Detectorific?

Your talking in the SC2 discussion area, so ofc he would talk about stuff in sc2

why not use goons to attack mutas? I've done it to help with 1-2 cannons and it seemed to work pretty good.

It can only cloak 1 unit at a time, and only for a very small period of time. And since they cost more than regular pylons, I don't see anybody building more than 1-2 per base.

um...just because a unit costs more doesn't mean it won't appear until later on. Techwise, the nighthawk only requires 3 buildings, the DT needs 4. So by the time the time the Dark Obelesk goes up, you should already be having a NightHawk in production. Also, as the DT needs more structures, the protoss has to invest more min and gas before even getting a DT, so the higher gas cost for the Nighthawk is justified and countered by the excess gas needed for DT production.

I dont see how you came up with that conclusion. What people mean is that it gives you an early warning when an enemy is near the tower, it doesnt tell you what units they are, only that they're there. Even if you get towers, you till need to scout to see exactly what units the enemy is producing.

obs come out about the same time as the nighthawk, and again requires more buildings than the nighthawk. And the observer is much weaker than the nighthawk or banshee and cant attack.

 

@Eonmaster, I am not saying u cannot take part in this discussion. But I believe that gasmaskguy can answer the replies by himself. Anyway to reply:

1. We were talking abt SC1 initailly. Even if u add in the sensor tower, I can add that the observers could also give u the awareness earlier. So the canons still contribute better than the turret even with the help of sensor towers.

2. I didn't say u cannot use goons to attack the mutas. But I am saying its a poor counter. Of coz in early game, there isn't much choice. But corsairs would be the best no doubt.

3. The dark pylon thingy is ur own judgement. Sure u could be rite. But still gasmaskguy claim that there isn't ANY cloaked units in the early game and even mid game. And not only I manage to find a way to allow tier 1 units to cloaked, but I actually caught him having knowledge abt it. And yet he dare to tell me there isn't one early or mid game. The more he argue with me regarding this, more laughing will occur.

4. Technically u can purposely get nighthawks as early as possible. In fact u could have tech to it even if ur enemies are rushing u with zealots. The question is by teching too fast to the nighthawks, would this be feasible? U have to take into consideration of SC2 gameplay. U could have been dead trying to do that. Not to mention it will take more time to build nighthawks compare to dark templars apart from the double gas. Plus protoss buildings do warp in faster than terrans construct buildings. U can count for urself if u dun believe me.

5. He's been talking abt scouting to see enemies tech. He claims after we discover the enemies tech, there is no need to scout. I am giving him a lesson on why he needs to scout even after discovering the enemies tech.

6. Observers require 3 buildings while nighthawks require 3 buildings and 1 add on. So nighthawks require 4 buildings actually. Observers require less gas compare to nighthawks. And protoss buildings technically can warp in faster than terrans construct buildings. Most likely observers can come out first depending on the Protoss player. And observers are not weak either. They are permenantly cloaked which means they can scout relatively unharm so long as there are no detectors.

 

I obviously haven't had the time to keep responding to this thread in full, but not only are you wrong here, but you've already been proven wrong on these points.

Terran:

1. Barracks )
2. Factory. > + 0.5 Tech Lab.
3. Starport )

Protoss:

1. Pylon
2. Gateway
3. Cybernetics Core
4. Robotics Facility.


To put that into words, the Terran need three buildings and an Addon that can be built at any time after the first Barracks has been constructed. It's built along side the construction of the other buildings, because neither the Factory or Starport require it to be built. Construction on said Factory or Starport can be under way while the Tech Lab is being added to the Barracks. Once completed, the Barracks can be moved out of the way and the Starport can even be built already attached to the Addon.

With Protoss, they need four buildings. Every building requires that the previous building is completed before construction can start. They have to be built sequentially, and cannot be built along side each other, unlike Terran.

Therefore the only way requiring a Tech Lab affects the Terran is in the resources it costs, which is only fifty minerals and fifty gas.

I also went to the trouble of calculating how much it costs to tech to both the Nighthawk and the Observer, and how much building time there is. Oh, no effort at all... You can thank me later.

A Terran Nighthawk requires six fifty minerals, four fifty gas, and there's two forty-five seconds of building time.

