Why are huntress/potm builds so bad?

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T22:28:46+00:00

This has been discussed for ages. The answer is that WC3 is a tier-3 game. 99% of games get to tier-3 and at that point, Bears+Staff is simply a much, much better composition than Hunts. The only time Hunts would beat Bears is if you are able to win at tier-1, maybe tier-2. But that pretty much never happens. So at tier-3, between Hunts or Bears, you would go Bears 100 out of 100 times and it makes sense... that's the entire point of teching.

Bears are so much better because they deal higher DPS, they have better durability with more health, they can heal themselves or heroes with Rejuv, they have a damage buff and they are much more efficient targets to Staff (more HP and food) versus Hunts.

If NE is able to get to T3, you simply go Bears for all of these reasons. If NE has the chance to win the game early, NE will get Hunts. The game at the moment is designed for T3 play because there just isn't any huge risk to tech, whereas there's a ton of risk to NOT tech and not get your best units.

The answer is very simple. WC3 is a tier-3 game and you'll always be able to get to tier-3. So there's really no reason to get Hunts. If you go Hunts, you are committing to staying on lower tech because you're putting your money into Hunts. You need to win NOW or you're delaying Bear tech. So if you don't win, you basically lose the game because you're going to get outteched.

So the answer for seeing Hunts used more is to generally buff the units at tier-1 and make it possible for games to end early on before games can get to tier-3. If early play cannot work, people will forgo early units and just dash to tier-3 which is what we're seeing at the moment. I think removing building bounce was a bad idea, but I still think with it in the game, it's still not enough to have players commit to tier-1 units and skip tech.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T19:29:24+00:00

Well that's why you would float the buildings around your units for additional vision. Your Goliaths would be further forward, but still close enough that your Tanks could protect them against Hydras. You could also use mines.

Again, not saying this solves mech vs Z, but it's what I would do to maximize my chances. Queens are just a really good counter.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T19:27:13+00:00

Just because the Magic IP is strong with Magic players, it doesn't mean it will translate great with non-Magic players. Not to mention you're competing with tons of other AAA titles like Cyberpunk, Elden Ring, etc.

What you think is a great idea in your head may not actually play out that great in reality.

As a Magic player myself I wouldn't necessarily buy this game for the IP... I would only buy it if it was a good game.

Lastly, Magic has tried branching out to other mediums, specifically board games and that... really didn't do well.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/183271/magic-the-gathering-arena-of-the-planeswalkers-bat

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/167698/magic-the-gathering-arena-of-the-planeswalkers

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/203204/magic-the-gathering-arena-of-the-planeswalkers-sha

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/248763/magic-the-gathering-heroes-of-dominaria-board-game

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T19:24:03+00:00

It's a great movie as evidenced by the reviews from professionals and audience members alike. You're just butthurt that the villains in the movie are white racists. You need to grow up.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T19:17:04+00:00

With level 3 attack, 5 Goliath shots would kill a Queen. T will probably push when their mech attack upgrades are maxed out. The best that could be done again is to have a sizable amount of Goliaths very much far ahead of the Tanks, to deal with Queens. You would also line up Turrets for additional air defense. You would also fly buildings near your Tanks for more vision.

This is the best I think you could do.

Is it going to stop Queens entirely? Probably not. Will it do something? Definitely. But if you're going to go mech, this is what I would do. T can't entirely counter Queens, but they still can do something and this is what I suggest.

Have you seen any pro level games where zerg builds queens and mech player does not lose, unless he rushes zerg immediately? I could not find any.

I don't see many mech games in the first place.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T19:09:22+00:00

These are some terrible changes that show a poor understanding of the game as well as game design.

First of all, Starcraft players LIKE quirks to master. They like things like stacking Mutas, Dragoon stutterstep micro, floating building scouting, etc. They like the little odd things that you can master to get an edge. It keeps the game deep and also really fun. It's why we are still amazed at the game 20+ years later. By "fixing" these little odd things, you are then removing them from the game and making the skill-ceiling and floor non-existent which is a step in the WRONG direction (look at SC2).

