EPTWhat the hell kind of test is that? A good portion of the Zerg army is stationary in the middle not fighting. Also not fighting on creep.
Someone takes me on with that unit composition - I will be on creep, surround them and crush them.
Mech Viability - Worse than HOTS? - Page 2
| Forum Index > Legacy of the Void |
|
DeadByDawn
United Kingdom476 Posts
What the hell kind of test is that? A good portion of the Zerg army is stationary in the middle not fighting. Also not fighting on creep. Someone takes me on with that unit composition - I will be on creep, surround them and crush them. | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
Someone takes me on with that unit composition - I will be on creep, surround them and crush them. Hellbats can oneshot and tank whole ling/baneling army, while cyclones will keep kiting them. But I agree, zerg wont allow you to kite that long | ||
|
Thezzy
Netherlands2117 Posts
That's off creep for one, benefitting the Cyclones/Hellions. Half the army is also just standing there. Second, it's only Ling/Bane/Ultra. That would in theory lose to any air units alone. Usually there quite a few ranged units or Mutalisks to accompany such a force. And if you are going for a pure kiting composition, I'd get Infestors and Fungal Growth the whole army. (I play Terran though, so maybe Zergies would go for something else) And even then, Zerg won't just let his Ultralisks/expensive units get kited all day long. They'll just retreat. Cyclones don't kill stuff fast enough to be used in a straight up fight. Not saying Cyclones/Hellions can't work, but no way is that going to beat a lategame Zerg army. Assume creep, assume different types of units other than Ling/Bane/Ultra and always remember that Zerg can remax in the lategame. | ||
|
sabas123
Netherlands3122 Posts
| ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2657 Posts
On November 22 2015 18:11 TNVSG wrote: Also your points on the difficulties on defending with mech compared to attacking into it would be disagreed upon by most every zerg/protoss/bio terran. I tried to state in my original comment that there are difficulties toward playing with mech but engagements/executing fights was not one of them. You certainly have to be smart with your positioning/sim city and responses. That is bullshit and even more so in LotV. To defend with mech is not just to be smart with positioning, first you are going to have way to many bases to simply take smart positioning, you need good vision to know when you are getting droped/harassed/attacked, be fast with your response, have your army split in at least 3 or even more groups if you don't wanna die to multipron attacks, have some harass/counter attack ready or you risk letting your opponent, keep expanding, etc. If you try to simply sit behind a wall of tanks and turrets in LotV you will die before the 10 min mark for a lack of resources, so saying that is totally not true, if playing mech was so easy everyone would do it (for example in late HotS thats why eveyone did it) but yet nobody is meching at all. And most of the mech games I've seen have been as action packed as a bio game, I watched Fantasy mech on stream and his games where amazing, he played a game against Nestea where he had to constantly expand and defend pick up his tanks, using liberators, doing banshee harass, even transitioned to BCs it was really fun. So stop taking HotS as an example of how mech is, that has the same value as taking BW as an example, the game is way too different to compare the two together. | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
a lot of things have changed, but also a lot of things have not changed since WoL (expansions are expected to improve on a game by building on it rather than change it completely) | ||
|
Topdoller
United Kingdom3860 Posts
Simple fact is Mech is not what this game is about, it never has been and apart from the end of HoTS it hopefully never will be thankfully after what i seen in the tournaments. 45 min turtle feasts kill the game so hard its over 5 years since release and 3 expansions later people still cant stop bitching about this dead horse. let it die along with this thread | ||
|
Existor
Russian Federation4295 Posts
| ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16077 Posts
On November 22 2015 23:46 Topdoller wrote: Not sure why people want to compare this game to Broodwar. Bio is way better in SC2 compared to Boodwar with the Marines getting a massive buff and the introduction of the Marauder + ultra mobility of the medivac. Simple fact is Mech is not what this game is about, it never has been and apart from the end of HoTS it hopefully never will be thankfully after what i seen in the tournaments. 45 min turtle feasts kill the game so hard its over 5 years since release and 3 expansions later people still cant stop bitching about this dead horse. let it die along with this thread mech don't has to be this boring. look at taeja vs innovation on newkirk, this is what mech play should be. The problem in HotS was that ground mech was to weak and skyterran to strong so you were forced to turtle to that air fleet. | ||
|
Eiltonn
Germany307 Posts
On November 22 2015 19:07 Isarios wrote: As much as I usually hate Terran whine, imo, you're pretty spot on. You did miss that you can pick up tanks with medivacs now, so you shouldn't be losing them to Ravagers You do realise thats its way harder to micro your tanks to not get hit by CB than just firing CB? Besides that it adds nice "survivability" to the tank but the damage is still rather neglectable so why even bother investing resources or APM and attention to this crap unit? First thing the hellions fight of the swarmy stuff, cuz cyclones DO suck vs many small units like lings etc. Second your proof is a video where microed units fight vs unmicroed units? Really impressive lol | ||
|
TNVSG
United States7 Posts
