Hey guys, so now that the mod has been released for some time I thought I'd gather some general feedback from you all on what you think of the mod and some of the decisions mdae, the Howling Peaks map, each of the three races and your overall HOTS experience. This I feel will be a good way of gauging the direction both HOTS and the mod are taking, and will help give me some perspective on how people are feeling at the moment. Also if you could make sure to answer all questions that would be fantastic as it would make the poll more consistent/accurate.
Please open the spoiler below to see all the polls.
I don't get why after time and time again the community has rejected maps without a single, reasonably narrow natural choke (which Blizzard realizes), Blizzard goes and demos a map with 2 natural chokes.
Other than that, the mod works excellently, and HotS looks like it'll be very interesting given some appropriate balance changes (*coughsiegetankbuff*)
On July 25 2012 19:42 Garmer wrote: you just need Warhound\battlehellion\viking, and GG everything toss throws to you , do not need to disturb marauder
The army comp you descripe is from the concept like bio + vikings that don´t get healed and don´t have stim. Would add tanks and 1-2 raven for the extra juice. Perhaps ghosts before tanks. Not quite sure. If there are no tanks i feel that ff ht immo/colli are quite a problem for that comp.
warhound is so cost effective against protoss that isn't even funny, you don't need any ghost or tank, at max add mines for some strategic play instead of 1a, but with that composition is an easy win vs toss
also two waround take down a immortal if you kite a bite and viking take out colossy, add BH for soaking damage and gg, toss defeated
On July 25 2012 19:42 Garmer wrote: you just need Warhound\battlehellion\viking, and GG everything toss throws to you , do not need to disturb marauder
The army comp you descripe is from the concept like bio + vikings that don´t get healed and don´t have stim. Would add tanks and 1-2 raven for the extra juice. Perhaps ghosts before tanks. Not quite sure. If there are no tanks i feel that ff ht immo/colli are quite a problem for that comp.
warhound is so cost effective against protoss that isn't even funny, you don't need any ghost or tank, at max add mines for some strategic play instead of 1a, but with that composition is an easy win vs toss
also two waround take down a immortal if you kite a bite and viking take out colossy, add BH for soaking damage and gg, toss defeated
I faced that strat and i have no issue countering it with high amount of robo poping only immortal. I use very few gateway warping only z and i go 5-6 robo to pop out only immortals and with energize on nexus i can chrono the 5 robo + double upgrade same time. i go for a 200 pop full upgrade a+click and bb ur formidable mech army . U should adapt adding some marines/BC/Banshee or something because for now i only face full mech army in this HOTS custom map and its pure ownage! I feel ashamed to fall into the vice of single unit play like zerg love so much but it seems to work for now.
My point in this is to say that there is no imba army with no counter especially in T v P even with the warhound coming up ! I feel this unit is good but not abused.
Did someone test a combo warhound banshee in their game? How effective this kind of strat is?
lol 5-6 robo? the time you have 5-6 robo i have 8 factory that produce non- stop warhound, and warhound are very supply cost effective, they can also kite immortal with their range 7 and missiles
On July 26 2012 17:30 Garmer wrote: lol 5-6 robo? the time you have 5-6 robo i have 8 factory that produce non- stop warhound, and warhound are very supply cost effective, they can also kite immortal with their range 7 and missiles
And they are also so big, that they are going to be new Goliaths in terms of bugging. On a serious note, cost per cost, Warhounds can beat Immortals only by kiting, but you can't kite them for eternity, and Warhounds aren't massive, so Force Fields will help there a lot(unless they change that, but I doubt they will).
Even with buff to their HP, Battle Hellions still can't stand more than few seconds against Colossi, and unlike Bio, they don't have stim. So, you can also mass a lot of Chargelots with 4-5 Colossi and few Phoenixes to defend from Vikings.
I tried Mines, Battle Hellions, Warhounds and Tanks vs. Mass Chargelots, Immortals and Stalkers, same cost of both armies, and Protoss won every single time, even with great positioning from Terran and just "blob-a-click" from Protoss, it wasn't even funny.
I feel like that mines need a damage nerf, and let it be like 100 damage vs. light units, and 150 or 175 damage vs. armored, because they will hard counter Mutas, because not a single sane person will trade 75/25 Mine for 100/100 Muta. And I feel that they need an upgrade for faster detonation. Currently, when they attach themselves to something in the middle of the battle, or when battle starts, that unit usually get destroyed before the mine explodes.
