players purport it to be. I have no doubt it is less than that of the tank, and in addition can be phased out through manual targeting and pre-splits, something becoming ever more rare in terran micro.
This was in regards to your point on not being able to choose targets, or firing randomly, which is entirely dependent on the terran player’s ability to manually target and juggle.
That is not how a terran player should play, yet it happens all the time for all pro players of all races. It will happen, maybe not exactly 3 cloaked mines vs a bio ball, maybe it’s 8 mines vs going for a surround, maybe it’s 1 in your mineral line vs an oracle, maybe it’s 2 on your ramp vs an all-in, or two on a ledge vs a drop. The point stands that mines in practice get their shots off, even in pro play, as we’ve seen throughout the majority of hots despite facing units that have the speed to evade it.
Once again, I implore you to test a bio ball of marines vs a much smaller ball of marines supported by mines. Seriously, test how long it takes you to stutter step out of the mine range then back in enough to kill them cost efficiently. You could have one group with 30 marines and 2 medivacs, and then another with mines equivalent to the gas cost of 2 medivacs, minus marines for the extra minerals required. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but the sheer time it takes for even marines to deal with multiple mines cost efficiently is ridiculous.
In a lot of AOE scenarios that doesn’t matter. Especially in TvT or TvZ matches.
Against light units the damage of 2 Banelings is also consistently higher despite the shield bonus.
- Two Banelings cost 50% more resources and hit 50% more area, so it is a fairly valid comparison.
- Zergs production capacity is always a lot higher.
- Gas is not the only limiting factor for these units.
While the Widow Mine is useful in many cases where Banelings are not, Banelings are significantly more powerful at the role they typically fill; and tend to be far more devastating to the opponent’s army than Widow Mines. That is the main point, and it is the reason why Banelings may need a nerf–whereas Widow Mines certainly do not.
No, it is not. I explicitly provided both sets of numbers quite consistently.
I provide normal speed values for most threads (and include the conversions) because it is more accurate. The “normal/editor” values are exact values while the “faster” speed values almost always have rounding errors.
All projectiles that work by targeting a unit chase that unit regardless of the actual damage dealt. It is frankly an irrelevant point; whereas the fact that the Widow Mine takes 1.5 (1.07) seconds to fire is relevant in any engagement where units are moving.
Because outside of the early-game it is stupid to move around without detection when your opponent is making cloaked or burrowed units; and in the case of mines specifically it is stupid to run around without detection without pre-splitting at least a few of your units. Those are both user errors more than anything else.
Overseers have plenty of speed and sight range and the armies that typically use Widow Mines usually lack the range or air force needed to snipe them; so no you should not lose them that often. Overseers are also relatively cheap to make considering that Zerg needs to build a lot of Overlords and make some extras in case they get sniped anyway.
Yes, that is 6. I said 5 if you exclude Mutalisks because they are not balanced for air combat (being too good as a harassment unit for that), and I explicitly excluded Spore Crawlers because they are a structure.
Parasitic Bomb, Abduct, Neural, and Fungal are each exceptionally powerful against air units; so it is completely valid to considerthe casters that use them as anti-air.
Fungal and Parasitic Bomb both consistently deal more damage than Storm (another spell that does not stack and one which most units can escape with around 30 net damage); and Neural Parasite is extremely punishing to capital ships in particular.
Queens are an incredibly strong combat unit that is efficient against most Protoss units and many Terran units. They see wide-spread use because they are powerful, and because they can hold off most forms of aggression without requiring the Zerg player to redirect as many larva from Drone production.
Why are you using the damage vs light as the base point when most units in the game aren’t? Could it be you want to distract from the fact that the mine does 125 + 40 splash vs the baneling’s 20 (+15 vs light) splash? This is a huge difference in base damage for the same gas cost.
Sure, we can compare maximum damage for each unit, but then the burst damage of the mine has to be fairly considered because they are frequently seen one shotting units like stalkers, oracles, and mutas in pro play, instantly making up for the cost. Compare this to a lone or even 2 banelings which have next to no damage potential.
The widow mine’s 5 range allows it to be effective in isolation compared to the baneling’s melee range that does not, an advantage of being ranged that I think you are overlooking.
The area the baneling hits isn’t relevant to why you chose to use 2. One baneling also hits for 50% more area.
