Haven't touched SC in a while. Tanks if they are strong decimate an enemy team without them even reaching the tanks. If they are weak they die before they reach critical mass.

If the player is not good at handling positions and making decisions he can slowly lose his army to tanks until he doesn't have enough to retaliate. Tanks are a binary unit due to their range. You need to be careful when buffing them.

lichter

1001 YEARS KESPAJAIL22272 Posts

September 28 2013 01:43 GMT

#23

On September 27 2013 23:39 Falling wrote:

Show nested quote +

What's the point of seige mode then? It doesn't cost anything, you don't have to research anything, and you are proposing to narrow the window of vulnerability. The solution is to make that window of vulnerability worth it. But based on all the things in SC2 that can snipe the tank, I am almost in agreement with the OP. Somehow I think even if tanks were viable, we'd get passive tank-viking again and not the dynamic tactics of Mech Play. Maybe SC3 can finally figure out the siege tank.

Well I did say maybe.

Another thing to consider is that the pace of SC2 and its battles are far shorter, so having a siege duration is more punishing in SC2. The fact that mines get set faster, cost less, and have less supply, make up for their much longer attack cool down since there is rarely retreat for siege units. If siege tanks had comparable prep duration maybe they'd have greater utility since mines wouldn't be universally better. The tradeoff would be cost/supply vs attack cool down, instead of cost/supply/mobility vs attack cooldown.

[UoN]Sentinel

United States11320 Posts

September 28 2013 01:59 GMT

#24

On September 28 2013 04:12 Shady Sands wrote:

Show nested quote +

And cost 25 more gas and 50% more supply.

They shoot twice as fast as they did in BW though.

Djzapz

Canada10681 Posts

September 28 2013 02:02 GMT

#25

IMO removing tanks may make sense given the game's current state of affairs but I'm one of these people who aren't in love with the game right now, and one of my beliefs is that the tank is one of SCBW's remnants and in a vacuum it's truly elegant and awesome.

The game, IMO, is fundamentally flawed. It would be bad to remove the tank because the game is not good enough to have that unit =(

ninazerg

United States7291 Posts

September 28 2013 02:11 GMT

#26

If going mech ever became a viable option, it would get nerfed for being too strong.

Zaphod Beeblebrox

Denmark697 Posts

September 28 2013 10:35 GMT

#27

I lost a lot of faith in the SC2 community today...

Siege tanks were one of the best designed units in BW. Everything that made the original Siege tank great is not in any way shape or form present on the current tank, and now we are left with a joke of a unit that really isn't a Siege tank.

Blizzard removed most of the big weaknesses of Tanks in the transition to SC2, and guess what? It was massively overpowered. What did they do to fix this? remove most of the strengths as well - now it was UP. Then they decided to buff unsieged tanks, so now its just a more expensive Marauder with a useless Siege mode.

The reason the Tank is so bad, isn't because its a relic from an old game, it's because everything that was once great about this unit has been removed. There is basically no way you can compare the old BW tanks to SC2 tanks anymore.

Scarecrow

Korea (South)9172 Posts

September 28 2013 12:18 GMT

#28

This is a horrible, ill-conceived thread. You're talking about removing an archetypal terran unit from the game based on fuck all actual evidence/analysis and a 5 minute OP. You just repeat and bold your opinion without adequately justifying it:

On September 27 2013 22:40 sctstarcraft wrote:
Can Siege Tanks work in SC2?

I daresay not, in their current form. The Siege Tank as we know it right now is a relic of the past. It can never be strong enough to work as base defense on its own, and if we make it work like that, it'll be OP in the offense.

Why was ST added to SC2 in the first place? I think that the only reason it was was the sentiment of SC2 creators and the community.

I say: get rid of the current Siege Tank in LotV. Recreate it as a completely different unit, possibly having a similar intended role, but with completely different mechanics. How to do that? I do not know. I have some ideas, most of which are probably stupid, but I'll list them at the end anyway. But please consider my original thesis - Siege Tank has no place in StarCraft 2. It has to go. And we have to let it go.

You support your entire "thesis" (lol) with one statement (I underlined it for you) and didn't back that up with any evidence whatsoever. It's not even true because we see tanks regularly (and defensively) in one of the mu's. The rest of your rambling is just you repeating that tanks should be removed.

Tanks are still a big part of TvT and your summary of the two games is also ridiculous. I can't believe you called SC2 more macro oriented than BW.