I can also see Protoss air force making a comeback vs. Terran mech, together with Tempests(but I don't think that it will be a must, which is good).
Also, I am Zerg player, so I am not really biased about the stuff I say, I just try to figure out units and how we can make them balanced without being useless or too useful(case of Widow Mines vs. Mutas).
On July 26 2012 17:30 Garmer wrote: lol 5-6 robo? the time you have 5-6 robo i have 8 factory that produce non- stop warhound, and warhound are very supply cost effective, they can also kite immortal with their range 7 and missiles
And they are also so big, that they are going to be new Goliaths in terms of bugging. On a serious note, cost per cost, Warhounds can beat Immortals only by kiting, but you can't kite them for eternity, and Warhounds aren't massive, so Force Fields will help there a lot(unless they change that, but I doubt they will).
Even with buff to their HP, Battle Hellions still can't stand more than few seconds against Colossi, and unlike Bio, they don't have stim. So, you can also mass a lot of Chargelots with 4-5 Colossi and few Phoenixes to defend from Vikings.
I tried Mines, Battle Hellions, Warhounds and Tanks vs. Mass Chargelots, Immortals and Stalkers, same cost of both armies, and Protoss won every single time, even with great positioning from Terran and just "blob-a-click" from Protoss, it wasn't even funny.
I feel like that mines need a damage nerf, and let it be like 100 damage vs. light units, and 150 or 175 damage vs. armored, because they will hard counter Mutas, because not a single sane person will trade 75/25 Mine for 100/100 Muta. And I feel that they need an upgrade for faster detonation. Currently, when they attach themselves to something in the middle of the battle, or when battle starts, that unit usually get destroyed before the mine explodes.
I can also see Protoss air force making a comeback vs. Terran mech, together with Tempests(but I don't think that it will be a must, which is good).
Also, I am Zerg player, so I am not really biased about the stuff I say, I just try to figure out units and how we can make them balanced without being useless or too useful(case of Widow Mines vs. Mutas).
well, widow mines are just really good right now, but you can counter them, and they are a bit hard to rely on against air that flies in from airspaces. THere is a lot of stuff that has to be watched... Mass Reaper is really strong again in the hands of a somewhat skilled player, Swarm Hosts are imo the most broken unit right now (they just don't give you enough of a window to deal with them after you finally dealt with the locust). Tempest feels really weak (too little dps) and could use a holdfire command or something that makes them a little bit easier to targetfire on the right stuff, Hydralisks are still hilarous (if speed hydras would fix them in the lategame, people would just creep over the whole map right now; sadly that doesn't change a lot. They don't reinforce well in timings and they plainly suck in the lategame statswise). Haven't really found a use for blinding cloud yet, the area feels really small and right now I'd just fungal instead of blind, whenever I have the choice to.
Also we don't know the stats of the old units. There might be already (big?) changes going on. This balance is not final...
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
warhound missiles have range 9, just focus fire colossi, or add viking for newbie way
Although I can not go, if you have any questions about HOTS, I can help you to convey them to my friends whom will go. And you are welcomed to ask your friends whom know Chinese to translate the questions first.
Played a little bit with each race, pretty fun overall.
Zerg: This is my main race. I felt like the swarm hosts didn't really have much use. Every time I tried making them it felt like a waste. I've read what others have said so I'm probably using them wrong. =) Vipers seemed pretty good though. Tried going ling/ultra/viper vs a meching terran. It went alright, probably would have gone better against a bio player. The evo chamber for overlord creep is pretty interesting. I used that to spine rush a protoss player's forge expand. He didn't know to use defensive mothership core though so I'm not sure how good the strategy is but it seemed really nice.
Protoss: I used mothership core to try out an improved 4 gate rush. Use 3/4 chrono on nexus to get a few extra probes. Mothership core instead of stalker. Use energize to restore nexus energy to finish warpgate and then keep using energize continually chrono all 4 gates.
Terran: Played as terran and against a terran going mech. Widow mines don't die. You can just run them into an army and burrow and you're pretty much guaranteed to trade cost effectively. Can't really see the hitpoints staying as high as they currently are.
Also, thanks to XenoX for once again putting in the effort to make this map. If you need a zerg player to test feel free to ask. memcpy.280
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
warhound missiles have range 9, just focus fire colossi, or add viking for newbie way
Haywiremissle are autocast so you can´t focus with them. Adding vikings "for an newbie way" like it´s the today common response with bio + vikings has a flaw. The thing is when ever the bio is forcefielded stalker colllosi viking dance begins and in most cases terran want to escape because you can´t have that high viking count. Then again the direct confrontation with a (more or less maxed) mech player is not what you want even now in WoL as a protoss.
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
The same way bio does. Vikings, you need some anti air anyway, and a few ghosts. Not sure if you even need Vikings though, the special attack of the WH can manualy target units, and the Collosi is a mechanical unit.
On July 26 2012 18:15 Garmer wrote: you tried it worng, in my test terran mech win without problem
I didn't try it wrong, you obviously don't know what the same cost means. It also depends what units were you using, I said unit composition that I was using. It was HOTS Custom 2 unit tester, and I didn't test it once or twice, I tested it 10 times in a row, results were different, but I think that Terran won once.
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
The same way bio does. Vikings, you need some anti air anyway, and a few ghosts. Not sure if you even need Vikings though, the special attack of the WH can manualy target units, and the Collosi is a mechanical unit.
Problem with your comparison: no stim, no heal. You will be forcefielded. When i take top-notch ghost controll out of the count.
On July 26 2012 18:34 Garmer wrote: warhound missiles have range 9, just focus fire colossi, or add viking for newbie way
You can't really kill the Colossi with Haywire Missiles, they do 30 damage and has 6 sec cooldown, the fight will be over when they attack the second time, the Terran or Protoss will be dead.
On July 26 2012 08:03 Sapphire.lux wrote: Slow yes, and positioning based, with an army the grows exponentialy stronger as the games goes on but without "T3" units like Protoss but by the nature of it's AOE. In short, siege tank based. Take all this away and you have Protoss 2.0
Nothing's being taken away. Battle Hellions are slower than normal, and Widow Mines are all about strategic positioning. The Warhound, on the other hand, is intended to fill the gap when it comes to being able to fight Protoss. Mech is being expanded upon, that's Blizzard's focus. Don't be so narrow-minded, it's nothing like Protoss.
I was referring specifically to the BH+WH combo (and mines) and that is not expanding upon anything, is "noobifing?" it. I am not narrow minded, i am pissed that Blizzards solution is a borring 1a unit that will, possibly, make the Tank even more of a specialized unit then it already is. You are just happy that you will have a strong and easy to use army to get some easier wins then you get with bio and all the work that has to be done with harassing.
Clever, pull race bias. I'm probably one of the least biased players out there. If you didn't notice, I'm a melee mapmaker, so that means 2 things straight off the bat:
1) I don't play that much. Honestly, I don't care personally. While I want SC2 to be successful as an e-sport, when it comes to my in-game performance, I couldn't care less. Both of those things mean I have no reason to be biased. Quite the opposite in fact.
2) To be a successful mapmaker, you have to eliminate bias. This is easy, since it also cuts in on your ability to play the game. I have to consider the pros and cons of every conceivable map feature, and if it doesn't work well for all 3 then it's a bad design. I'm not about to waste my time doing that.
Attack my logic, not the race you think I play. Because as it stands, I'd argue that I don't play any of them.
Fair enough and sorry for the little "attack"
I play Terran BTW, and not only that but mech exclusively in all 3 MUs. I get pissed when i see Terran players, that have never or barely tried to put in the time to understand how mech works (in particular the siege tank) and whine that it's to strong ( in TvT) or, as we see in this thread and others, be happy that they wount have to learn anything because BH+WH is a "1-a" army.
The WH makes tanks worse in TvT and almost unecesary in TvP (based on the units design and the little experience i have with the mod). Are less tanks a good thing for the game? I think not.
Well if you don´t have tanks how you fight collosi+forcefield with your BHWH comp?
The same way bio does. Vikings, you need some anti air anyway, and a few ghosts. Not sure if you even need Vikings though, the special attack of the WH can manualy target units, and the Collosi is a mechanical unit.
Problem with your comparison: no stim, no heal. You will be forcefielded. When i take top-notch ghost controll out of the count.
Well it's silly to take top-notch ghost controll out of the count because that's what pro. players have and they are the ones we are watching play. Besides,to EMP sentries is not that hard.
guys to beat mech you cant only go immortal + zealots as you guys write here, you forgot one thing , think if terran go marine , immortal is weak to marine so LOL ,
I rather say you should go then colo + some stalkers for battle helion + and many zealots for the warhound.
EPT