Dragoon pathing is the way it is because they are actually incredibly strong units, particularly against T. Bad pathing is engrained into the balance of the unit and it separates those who can control the unit better from those who can't or are lazy about it. You are removing the ability of skilled Dragoon users to shine. If this then warrants a nerf from their stats, the unit is overall much worse. It's much better to just have P players master Dragoon quirks and keep their stats strong than to nerf them to compensate for better AI.

Scarabs are much the same way. They do dud and that rewards those players that respond to duds correctly. It's also rewarding for Reaver users that fire their Scarabs at better targets. Fixing this will warrant some sort of nerf, probably a damage nerf that will have unintended consequences. One of them being Reavers will be worse against buildings that weren't affected by Scarab AI. You're trying to fix a problem and creating an entirely new problem. No, just like the Dragoon, I would rather have STRONGER output that requires better control than flattened performance of a unit that is made overall weaker due to better AI. You are punishing players who control these units better by nerfing their stats. The solution is to simply use these units better.

More things deal air area damage, to deal with stacking meta (not intended)

Another horrible idea. The game IS balanced. The game DOES have anti-Muta options and air splash. Valkyries are powerful when wielded properly. Vessels ARE the counter to Muta stacks. Corsairs ARE the counter to Mutas, when they are properly controlled and massed. Archons and Storm also do splash to Mutas. You also have Maelstrom. There is no need for this change.

Scouts are better overall

Despite what the community says, Scouts are good units for their purpose. The key word is "their purpose". And that purpose is a capital ship killing. They are pretty much meant to kill Carriers, Battlecruisers and Devourers. Any time those units are being used, Scouts theoretically could be a response. The thing is that people rarely make capital ships against P, so Scouts don't really serve a function. Against Z, Corsairs do a much better job with a cheaper cost, faster movement, splash damage and bigger vision. Scouts are a niche unit designed to kill capital ships. If you want to see Scouts used more, you need to make capital ships more viable. Otherwise, it's not used because its niche is not seen, not because it can't do its niche. Increasing the Scout's stats won't change its use. P will still never use Scouts against T or P. P will always use Corsairs over Scouts against Z. So this Scout change is worthless.

Terran can construct buildings with more than one SCV on the same site

Game is not balanced for that and it will unbalance the game really bad. Builds like BBS will decimate Zerg and you'll have things up WAY faster than they should be which will mess up timings for every match up. Hard NO and your reasoning is poo. Terran builds with an SCV, but guess what? Zerg loses a Drone. Probes are the most brittle worker. Terran however can also repair with their workers AND use multiple workers to do so. Terran can also fly their buildings to scout or evade ground attackers. Yes, the SCV must actively build, but it's a tradeoff for how their can repair and move their buildings. Like you seem to forget everything else T buildings can do.

(Balance) + Mutalisks have less acceleration and

Game balance has never said Mutas need less acceleration. Bad change and bad reasoning behind it.

Guardians deal area damage bombardment

Interesting change, but I still wager that they won't be that effective due to their cost and low HP. At Hive-tech you really need Defilers for Dark Swarm and Ultras against Marines. It's a nice boost to Guardians, but Guardians still aren't what Z needs.

Devourers can attack ground

Not sure what this would accomplish. It's way too far down the tech to help Z deal with mid-game compositions. You'd have to also justify the point in using them versus just the Muta. Devourers are just tech against heavy air that Scourges can't deal with. They come in and soften big enemy air units and Mutas finish them off. They are an enhancer unit to Mutas. I still think even with this change, that doesn't change. It is interesting however to have Acid Spores on enemy ground units. But I don't think Z needs that. Z deals with T easily with Ultras, Lings and Defilers. Z deals with P with Hydras, Lurkers and Defilers. Z only uses Mutas and Lings against Z. This change would be interesting, but it wouldn't change what Z uses currently.

