It occurred to me that I have never yet done a simple cost/power comparison between Tesseract Cannons and Photon Cannons. What I found was that the new cost maybe was more fitting all along:
The Tesseract cannon costs 400/150 = 8/3 =2.67 times the cost.
The power of ratio of 2 units is equal to the product of the ratio of their attack and the ratio of their defense (e.g. 50% more attack and defense means 50% more damage while living 50% longer, thus 2.25 times the power).
Thus, while admittedly assuming 3/3/3 which may be unfair (I compensate by ignoring the tier 3 barrier ability), we get that Zeratul’s cannons are 39/20 * 400/300 = 1.95 * 1.33 = 2.59 times the power.
So basically, when completely ignoring the ability to project a shade, and while not counting the barrier ability Zeratul’s cannon has, not to mention not needling a pylon, his cannons are 2.59 times as powerful and now 2.67 times the cost. Which seems pretty fair to me.
To be honest, I wonder if had someone pointed this out within a week of Zeratul’s release, if they may have nerfed it before even releasing Stetmann.
Why on earth has balancing to be all about nerfing.
Yes zer was better than others but you cant compare other commanders to others. Like raynor tanks are better than swanns yet swann is all about defense and vehicle while raynor is about a blob. ( there bio says so )
Because something is good doesnt mean it is broken. Idk but the point is that the commanders are unique and playable that way. If someone wants to play let them dont force your opinion down there throat and force them to play only the hard way. Its not comp god…
It gets a bit more complicated for units though. AoE becomes a bigger problem, speed and range come into play, and while buildings are usually standard issue in co-op (excepting a few commanders), the units are usually quite strong.
For example, comparing ascendants and high Templar is almost impossible. For example, ignoring healing and feedback and mind blast, just looking at damage and hp, ascendants are just a little better after only 1 stack, but only if we assume that the units are staying in the area of the orb that is moving in the opposite direction of the wave.
However, this is largely because of the relatively massive hp of ascendants, which is less relevant because of the high range of both units. Further, we have to account for guardian shell, but we can’t because that’s anything from as valuable as 1,000 hp to as mediocre as 10 hp. We also can’t account for all of Artanis’ many warp gate style abilities that allow for incredible mobility. And we can’t account for the healing effect of the Templar. And we can’t account for the ability of the Templar to merge into an archon, the synergy with shield overcharge, the superiority of Artanis’ mineral dump, the fact that ascendants come with effectively a tax, and the above problem of “does the enemy stay in the area” and we’re only looking at 1 spell each on units that have 2 each.
The point im trying to make about nerfing is people like to play a certain way.
In zeratuls case it was cannons. It was a way you could play him. The reason the forums are full of it says enough. Many bougt him for that reason. Not much micro just a easy commander. Nothing wrong with that.
In the end many wont play that way anymore and maybe many will drop the game since they feel betrayed spending there money. Result will be the cashcow beeing dry and nobody will be happy when that happens.
They took a way you could play him for the casuels. I know a better than casuel can still play him. Its about the overall player base not just the top one.
Swann’s have slightly less dps (with full mastery for Raynor), and slightly less hp (Raynor 3/3). They have the same range, Swann’s has less effective build time, and while Raynor’s cost less gas Swann can make all that gas and more. I fail to see how Raynor’s could be capable of ranking anything more than “marginally stronger”.
They are not godlike better but def better. Still nothing wrong. I didnt mean to say is was more viable than swann. Just making the comparison stat wise. I will try to find the treat.
To be clear again im not here to arguing just seeing its easy to compare units and so forth while all units are op in a certain way.
Oh I know Raynor’s tanks are good, I use them all the time as Raynor (though lately I do a lot of just lazy BC making) and just earlier today played with a Raynor who did hard mass tank (though it was DoN).
Its just fun to see certain things beeing better than you might have thought. To be clear all im trying is to make a point stat wise. That is what is done above so …
I’m going to have to rethink my idea that the cannons got hurt by the nerf. Thanks a lot, like actually, that’s good to know.
That also makes Karax Kannons better in a lot of ways now. Which is good!
Good to hear that you like them! Bear in mind I have made it a point to try to not look at support units for them. It’s just the raw attack and hp numbers with buffs the units apply to themselves.
They changed the playstyle of said commander so much it got a different playstyle. You can no longer use the playstyle like you used to or they advertised him.
Be your logic why not play brutal 6 … gues what to diff for many so instead of balancing just limit his playstyle even more
It’s just a big joke and i find it diff to have some respect for them after Stokov, zeratul,stetman, mensk.
Just put a poll in the game who likes the current “balancing” and who dont like it. We both know how that will end