Stim bio you HAVE to split/kite to be cost effective. Blink stalkers you HAVE to micro to be cost effective. ling bane you HAVE to micro to be cost effective. Even ravagers you have to be using their bombard effectively if you want to come out ahead in fights. I'm not saying every single thing that the races do right now are all micro intensive and that every style has the same degree of skill to use. Obviously airtoss is mindlessly easy to execute, sometimes zerg can just move command some ultras into you and not give a shit cause they are unkillable. Liberator turtling can also be pretty retarded to break at times. But just because there are other easy to execute styles/comps doesn't mean that we should buff up mech and add another. Until there is some way to make mech players have to micro in fights to a reasonable degree 3/4ths of the community will always veto/shoot down any thought of blizz buffing mech into a more viable state. Hell for all we know mech actually is still viable and we just haven't seen GuMiHo come out and destroy people with it. | ||
|
BronzeKnee
United States5221 Posts
On November 22 2015 15:53 TheoMikkelsen wrote: there is no anti air unit on the robo  Different races are different. Mech is a style of positional play based around the Siege Tank with support from other Factory units. Due to the way +1 upgrades are divided with Terran, it makes sense to have an effective anti-air unit come out of the Factory. As Protoss (being a Protoss player myself) when I upgrade +1 attack, it helps both my Immortals and Colossus from the Robo, as well as supporting anti-air unit, Blink Stalkers. avilo rightly points out some major issues here. First that the Siege Tank is too weak (which frankly, myself and a lot of people have been arguing since the HOTS beta) and second that the Factory doesn't provide a reliable and effective method of anti-air. On November 23 2015 02:15 TNVSG wrote: I still feel most of the people in this thread are missing the point that Mech in sc2 has been and likely always will be an anti-fun style to play against. Unless that is somehow addressed, unless blizzard somehow adds micro mechanics to mech units or the compositions that use them that you HAVE to use to be cost effective, it will never be accepted back into the game in a significant way. I find this really sad. Sad in the sense that you probably haven't experience the beauty of positional play. The micro and skill of positional play is the positional jockey that happens before a battle. Getting your Tanks in the right spot, covering your flanks, scanning to see where his army his, judging whether you can take the high ground before his army gets there, seeing if you can find a weakness in his line or get his forces out of position ect... And that is really what strategy games have traditionally been about. The units fight for themselves, but you have put them into position to win. And we know that is a skill based game, because the same players keep coming out on top in positional strategy games. I find positional play incredibly fun. My reflexes and hands will slow down with age and I won't be able to micro well my whole life. But positional play is much more about your brain. Now we've nearly lost positional play in SC2. Things like Forcefields, Blinding Cloud and Abduct threaten it. "Oh your army is sieged up in a good position? I'll just cast some Blinding Cloud and make that position worthless..." "Oh my army is in a bad spot, I'll just throw down some Forcefields and now the concave is in my favor" Micro being able to so easily overcome positional play has increasing made SC2 into WC3 where abilities rule. Day[9] subtlety pointed this out when he did a daily on Starbow, where positioning is really important because abilities don't negate it so completely. He said that SC2 is more about having the right units and abilities at the right time, whereas Starbow and BW include having those units in the right place. | ||
|
royalroadweed
United States8301 Posts
| ||
|
Eiltonn
Germany307 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:15 TNVSG wrote: I still feel most of the people in this thread are missing the point that Mech in sc2 has been and likely always will be an anti-fun style to play against. I dont think so and I too hate to play vs turtle Mech TvTs to an enormous point. To nerf turtling was the whole reason the economy changes were introduced, wasn`t it? Also i still feel most people in this thread are missing the point, that only 1 playstyle to be viable for an entire race is utmost inacceptable. Look at TvP the unit compositions since WOL didnt change until now the Liberator usually get incorporated, too. What change did HOTs bring to TvZ? Instead of supplementing your Bio with tanks you now do it with way more mobile mines. It really sucks to be 100% reliant on Bio in TvP and TvZ for years now. Isnt it understandable that Terran players wish for more than one production facility to be viable as core production? | ||
|
Eiltonn
Germany307 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:49 Eiltonn wrote: I dont think so and I too hate to play vs turtle Mech TvTs to an enormous point. To nerf turtling was the whole reason the economy changes were introduced, wasn`t it? Also i still feel most people in this thread are missing the point, that only 1 playstyle to be viable for an entire race is utmost inacceptable. Look at TvP the unit compositions since WOL didnt change until now that Liberators usually get incorporated, too. What change did HOTs bring to TvZ? Instead of supplementing your Bio with tanks you now do it with way more mobile mines. It really sucks to be 100% reliant on Bio in TvP and TvZ for years now. Isnt it understandable that Terran players wish for more than one production facility to be viable as core production? | ||
|
Eiltonn