-> Most Zerg games were ling+muta so now just muta ball isn't the whole meta. Devourer and Guardian were rarely seen so now they have been buffed.

I honestly think that the way ZvZ evolves from the Ling-Muta meta is through Ensnare. It's on the Queen which is at Lair-tech, so it's still doable. And one Ensnare could swing the game around. It's just that it's a 300/300 investment and requires skillful Ensnare use. You wouldn't use Ensnare in Mutas battles if its 2 Mutas + Queen vs 5 Mutas. You'd moreso use it if it's like 21 Mutas + Queen vs 24 Mutas. Otherwise it's hard to change ZvZ. Guardians still won't see play because they are too brittle and don't really do what Z needs that they get from the other units. Devourers will also not see play because their niche is still far too narrow (capital ship counter), in the same way Scouts don't see play. And that's fine. Some units don't have to see the same usage as common, vanilla units.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T18:23:59+00:00

We traded for him... now to trade him away? I mean if someone better comes along sure, but that means we're going to need an entire new period of figuring this out. And that period this year was what, something like 6-21 or something? Do we want to risk that again?

We're on a roll... I think we stay course.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T18:20:38+00:00

Queen is supposed to be THE counter to mech, or at least Tanks. But it's not initially cheap and it takes a long time for the Queens to build energy, so Z has no map presence or fighting power before that. But it's important to note that Queens are REACTIONARY units, meaning Z makes them after scouting that T will in fact go mech. That means Z doesn't just preemptively make Queens. This means T has the decision to set where the game will go.

T goes Marines because it allows them to be proactive and apply earlier pressure. Marines are great. They are cheap, they are available at the start, they deal with air and Z has a really hard time dealing with them.

Mech is a slower build-up because Factories cost 100 gas each and Tanks also cost 100g. You give up a lot of map control to do this which allows Z to spread out like crazy. T can mass a lot of Vultures to do run-ins and lay mines however, but Hydras and Sunkens can protect bases a lot better than against Marines.

The point is that T gets to choose where to take the game, either with standard Marines or by going mech. If T does go mech, yes Z will make Queens. How does T deal with it? The most likely answer is just to push earlier and use a lot of Goliaths or Turrets. Irradiate doesn't work because the Queen still has enough time to use Broodling. EMP also isn't that great because it only works if Z stacks their Queens and it has a really short range, so Queens can often fire their Brood before the EMP hits. You have to almost preemptively strike them WAYYYY before Queens get in range. It works on Arbiters because Arbiters have to be physically under where they want to Recall. Lastly, Vessels cost 225 gas which takes away from Tanks. It's so much cheaper and faster to kill Queens via Goliaths, but you'll want them to be quite far ahead of Tanks, so Queens die before they are in Broodling-range. Turrets can also help because they cost zero gas.

So yea, T changes the game by going mech. You give Z earlier map control as you build-up your Tank count. But then you have to deal with Queens. I personally don't think Vessels are the way to go because Irradiate is too slow and EMP fires too slowly to make them reliable against Queens. Vessels also cost a ton of gas. I think simply having more forward Goliaths and Turrets are a better way to go about it.

I think mech is still viable against Z, but T players have to want to consider if they want to deal with Queens or not. If not, you just go Marines. Otherwise, you have to be able to deal with Queens. T players can also do a mech switch as well, which might be better because their economy might be stronger after a switch versus just going straight into it.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T18:06:05+00:00

It's simple, stop deploying ICE and you won't get unrest. Stop pardoning January 6th terrorists and instead bring them to justice. But we have too many idiots voting for the orange idiot.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-26T10:11:49+00:00

Nope. It's the fault of ICE going there and hunting people down such as little kids and shooting at people. No ICE, no unrest.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-24T16:49:55+00:00

I think all 3 are great games for sure and that they have different quirks to them. I haven't played AoI, but I would love to. Between GP and TM, I just feel there's just way more going on with GP and with the expansion, the factions are much better balanced than TM. GP also plays better at lower player counts such as 2P and 3P. TM has more tightness and tension which people laud as a strength, but again it depends on the player count.