A Protoss Observer requires six twenty-five minerals, three seventy-five gas, and there's two hundred and eighteen seconds of building time.

Nighthawk - 650 minerals, 450 gas, 245 seconds of building time.
Observer - 625 minerals, 375 gas, 218 seconds of building time.

Overall, the Nighthawk costs twenty-five minerals and seventy five gas more than the Observer and takes twenty-seven more seconds in building time.

Seriously dude, that's more balanced than their first tier units:

A Zealot requires three fifty minerals and there's a hundred and eight seconds of building time.

A Marine requires two hundred minerals and there's eighty five seconds of building time.

Zealot - 350 minerals, 108 seconds of building time.
Marine - 200 minerals, 85 seconds of building time.

Overall, the Zealot costs a hundred and fifty more minerals and takes twenty three more seconds. The Terran player would have time to being a whole other Bunker and extra Marine, taking up a hundred and fifty more minerals and twenty more seconds, and would still be finished three seconds before the Zealot's been completed.

And Nighthawks are weak? They've got eighty more health and can defend themselves from pursuers. They can also deploy Targeting Drones to act as Cloaked sentries wherever they please.

Yes, the Observer may be permanently Cloaked, but bases almost always have Detectors protecting both their defences and economy by this stage, so using Observers as scouts isn't as useful as scouting with Probes at the beginning of the game. Also, once an Observer is discovered, especially if it's been discovered by Terran, it's dog meat, and what with Radar Towers in StarCraft2 now, not only is covering your base from such intruders much easier because of their massive radius, but almost all human error is removed from locating, Detecting and hence destroying them.

Q.E.D.

 

@Itza, u really should add in the supply depot to replace the pylon. Although supply depot is never a direct requirement, the Terran army will need them to support their sizeable army. If u dun build supply depot, then ur max supply will only be 10 while the Protoss has 18. So to make it equivalent, the supply depot has to be added in.

After amended,

Nighthawk 750 minerals, 450 gas, 245 seconds

Observers 625 minerals, 375 gas , 218 seconds

The build time is a little bit different but on the cost side there is still some difference. So if the protoss player wishes to bring the mobile detector first, they can do so. Its true that it could be countered by the fact that zealots are produced slower but still all this is theoretical. What I need is more practical becoz it doesn't take into acct of the effect of harassment and etc.

Also take a note that after the building is completed, the observer = 25 minerals, 75 gas , 33 seconds and 1 supply. Nighthawks = 100 minerals, 200 gas, 60 seconds and 2 supply.

1 nighthawk = 4 observers (minerals)
1 nighthawk = 2.667 observers (gas)
1 nighthawk = 1.818 observers (build time)
1 nighthawk = 2 observers (supply)

Again theoretically if time continue to progress, the protoss can afford to double the production of mobile detectors. Then again it ignores the effect of the harassment and etc. Seems like protoss has better mobile detector.

DARK TEMPLARS

1. Pylon - 100 minerals, 0 gas, 25 seconds
2. Gateway - 150 minerals , 0 gas , 50 seconds
3. Cybernetics core - 150 minerals, 100 gas , 50 seconds
4. Twilight council - 150 minerals, 100 gas, 50 seconds
5. Dark Obelisk - 150 minerals, 150 gas, 100 seconds
6. Dark Templar - 125 minerals, 100 gas, 42 seconds

Total Dark Templars = 825 minerals, 450 gas, 317 seconds

Upon completion of buildings and as time progresses :

1 Nighthawk = 0.8 Dark Templars (minerals)
1 Nighthawk = 2 Dark Templars (gas)
1 Nighthawk = 1.428 Dark templars ( build time)
1 Nighthawk = 1 Dark templar ( supply)

It seems Nighthawks can be produced first b4 dark templars. However is it viable to tech all the way to nighthawks if u r so sure that ur opponent is teching to dt?. If u ask me its quite crazy strategy. After all the auto turrets and spider mines has not been factored inside the equation yet. In the middle of the tech u still can be harassed. However as time progresses, the protoss player can have more dts than the terrans produce nighthawks as time to pass.

Conclusion:

While this setup gives a rough idea of how detectors can be used to counter cloaked units, this progression isn't enough to convince me that nighthawks can be produce earlier than dark templars and the Terrans must be in a comfortable situation. Meaning they cannot afford to lose their factory let's say in their quest to get nighthawks. This will delay the Terrans. Anyway my point is if u dun play the game, it is hard to know. If u ask a new player to analyze all these details in order to analyze SC1 let's say, it will be hard to learn. Players usually learn by playing not by studying textbook.

So the big question here is does anyone has a video of the latest build in SC2 that features the use of nighthawks against dark templars? The only condition is the game must be played by 2 pro players and not some amateurs. Thanks. If indeed nighthawks can be buld b4 dark templars in a very meaningful way for Terrans, I will be more than happy.

 

@Eon. Thanks for responding to some of his points, it really saves me a lot of time.


@Charmed. The response you made on the last page is just nuts, concerning Cannons and Turrets. I think everybody understands 'cept you. See, here's what I did.

Turret damage vs small divided by cooldown divided by minerals a Turret costs = a number that represents how much damage a Turret does over a certain period of time.

Do that math. Then replace "Turret" with "Cannon" and do the math again.

10 / 15 / 75 = 0.009. That's the Turret's damage vs Mutas, for example.

20 / 22 / 150 = 0.006. That's the Cannon's damage vs Mutas.

What I mean by unit size not mattering is that no matter the air unit's size, the Turret is better than the Cannon at damage per time per structure.

Hence, your statement about Cannons being better vs Mutas than Turrets is false. How can you dismiss these simple calculations? There's not much room for error really, it's just simple math...


"The GTG made up for the double cost. In fact with the GTG they are better off in terms of being able to survive better."

Haha, you think we're talking GtG here? We're talking DETECTION dude. You said that Cannons are better than Turrets if you only consider Detection, I proved you wrong, and now you're all sore about it, avoiding the subject at hand (which is detection, not GtG) to keep trolling.



"I was talking abt SC1 and now u talk abt SC2. U are really funny anyway."

Yeah, 'cause now this "imbalance" will be even more evened out. Terrans in SC2 will have time to return to their base.


"Now I am telling u that permanent cloaking > the ability to fly with energy requirement. If u want to discount dts, the observers are flying and permenantly cloaked! Beat that!"

I can beat that. We we're originally talking tier 1 here, dude. You got all mixed up with the tiers and pulled in the DT. One word for ya: Scan.



"The nighthawk is not the the earliest. Their gas cost is double compare to dark templars. Obviously becoz of the gas the Protoss can warp in dark templars first. Cost is one reason why Terrans has the poorest mobile detector."


Haha! Rich. As if that little gas difference can't be gathered. Sounds to me like you don't even know how the game works, because everybody 'cept you in this thread knows that having to build an entire structure takes more time than gathering say 100 extra gas. But that doesn't matter, not at all, since that gas can be gathered at any time before the Starport with the Tech Lab is ready. On the other hand, the Dark Obelisk can't start warping in until the Twilight Counsil's done.



"The dark pylon thingy is ur own judgement. Sure u could be rite. But still gasmaskguy claim that there isn't ANY cloaked units in the early game and even mid game."

Sorry I didn't say so then, but I meant units that can cloak themselves (or others, like the MS) for a very long period of time. The Dark Pylon's cloak costs a lot of energy and lastas only a while. Using it offensively will be impossible unless you place the DP near your opponents base, in which case you will have wasted 150 mins when he destroys it. And believe me he will, when he sees a cloaked Zealot or whatever.
Since it isn't massable, they will get picked out by Scan. Simple.



"However as time progresses, the protoss player can have more dts than the terrans produce nighthawks as time to pass."

Then again, you don't really need one Nighthawk per DT, do you?

 

@ Charmed. Adding Supply Depots is unnecessary. The production of Nighthawks is not directly dependant on Supply Depots, whereas the production of Observers is dependant on Pylons. Supply Depots would obviously have to be made for supporting an army, but defences would also have to be made to defend the base as well. The fact remains that they are not a link in the Nighthawk's tech-line.

The Zealot and Marine comparison was to show that the production and tech-line to Observers and Nighthawks is even more balanced than the production of their first tier units.

And the production of mobile Detectors from then on is irrelevant, as the Terran already have the Scanner Sweep. On top of that, the fact remains that you do not need multiple Detectors to counter Dark Templar. As I've been saying, Detection does not stack.

And no, it's not viable to tech to Nighthawks just to protect yourself against Dark Templar. This, again, is where Terran have the advantage of Scanner Sweep, regardless of it's reliance on Energy.

As for your conclusion, it's absolutely ridiculous, and is taking everything back out of context. This is not being discussed as Nighthawks being used as the counter to Dark Templar, as there're already static Detectors and Radar Towers for defence and Scanner Sweep for the offence. The fact of the matter is that Observers do not come into play noticeably earlier than Nighthawks, which was one of the points you had been making. Of course teching to Observers and Nighthawks to counter Dark Templar is not a viable strategy. It was never proposed as a viable one.

 

@Gasmaskguy

1. Ur calculation for missile turret is wrong becoz the minerals required is 100 minerals.

So,

Turrets = 10 / 15 / 100 = 0.006

Canons = 20 / 22 / 150 = 0.006

So u see it is completely the same. Plus the fact that canons have GTG as well as GTA, it only proves that canons worth of resources is greater than turrets. I prove u wrong..

2. I am talking abt the balance of having GTG, GTA and detection. Hence canons > turrets. Having gtg is as important as having detection. This is where u fail to take into the acct of gtg.

3. As if I have to pump gas solely for nighthawks. Ur head is really mess up. I need the gas for elsewhere.

4. The fact is u said there were no cloaked units in early game and I oredi show u that there is through the dark pylon. It doesn't matter now anyway. There are cloaked units early game currently.

@Itza

1. Agreed that supply depots are not a requirement. Unfortunately every Terran build needs supply depot. Its more fair to add in the supply depot.

2.The fact that u said nighthawks are not viable to tech to counter dts oredi prove much of my points.

3. Anyway if anyone do has a video abt how someone tech to nighthawks to counter dts, plz upload. I would like to see the video.

 

We were talking in terms of SC1, since we don't know their cooldowns and the Turret damage in SC2 for sure, but whatever. Let's assume they have the same damage and cooldown, like you just did.

Only when countering small units. Vs medium and large it's not the same, you see. Remember though, you are discussing TvP, the Turret's effectivity vs the Photon Cannon's, so there's really no Muta in the equation. Only medium and large air units.

Stop it already. We're talking GtA. See, you came with the outrageous claim that Cannons prevail at GtA.

Who cares if Cannons > Turrets? It don't mean jack. Here's another formula for you: Cannons = Turrets + Bunkers with Marines.

It's not important when only discussing detection. You can't just spew out incorrect facts to make points and get away with it. You said that Cannons have better detection than Turrets, not taking their attacks into account (so stop bringing up GtG), and I proved you wrong.

As if you can't spare 200 gas after several minutes of playing, when going for Nighthawks no less. And it doesn't change the fact that DTs need one more structure than Nighthawks. And if you want to take the Supply Depot into account, it's a stalemate at best. So your statement about DTs being earlier than Nighthawks is wrong.

I already answered that. I am/was pretty sure you were talking about massable cloaked attack units.
Are you implying you're gonna rep me down or something?
And if you think this is talking crap when people catch you, oh man oh man. Getting busted is all you do.

Remember that time when you said Cannons > Turrets @ GtA?
Or that time you said DTs and Lurkers come out before Nighthawks?

Yeah. Busted. Yet you're still arguing regarding those.

 

@Gasmaskguy

A mistake is a mistake. Once the milk is spill there is nothing u can do abt it. I am just pointing a fact. And just forget it. I dun know who are u and u aren't my enemy. I am not going to waste my time damaging u.

Even if dts and lurkers come out of b4 nighthawks so what? The fact is teching to nighthawks is not going to be viable against dts. And I dun care abt lurkers. In fact I have no problems with lurkers. If u could demonstrate to me that it is possble to tech to nighthawks to counter dts and made it a viable strategy be my guest. In fact I will be more than happy to see the video. I dun dare who come out first. All I care is abt countering cloaked units as Terrans especially in early to mid game. Tat is why even if both nighthawks and dts are in the same tier, it will take some long time for nighthawks to counter dts. Tat is why I requested for spider mines to be place in the early tier. More choice. If u dun understand me, stop flaming me.

I oredi said its much cheaper for u to have 1 canon compare to 1 bunker and 1 missile turret. And fyi I value the gtg in the canon very much.

Against zerg, I will mass turrets if I know I am going to be under heavy attack by mutalisk. Though they suck I do not have much choice. Of coz there will be marines as well helping out. Against Protoss, I will rely on spider mines more against cloaked units. And I might throw some turrets just in case there are shuttles with reavers. The moment I got Goliath, there will be hardly any turrets and even less when I get science vessel. Moral of the story = I only use turrets when I am desperate. When I play toss, I will definetely throw some canons early game. Moral of the story = I find canons more useful.

As a conclusion no matter what, I will always prefer canons compare to bunkers and turrets no matter what u say. I play SC long enuf to know that they are cheaper and they are a 2 in 1 building. Tats how I value canons. Anyway they are just static defences. There are alot more things more important than just static defences. I dun even know what are u arguing abt. Are u trying to make me like bunkers and turrets over canons? No way I will.

 

Several things have been made to balance out the lack of mid game mines, you need to consider them.

1. The new Scan requires one less building, meaning it has time to regen 1 or 2 extra scans compared to in SC1.

2. Dark Templars require an additional building, giving you even more time to prepare your Turrets / save up your Scan.

3. The Sensor Tower. In SC1, a DT can usually get a free swipe or two before you have time to scan and destroy. In SC2, the presence of the DTs is known to you even before they enter your units' line of sight (while still remaining invisible). This way, you already know they are coming, and as soon as they enter your units' line of sight, revealing that they are indeed cloaked DTs, you throw a scan. This way, when you play your cards right, DTs will be even less useful than in SC1.

So? It's much cheaper to have a Zergling than a Zealot. Thing is, the Zealot is way stronger. Same with the Turret and Bunker combo. Costlier, but more effective. They are about as effect though, if both players spend equal cash on them.

In SC1, they are even more effective than Cannons, and in SC2 they appear to be equal.

What you like is just preference.

 

1. No doubt the new orbital command is good. Seriously. But there is a dark pylon which grans invisibility though only a short time. So nothing great here.

2. Which additional building u are referring to? Dark obelisk? In SC1 = pylon , gateway, cybernetics core, citadel of adun and templar archives. SC2= pylon, gateway, cybernetics core, twilight council and dark obelisk. Both = 5. Seems like no difference unless u are referring to the old SC2 phase.

3. In defence yes. But in offense I doubt so. Unless u are planning to build sensor towers and missile turrets very far from ur base. Of coz u can scan too. But the beauty of mines is that u can place anywhere on the map. U can put in strategic location which ensures that those pesky dts can't go through. And its really fun to see those dts getting owned by those mines. Very funny. In other words while sensor towers will do a good job, spider mines would have been better. Thats why I prefer if they move the spider mines to a lower tier and scrap the sensor towers. Mebbe I miss SC1 too much..

4. Okay mebbe u really like bunkers alot becoz u can put anywhere on the map, they have more life / damage and can repair. But u still can't deny that canons are cheaper and more multipurpose. Different taste.

5. There is nothing wrong to have preference. Its like I am saying I like siege tanks compare to reavers and guardians as siege units. Tank has the longest range and deal splash damage. Reavers need to refill their weapons with minerals and their range is inferior. They also can't fire from the cliff. And guardians suck gas like nobody's business and are placed at a higher tier. The only consolation they have is they know how to fly. So really, preference makes ppl think one is better than the other even though it is balanced.

 

Imagine you're rushing as Zerg/Protoss vs Protoss The defending Protoss can make a defending Zealot or something invisible, halting the rush/early push. No mobile detection for Z or P. Terran can Scan on the other hand. The Orbital Command is seriously good, as you said.

Sorry, I must have thought of something else, my bad. Didn't Artosis and IdrA say something about DTs being later tier in SC2 in their SC2 dicussion? They must have been talking about an old build like you said.

Well, at least the OC is earlier.