Germany307 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:15 TNVSG wrote: I still feel most of the people in this thread are missing the point that Mech in sc2 has been and likely always will be an anti-fun style to play against. I dont think so and I too hate to play vs turtle Mech TvTs to an enormous point. To nerf turtling was the whole reason the economy changes were introduced, wasn`t it? Also i still feel most people in this thread are missing the point, that only 1 playstyle to be viable for an entire race is utmost inacceptable. Look at TvP the unit compositions since WOL didnt change until now that Liberators usually get incorporated, too. What change did HOTs bring to TvZ? Instead of supplementing your Bio with tanks you now do it with way more mobile mines. It really sucks to be 100% reliant on Bio in TvP and TvZ for years now. Isnt it understandable that Terran players wish for more than one production facility to be viable as core production? | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2657 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:48 royalroadweed wrote: It probably is weaker. The economy changes on top of the tank still being shit probably means its not viable. I'm not complaining. The kind of mech I'm interested in playing and watching doesn't seem possible in sc2. Ofc a few niche players like bbyong can make aggressive mech work. However, attacking with mech is inferior to turtling into skyterran in almost every way. Mass raven-bc isn't even mech imo. Funny you point two things that don't even exist in LotV, first turtling in LotV is suicide, you can't simple stay on 3/4 bases or you will die even before you can get 3 starports; second, ravens and BCs suck, if you somehow are able to make a huge raven/BC ball you will just die to vipers/carriers. | ||
|
Beelzebub1
1004 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:52 Eiltonn wrote: I dont think so and I too hate to play vs turtle Mech TvTs to an enormous point. To nerf turtling was the whole reason the economy changes were introduced, wasn`t it? Also i still feel most people in this thread are missing the point, that only 1 playstyle to be viable for an entire race is utmost inacceptable. Look at TvP the unit compositions since WOL didnt change until now that Liberators usually get incorporated, too. What change did HOTs bring to TvZ? Instead of supplementing your Bio with tanks you now do it with way more mobile mines. It really sucks to be 100% reliant on Bio in TvP and TvZ for years now. Isnt it understandable that Terran players wish for more than one production facility to be viable as core production? Welcome to Zerg, playing the same unit comps against the same races since WOL. Only Protoss has any real unit composition diversity imo Zerg still plays mass roach plays into some type of Lair/Hive tech units (Lurkers and Vipers) ZvP Zerg still plays LBM into Vipers in ZvT | ||
|
Erugua
13 Posts
I don't understand at all that blizzard decided that 45 minutes games where the terran just want to safe himself with tanks and AA, then make himself unbreakable with ravens, that was so entertaining. I don't get it ! So shame you now have to use barracks to eventually win the game ! Seriously now, you're no longer allowed to be so static, because of the new minerals, and the new units that allow the other player to be efficient against meca. However I understand your feels when it's about to say that you don't have the endgame 100% sure now, because you can't build the ultimate army anymore. Even more seriously, I think i do agree with the cyclones being a bit weak, in archon mode they can be used to kite forever, but in 1v1 there is issues to make it worth it, because it simply does require too much attention/time. And maybe the vypers are a bit overpowered, but in the other hand if you spread well and your air army survive, you're just fine, I think it's too early to say. Oh and maybe the infestor/vypers combinaison is a bit overpowered now, but I do think that with time, terran will learn how to not get their whole army touched with just one parasitic bomb/fungal Edit : i did a lot of edit because a lot to say, and don't want to be too long to read | ||
|
ProMeTheus112
France2027 Posts
On November 23 2015 02:33 BronzeKnee wrote:Micro being able to so easily overcome positional play has increasing made SC2 into WC3 where abilities rule. Day[9] subtlety pointed this out when he did a daily on Starbow, where positioning is really important because abilities don't negate it so completely. He said that SC2 is more about having the right units and abilities at the right time, whereas Starbow and BW include having those units in the right place. Honestly in WC3 though, I mean ok in WC3 the economy of the game and "macro choices" are way simplified it is a lot more straightforward and simple than SC or SC2 in that aspect, but in WC3 the micro though it is heavily based on abilities is a lot nicer and complex than SC2 isn't it ? Positional play is very present in WC3, it is just on a smaller scale than BW, and there are tons of different things you can do with it and I think the game does shine in it. It has good good micro. SC2's micro is not on par with WC3. With SC/BW you can say micro is "different" when you compare it with WC3, it is faster and about as hard and diverse, whereas in WC3 it is more complex locally but slower and smaller scale (way more tactical implications than strategic). In SC2 the micro is just not on par with those two games. This is a result mostly of the pathing that prevents a lot of micro/tactical possibilities in SC2, because it is not hard to bring something/everything in range of something/everything else in SC2, in most cases it's just you better not get in range unless you are going to deal more damage in that engagement due to what you have against what ur opponent has. The units and abilities are all designed considering this pathing and it is the most core important problem in the game imo, along with the attack rates or some movement mechanics. WC3 and SC/BW indeed have very close pathing/collision system, WC3 mostly just perfected it by removing some bugs or errors that sometimes happen in SC/BW but mainly it functions the same. | ||
| ||