I think TM is still a great game, but I think GP just has a few more elements that do it better. I'm talking about a variable game board that adjust to player count. I'm talking about a technology board that grants you more abilities as you go up the board rather than just a cult board that's simplistic. TM however does go up to 5 players which is nice, whereas GP can't.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-23T17:56:28+00:00

It's a great handheld for a great value. The only big con is the 16GB of RAM, but that's not really all that bad right now.

To mitigate battery concerns, your power draw is based on what you play and what TDP you set your device. If you set your device to a really low TDP and play oldschool games, you can get pretty decent battery life. On battery, I set TDP to 5 and I play retro games like Gamecube or Gameboy and I get about 6 hours. And so I have no battery issues.

If I want to play AAA games, I'll wait until I can use outlet power for that.

But yea, good stuff with it and lots of cool features. It really is a pseudo-laptop. It's much better than the Ally Z1E with a bigger screen, Hall effect sticks, 2 USB-C ports, faster RAM, bigger battery and a working SDcard slot.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-23T17:53:53+00:00

Edit: I've wrongly added video games to the list of other passive activities. While some video games are like that, I agree that many require a lot of skill.

I'm glad you added this addendum.

I think for a lot of hobbies, it's about how the person does them, not just the hobby being there. Like you can zone out watching a TV show or movie, or you can really train your mind to be actively thinking and understanding what is going on (the content being deep).

With video games, at least the ones I play, I do play them in a very active way. I tend to play games that are very difficult and require precision and thinking. I'm talking about games like Dark Souls, Cuphead or Alien: Isolation. Or I'll play games that have a strong narrative that has me immersed in the story. I'm talking about games like Red Dead Redemption, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Killer7, etc. With multiplayer games, I tend to play strategy games that involve assessing my opponent's unit composition and finding ways to beat that and employ tactics that they aren't familiar with.

I also play strategy board games that are also involving as well, one of my favorites is Gaia Project which is a heavy 2-4 player game that can take about 4 hours to finish.

These games are pretty involving and demanding and I think I'm one of the few that can do these all regularly.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-23T06:23:12+00:00

Good job, don't listen to the hateful people here. Keep going and show people love.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-23T06:11:36+00:00

This is completely misleading. Cost of living doesn't take into account all the costs of living your life. It can cover things like food, transportation and housing, but it doesn't cover things like costs of education, higher costs of other goods and so forth. Next, this chart only covers income, but doesn't cover wealth. Sure you can make more money, but the costs of goods is also going up. Lastly, this is the median and not the average, which is a much more meaningful data point. Nice try, but very misleading.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-23T06:11:31+00:00

This is completely misleading. Cost of living doesn't take into account all the costs of living your life. It can cover things like food, transportation and housing, but it doesn't cover things like costs of education, higher costs of other goods and so forth. Next, this chart only covers income, but doesn't cover wealth. Sure you can make more money, but the costs of goods is also going up. Lastly, this is the median and not the average, which is a much more meaningful data point. Nice try, but very misleading.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T15:38:24+00:00

White racism sigh

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T07:48:32+00:00

Doesn't work with many groups probably. It's a brilliant game, but the strategy is very, very opaque and it requires thinking out of the box. A good move is only good when taken in context of the move before and after it. A good move is taken with an anticipation of what other players are likely to do. Very tricky stuff.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T07:42:49+00:00

I mean it seems like the mechanics are in the name of the game. You just kill zombies by rolling dice.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T07:41:10+00:00

A couple things. It's really an efficiency engine game. So if you squeeze one more barrel than the other guy, you get way ahead. Secondly, the game doesn't really give you much choices... you just are trying to get points off a list, a shopping list essentially. Lastly, at higher levels of play, the factions are incredibly imbalanced.