That's right, I only meant Sensor Towers in a defensive position here. I don't know how using Sensor Towers offensively will work out though. Since they reveal their position they might get picked out easily, but if the Terran protects them well... It all depends. Using them defensively will provide great help though. Sensor Towers will tell you where to scan, or be ready to scan. Will save your OC some energy.

Myself, I see no potential problem. DTs will never manage to sneak into my base when I have Sensor Towers.

As you said it would only be funnier. Really though, I do think Sensor Towers are better. Mines cover a very little surface, while a Sensor Tower or two can cover your entire base + the surroundings. They won't detect (at least not in a large radius), but they will pinpoint where your scans should go, so it balances out.

I believe you do. I can't comfort you more than I've tried though.
SC2 will be different that's all. Whether it's for better or worse is (mostly) preference. Personally I much prefer the Sensor Tower.

1 Cannon is cheaper than 1 Bunker + Marines + 1 Turret.
1 Zergling is cheaper that 1 Zealot.

There's no denying those facts. And yes they are multipurpose. So? That just means that Protoss defense is simplified, all combined into one structure. As a Terran, you need to spend a little extra skill when building defenses, that's all. But it can pay off, since you can regulate your Turret : Bunker ratio to better fit the situation.

Exaaaactly... Just like how Terran detection atm is pretty damn balanced, but your preference for mines makes you think otherwise.

 

1. Yes Terrans will be better off. For Protoss it didn't matter since they both can cast null shield. For Zerg, errrmmm..maybe dark pylon will be a good excuse for overlords to be detectors.

2, Yeah using sensor towers offensively might be a problem. U can build turrets and scan though. I will definetely miss my vultures + spider mines. While dts has harder time sneaking into Terrans base, Terrans will also have harder time killing dts without spider mines. Scans work but mines are just fabulous. So to make dts have better chance to sneak into Terran base and to allow Terrans to kill them more effectively : scrap sensor tower and move spider mines to ghost / hellions.

3. Well its hard not to laugh at dts that got kiiled by mines. Good for u since u can adapt. I will miss my mines with vultures.

4. I love multipurpose things. That includes overlords / overseers as support.

5. I believe alot of Terran players will miss their mines. If I am not wrong u open a thread dedicated to allow mines to be placed in the lower tier.

 

What do you mean? The Terran is the only race that could continue the attack vs DPs cloaking stuff. What good does the Null Shield that is at home do the attacking Protoss?

Yeah, well it's called balance. It would have been bad if only one of those statements were true.

That wouldn't create balance but an alternative version of balance.

Yeah, honestly I never used Mines vs DTs but that's just me, I can see why you find them useful, but I always got away by building a Turret or two at key locations + scan.

Haha. Yeah, that's right! I suggested that it was to be moved to the Reaper or the Hellion. Even though I still kinda want that to happen (not as much now though) due to preference, I can see past that and understand how that is not necessary with the Sensor Tower and earlier Scan.

 

1. Yes that makes the Terran better off than other races since they can scan. The attacking protoss won't have any benefit. But since its a mirror match there won't be any balance issuse. Its just that the zerg might get annoyed by this new dark pylon mechanic.

2. This kind of balance for me is unhealthy. Both sides should have the chance to harm each other more. U might be right that Protoss may choose not to use dts anymore as a counter to Terrans. Maybe they would just use dts as support. Who knows.

3. Thats what I am striving for. An alternative balance which works like SC1.

4. Of coz ur way will work fine too. But I believe the Protoss player will feel more frustrated getting their dts getting killed by mines. It's as if they are so stupid.

5. Well thats true. But hopefully Blizzard will change their mind. I find having 2 detection abilities in nighthawks (passive and spider mines) abit redundant. Thats why if can better give the spider mines to others.

 

They're needed just as Bunkers, Marines, SCV's, Refineries, Missile Turrets, etc, are. We're not talking about those, though. We're talking about the tech-lines. If the Command Centre didn't provide any Supply, then yes, they would be a requirement, but that's not the case.

Again, the Supply Depot isn't part of the tech-line, and including them would be like including Marines, Bunkers and other defences. I mean, defences are needed just as much as Supply Depots, right? But are they part of the tech-line? No. Are Pylons part of the tech-line? Yes. They are required, unlike the Supply Depot, for the required buildings to be constructed.

In short, Pylons are a requirement for the Observer. Supply Depots are not a requirement for the Nighthawk.

No, it proves that both rushing the Nighthawk or Observer is not viable for countering Dark Templar. Therefore, players must rely on the other forms of Detection they have, being their natural early game Detection, in which Terran have the advantage and the greatest number of choices. Protoss have Photon Cannons, whereas Terran have Missile Turrets, Radar Towers and the Orbital Command.

Nighthawks and Observers are obviously great counters when they naturally come into play, but speed teching to them in order to counter Dark Templar is just idiotic.

 

Wait, what? Did you even read my post? I did acknowledge that it's both a weakness and a strong point. I said that verbatim... I never said that SC was imbalanced, I said the exact opposite that it was indeed balanced. I did say stop complaining about the overlord being so useful, because it is also such a drawback. Your the one saying that if it worked in SC1 then it'll work in SC2 but you seem so intent on changing what happens with the overlord in SC2... I wasn't complaining about the crippling effect I was merely pointing it out because you said it's too good of a unit. I never said that it's unfair to the zerg, again I said it was quite fair indeed because although woo I save minerals you drop one 200hp unit and suddenly I'm out of three things, not to mention that for them to be useful in what they do you pretty much have to have them together if your dropping troops or providing food just to keep them out of the way so when you loose one unit you have to accept that your going to loose several more before you can do much about it. So those say three kills are more like nine. So yes I see the good, yes I see the bad. Does it need to be changed? No. It brought a new kind of balance to the game that I think is lost, unless other things are done to reestablish said balance which I have yet to see.

By the way this entire scenario is what you dodged, you said the radar tower isn't an advantage and in some cases a disadvantage. However if a very simple tactic is employed as described bellow it's actual extremely useful. You never acknowledged this.

 

@Michael Liberty

Yes I did say if it works in SC1, it can also work in SC2. For Terrans there aren't much issues but for Zerg there is. The issue is the Zerg Overlord in SC1 were too detectorific and that to make cloaking units more viable against Zerg, a nerf has to be made. Of coz it can be balanced either way. But to allow zergs to be immune to cloaking units in SC1 and SC2 is just unhealthy for strategy purposes. I can understand how u feel becoz I have issues with Terrans as well. But it seems that Blizzard is intent of keeping overseers. Overall in regards to Zergs I have always been neutral. Should Overlords regain their detection abilities like in SC1, I will just say Blizzard is being lame and uncreative. No big issue from my side. In fact I will wish u good luck so that u can get what u want.

Actually I nvr dodged the question. Its just that someone else asked me the same question and I choose to reply his question instead of u. If I replied to both of u, I will have to double my post for the same content. Anyway to answer:

I never said radar towers do not provide any advantage. In fact I did say it works both ways. The Terran player can utlize it and their opponents can also take advantage of the radar towers. Yes it works both ways. Against AI, it should work wonders since AI are usually idiotic in playing mind games.

What I have been telling u all is that do not think too highly of radar towers / sensor towers. The advantage and the disadvatage eventually neutralize each other. It depends on the players themselves that determine who can make use of the radar towers / sensor towers. U can read my previous post for more details.

So just becoz I nvr reply to u personally doesn't mean I dodged ur question. I had too many questions to handle.

 

Isn't these last posts really off subject i read at the start

this is about overseers and there detectorificness how did it get to terran and protoss?
or is this a omni discussion about all detectorificness or terran and zerg however that still doesn' make sense as it seams that you've disgarded zerg with terran and protoss but if this topic is done and discussed shouldn't you just make a new thread about how terran and protoss may be unbalence in their detecting?

 

"2. Which additional building u are referring to? Dark obelisk? In SC1 = pylon , gateway, cybernetics core, citadel of adun and templar archives. SC2= pylon, gateway, cybernetics core, twilight council and dark obelisk. Both = 5. Seems like no difference unless u are referring to the old SC2 phase."

In BW, you only needed one building for both dark templar and high templar. If you want to build both in SC2, you need two buildings.

Maybe it's not a big deal, I'm just clarifying that point.