So then make an argument against that instead of against a unit as cost inefficient as a baneling.
Yes but gas is the primary resource measurement we use to determine a unit’s cost effectiveness. You can argue that the supply is a bigger limiting factor for the widow mine than gas, but rarely does terran ever hit 200/200 for this to matter, and the ability to one shot most units compensates for this.
Again, banelings are “devastating” because the zerg dumps a lot more resources into these cost inefficient units than terran ever does into mines.
Yet it happens all the time even in pro play, as witnessed in countless hots tvz’s.
Yet fungal and pb will never make up for the potential dps of a unit that does aoe to air on auto, which zerg does not have but t/p do. NP just got nerfed and we’ve seen what a range nerf can do to the ability since wol, so I would be hesitant to label it an effective option vs capital ships. This is especially true given that yamato one shots them and np makes the infestor a priority and stationary. In addition, fungal can no longer stop tj, which forces zerg even more to take constant bc harass without any way to reliably to shut it down, as we’ve witnessed at the recent hsc despite a gamebreaking bug favouring zerg.
All of those are true, but the queen also has little offensive capabilities because of its immobility. In terms of defense, yes zerg has viable aa in the form of spore forests and viper/corruptor. However, you and I both know that turtling on spore forests and slowly edging forward with creep is a symptom of zerg’s lackluster aa so much so that they have to rely on static d and picking off units with abduct. This is a style not even zerg wants to be playing, we would much prefer the ability to take a head on fight late game, but that just isn’t viable given the gimmicky nature of np and the lack of a unit that does aoe to air on auto.
My rankedftw is literally in the thread, genius.
And did you really create a new account because your other one got banned that fast? LOL
you can’t make an account an instantly post, you have to play a bunch of games, people with multiple posting accounts have put a lot of effort into it, it’s kind of pathetic.
Bane should cost 1 supply. 100/50 resource per supply is simply broken.
There is literally no ground composition that can beat maxed bane army.
Maybe the people with multiple accounts enjoy smurfing and the reason they have all of these accounts aren’t related to a need to post on the forums. Totally doesn’t apply to me.
Banelings are pretty much fine, but they buffed their HP to 35 with centrifugal hooks “just because” they want it harder for bio and further push the already existing requirement for bio to split.
Every viable Terran or Protoss army include a very large number of light units (Marines, Hellions/Hellbats, Widow Mines, Zealots, Sentries, HT, etc) throughout most of the game, so the anti-light damage is always significant in non-mirrors.
Zerg is the only race that can get away a composition (mass Roach) that does not use light units not include many light ground units.
When you actually have enough splash damage to kill units with it, the single-target damage becomes irrelevant.
Yes, a single Widow Mine is more likely to get a kill when used in isolation, but that is not a problem and it is unrelated to the larger fights that make Banelings problematic.
If you compare the cost of the Widow Mine and the area that they hit for that cost, then 2 Banelings are effectively equal to one Widow Mine.
The Banelings hit 50% more area and cost 50% more.
I am not going to waste time making an argument against something that is not problematic. Banelings are overpowered and have been since WOL. Zerg’s production is balanced, at least in relation to the strength of most of its other combat units.
No it is not. If you try to use gas cost to measure a unit’s effectiveness then you are going to have a very bad understanding of the game; particularly when it comes to the effectiveness of units like Zerglings, Marines, Queens, Hellions, Ghosts, Siege Tanks, Ravens, etc.
Supply becomes a limiting factor when you are near the supply cap or have trouble building supply structures fast enough.
Before that, Minerals are usually the limiting factor since units with high mineral costs will significantly slow down the player’s buildup and limit his/her combat strength.
Gas mostly affects your army’s composition, rather than its actual strength, as you can always offset the gas costs of a by making more Mineral-heavy units in other cycles.
You cannot do the same with a unit that costs more minerals than normal; which is why the 200/100 version of the Ghost was more expensive in practice than the Raven (100/200) or any other version of the Ghost (100/200 in WOL alpha, 150/150 in early WOL, 150/125 now). As an example, assuming that your army is normally producing Thors, you can produce 2 Hellbats and a Raven instead for the same relative army supply.
They certainly can make up for that difference. Fungal Growth and Parasitic Bomb both hit a significantly larger radii than any other form of air-to-air splash for full damage in the entire area, and they can simply be reapplied once they run out.
Both spells are exceptionally powerful whether you are comparing them to Thors, Archons, Liberators, or even Storms:
- Thors: They hit in a 0.5 radius. 4.94% of the area of Fungal.
- Archons: They hit for full damage in a 0.25 radius, half damage in a 0.5 radius, and full damage in a 1.0 radius; and this is all at 3 range such that Archons are out-ranged by every air unit except the Mutalisk. Archons hit a total of 19.753% of the area of Fungal.
- Liberators and Storms: Both hit for full damage in a 1.5 radius, 44.44% of the area of Fungal. One Fungal can easily deal more damage than Storm, especially considering that the units cannot limit the damage by moving with Fungal like they can with Storm.
Widow Mines in particular are the closest to the damage output of Fungal, considering their 1.75 radius.
A combination of either Hydralisks or Corruptors with support from Vipers (Abduct/PB) and/or Infestors (NP/Fungal) can overcome just about any air army without Spore Crawlers.
Spore and Spine forests are used because they are mobile and hard to break. Not because Zerg’s anti-air is “lacking”. Any advantage that the Zerg player has over the opponent can be amplified by using a Spine/Spore forest to block the opponent from advancing on one side of the map. Using Photon Cannons, Missile Turrets, or Planetary Fortresses in the same way is a relatively larger investment, since it has to be repeated in multiple locations.
No it doesn’t. Having the ability to one shot units that cost a lot more is not rendered irrelevant just because they are surrounded by other units.
The larger fights that make banelings “problematic” only occur when the zerg invests significantly more into their army of banelings than the opposing ground army. In addition the fact that banelings are one-time use units necessitates their head on power.
It really isn’t though. 2 banelings cost 100/50, which is significantly greater than 75/25, just because the percentage difference in cost is equal to that of the splash radius does not make the comparison valid or relevant to use 2 banelings. 25 gas is a huge difference, which is why it is more fair to compare 75/25 to 50/25.
lol, that’s why it saw next to no use in zvp throughout 2 expansions, because it was constantly overpowered? Yeah right.
How is it not? Yes mineral only units exist, and they are most often measured in cost effectiveness based on the fact that they are mineral only units. Ghosts, tanks, and ravens are actually measured in cost effectiveness by their gas cost.
Which rarely if ever happens to terran players going bio mine, a composition relying on constant trading to make use of the incredible cost efficiency of the mine.
Maybe moreso terran relies on minerals, but both protoss and zerg armies’ strength are most often determined by their gas investment.
Composition is strength. My 40 supply of pure ling is going to do nothing against your 40 supply of pure marine or zealot. Gas determines strength, idk how this is even an argument.
Absolutely not, the 150/150 ghost was the most expensive version, and when it was changed to 200/100 it was largely heralded as a buff. What you have now is a more even split of resources, but when factoring in the double value of gas to minerals, the current 150/125 is of equivalent cost to the 200/100 version.
And yet if you’d ask any zerg player whether they’d trade those abilities for a unit that deals aoe to air like the archon, thor, liberator, or mine, they would agree in a heartbeat. Fungal is widely regarded as an ineffective spell and difficult style to play against mutas, yet when protoss gets 3+ archons in their main army the zerg has to transition out of mutas if they ever hope to win a head on fight. It’s the same with thors, and to an extent mines and libs. The anti-air capabilities of a unit that deals aoe on auto will always be greater than that of a unit that has an aoe spell, even if the unit hatches with 1 spell cast ready. In addition, both the thor and archon are significantly more durable than the infestor and viper, favouring the former in head on fights.
This has been proven to be straight up false on numerous occasions, never do you see a zerg player win a head on fight against a maxed t/p air army without heavy reliance on spores. It’s always by chipping away with abduct, retreating into spore forests, taking every expansion on your side while denying your opponent until it’s like 200/200 vs 120/200. We can even test this, give me a protoss/terran maxed out sky army and have a zerg of equal skill control the zerg army and try to do a headon fight. It just doesn’t work. They keyword you use here is “can” yet you know full well the zerg stands no chance unless they get 5+ free neurals, which would be poor play on the t/p part.