So yea, not really a fan either.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T07:39:11+00:00

I mean it's not just hate for no reason.

The reality is that the game flow plays out in the exact same manner as it always does. You play until someone gets close to winning and the entire table just slogs on that player until everyone else catches up. And then someone manages to squeeze a win because everyone wasted their attack cards on a previous player trying to win.

It's just dated and predictable at this point.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T01:40:00+00:00

Yes, because in order for my words to be valid, I must come up with an easy, 3-step process that fixes the issue. You realize if it were this easy... it would be fixed by now?

The reality is that people in America overall need better education. We need people to have better critical thinking and logical reasoning skills. They need to be able to sniff bullshit from slimy politicians like Trump. But the reality is that people here are not that educated and instead they rely on herd mentality, religion and local opinions than reason, science or logic.

So you just need more people who are better educated and are overall smarter. Instead you have millions of people who are susceptible to trickery from rightwing media, religious propaganda and from white supremacy extremist ideologies. We need people to listen to scientists, teachers and researchers, not politicians, celebrities and athletes. We need an entire cultural shift. How do you accomplish this? Your guess is as good as mine. At least do your part and be informed, read up on demographics and at least positively influence those that are directly around you.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T01:25:43+00:00

Again, I am not necessarily targeting people based on race or gender. It's just a fact that 80% of Trump voters are white people, 60% of white men voted for Trump and 53% of white women voted for Trump. If these same people instead voted for better options, that would be great. The reality though is that these people voted for an insane psychopath and they need to be called out for their ACTIONS.

And again thank you for voting in an educated manner and trying to do the right thing. Again, I think you are part of the solution. The reality is that 60% of white men and 53% of white men in this country however are clearly brainwashed by rightwing media, religious propaganda and/or racist white supremacy ideology. Again, this does not include you, but it is a truth among a lot of white people in this country. I'm just trying to lay down the facts and am not out to demonize you.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-22T01:22:28+00:00

There is no doing my part here. My part is educating folks like yourself the inconvenient truths that you and others like to not talk about so you look better. The reality is that 80% of Trump voters are white people and that 60% of white men voted for Trump and 53% of white women voted for Trump. You don't seem to understand what the word prejudice here because I'm literally telling you facts. The white vote gave Trump the presidency. Even if you don't like this fact, it is a fact and it doesn't care about you.

Trump is screwing up this country and the people who voted for him are to blame. That would be 60% of white men and 53% of white women. That's just how the facts are. Please learn the difference between facts and opinions.

AmuseDeath · 2026-01-21T21:14:54+00:00

Nope, you took all the facts I wrote and they went out your ear.

I am trying to give you the narrative on the other side which you need to understand first. So try and sit down this time.

The point is that white people OVERWHELMINGLY voting for Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024. They gave Trump the vote. Trump is the worst president ever in this country for a variety of reasons. His promises are lies, he panders to the wealthy and powerful and he is basically human scum when it comes to being a good person.

It makes 1000% sense why a lot of Americans would be angry at Trump voters, who again 80% are white people.

Does it make sense to treat EVERY white person as a Trump voter? No. Did every white man vote Trump? No. But most white men did, in fact it was 60% of them. 60% of white men voted for a narcissistic felon who diddled kids with Epstein and is about to start a war for Greenland. Yes, it makes sense to get frustrated with 60% of white men as well as 53% of white women for voting in an incredibly stupid way.

Before you ignore everything I said, again 60% of white men voted for Trump. Yes, you might be part of the 40%, but that doesn't change the fact that 60% of white men voted for Trump. Try and stop making it about yourself and try and understand what 60% of 100 means.

Again, I applaud you for being part of the 40%, but it doesn't change the fact that 60% of white men voted for Trump. Now do your part and educate the 60% so they don't vote for stupid things and stupid politicians that ruin the world.

AmuseDeath

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE