EPT[Q]Will we see something other than MMM? - Page 2
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 Strategy |
|
Withdraw
6 Posts
| ||
|
Tyrannon
Germany113 Posts
+Everything else got nerfed (Viking in Beta, BCs, Tanks, Reaper, Hellion via Roachrange) +if you go Air, its so expensive that you can´t build other stuff, solo Air is too weak. | ||
|
Strutswell
Canada47 Posts
 So the answer is: yes. | ||
|
RoseTempest
Canada196 Posts
On October 17 2010 18:21 Everlong wrote: Ok, I got it. You disagree.. Now, could you actually think about it and come up with something less sarcastic and aggresive? Lets see, Terran late game. Thors --> Raped by immo BC's --> After damage reduction, blink stalkers and voids rape them until they hit critical mass, which isn't going to happen Tanks --> Useless against chargelots and immo What else is there? HMMMM... Raven? They're used in MMM balls too. I don't exactly see your point here, terran is using T1 structure units with a T3 structure unit or two, while protoss is doing the exact same thing. There's nothing here to discuss, MMM has great DPS, is versatile, and can be replenished quickly, and can be microed to increase their efficiency. Everything else just isn't as good. Sure, there's marine/banshee play, but I'm sure you'll be complaining about how you're only using T1 units for the bulk of your army. If you don't want people to be sarcastic and aggressive, don't make stupid posts. There's no discussion to be had here, MMM works, deal with it. If you don't like it, experiment and see if other things work for you. | ||
|
zbedlam
Australia549 Posts
On October 17 2010 18:56 Everlong wrote: Yes, mech in TvP is problematic, since P has already many answers. Its not like P needs to think about how to play. Just make specific units and its done. Id like to see one change adressing mech TvP, which is Phoenix lifting tanks in siege mode. But its true that SC2 is too young. It will probably change over time again. Hopefully.. I think MMM will always be a staple composition in TvP at least until one of the expansions maybe. I agree that phoenix lifting siege tanks while sieged should be removed, but honestly I don't think it would help that much, when blizzard fixed tanks they fixed it for TvZ which was absolutely needed, however TvP didn't need quite as much siege tank "fixing" this reduced the viability of mech support too much imo, hence all we see is MMM :/ Raven? They're used in MMM balls too. I fail to see their lategame usefulness with them being countered by HT's even more now, and the toss player will almost certainly have HT's if you went bio. | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
If you don't want people to be sarcastic and aggressive, don't make stupid posts. There's no discussion to be had here, MMM works, deal with it. If you don't like it, experiment and see if other things work for you. 23/25 contributions to my post werent sarcastic, aggressive nor stupid. One would say this points to fact, that there is something to discuss here? Maybe these 2/25 stupid posts are from stupid people? | ||
|
Nightfall.589
Canada766 Posts
Either way, since you do play Terran, perhaps you yourself should experiment with not using MMM in TvP. I strongly doubt you'll meet much success. | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
On October 17 2010 19:26 Nightfall.589 wrote: Most of those 23 posts explained to you, from multiple angles why you really don't have an argument. Either way, since you do play Terran, perhaps you yourself should experiment with not using MMM in TvP. I strongly doubt you'll meet much success. Since I started this thread to share opinions and Im not trying to prove anything I dont think I need an argument? | ||
|
k4ne
Austria34 Posts
| ||
|
ledarsi
United States475 Posts
Mech is underpowered. The reason why some players allege that it is overpowered is because, in a heads up battle, it beats pretty much everything on the ground. So. How is it possible that a unit composition that "beats everything" is underpowered? Simple. The second you hit that "s" key to build those siege tanks, you lost the initiative. The enemy will determine when and where the battle happens. You cannot engage with tanks. You can contain and force an engagement, but that's as close as you are going to get, and will only happen if the enemy lets you within spitting distance of his base. Which means either you are going to win anyway, or your enemy is an idiot. Siege tanks have the ability to "checkmate" an enemy by sieging up within range of their main, or by a critical mining base, or what have you, and keeping them covered. There is literally nothing the enemy can do to win if they cannot break you right there, and you're already sieged up and ready to rock, so it's not gonna happen. They also have the ability to secure territory and make armies pay for charging your entrenched position. They are excellent at both jobs. The problem is that every tank you make weakens your army by 150 minerals, 125 gas, and 3 supply, and adds about a Marauder's strength to your mobile offensive capacity, which can be had for much cheaper, and in a faster, healable, stimmable package at that. The tank's strength is the ability to lay down a CRUSHING amount of firepower in a single salvo when sieged up in numbers. The problem then becomes- you have a large number of tanks, and no bio army. You cannot unsiege or you will be routed by a standard issue army. The best you can do is leapfrog cautiously. The tank never carries its own weight. The reason why tanks were "too strong" in people's eyes was primarily the maps were small. Consider Steppes of War. Tanks are excellent on that map because there is essentially one route of attack, and the distance between the two bases is very short. You can leapfrog away and eventually you reach the enemy base, and then checkmate. Without ever making an assault, and without ever exposing anything. On standard size maps, and in future we will see larger maps, this will not be the case. We will never see tanks because you cannot defend just one base forever and expect to win. You cannot really use tanks to guard a base that they aren't sieged up on already, and you cannot use them in an offensive capacity without getting a big bio ball anyway, and it's just more efficient to phase them out for more bio and medivacs (or vikings, situation permitting). Tanks are now more expensive than they were in brood war, most notably the extra supply cost. Yet they are actually weaker (and yes, the no-overkill AI is a buff, but go brood war style mech on a very large BW map and you'll get what I'm saying). I was going to bring up Thors, but this post is getting long. Suffice to say they are not a replacement for the Goliath in terms of anti-air in that they suck against armored air, and its dependence on its mediocre splash damage means good players won't lose much of their light air either unless you have a LOT of thors, and then we run into the same problem we had with tanks, but much worse since each Thor is 300/200 and a whopping 6 supply. An anti-air solution with a TON of baggage resulting in an overpriced, useless, clunky monstrosity. I'll go with marines instead, and we're back at bio again. | ||
|
CurLy[]
United States759 Posts
is pretty much Zealot Sentry Stalker, with colossus (immortals/templars) See how it works? | ||
|
bigjenk
United States1543 Posts
| ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
| ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
On October 17 2010 19:54 CurLy[] wrote: MMM with vikings (ghosts/ravens) is pretty much Zealot Sentry Stalker, with colossus (immortals/templars) See how it works? Sorry, but Im not buing this. Ravens are rarely used and during MGL I think I saw ghosts used 2-3 times? Even medivacs are not as used as you need those vikings to snipe collosi. So that leaves you with Marine/Marauder + Vikings most of the time and if you can, you sneak in as many medivacs as you can. No other options.. | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
I think MMM is used because its the most effective, not because there literally are no other options. If P finds a way to shut it down (templar tech without dying getting it) Terran will adapt. | ||
|
MockHamill
Sweden1798 Posts
Then I started to experiment with mech. Turns out that Tank/Hellion is cost effecient vs everything Protos has on ground as long as you have decent positioning. If he goes Immortals just add some marines. And Suddenly I could wipe out Templar supported armies without needing perfect EMP micro. So in my opinion Mech is much better than MMM vs Protoss espeically if you do not have 150+ APM and perfect EMP micro. | ||
|
Supanova7G
United Kingdom13 Posts
Take ghosts for example. As far I can see, players are only beginning to dabble with a few ghosts, the same goes for ravens in something like a mech powerhouse supported by raven. Has anyone, for example, tried using standard slow mech play and a few hunter seekers, which force the enemy into chaos either running away allowing you to advance/siege up or take fantastic damage from the seekers. Honestly if you are a stage where you can afford a pile of mech units, perhaps a Day9 response of 'get more mech units' is the wrong path to choose, particularly when you are playing Terran. MMM is great early and late game, SeleCT has demonstrated that at MLGDC (where he bored me to death with literally nothing except MMM), but for me we have yet to see a lot from terran in a zerg like macro play to support those exotic lategame gimmicks that, as qxc demonstrated in g2 vs IdrA MLGDC, can really win the game for you. Infact for me qxc was the best terran player in the tourny by a year and a mile with an almost zergish economic style. | ||
|
J-C-erloeser
Germany55 Posts
i agree with all (most) statements on tanks. from the terran units design most units are good in defending positions(immobile stuff)- others designed for herassment(supermobile stuff). but u wont see a terran using this, as it means to give away map control and relying on herass (which might be denied easily). the bio is allaround and mobile and the only way to escape this very strict "defend and herass" play. i tried to be very aggressive with mech by build turrets on a direct way to the enemies base and put tanks into position (mainly unsieged). few banchees to fly around - most of the time run away. and as explained above, suddently i had the urge for building bio to protect myself in all sorts of situations. | ||
|
risk.nuke
Sweden2825 Posts
On October 17 2010 18:11 petzergling wrote: pretty sad that all protosses use is gateway units and collosus i think they should nerf warp gates and collosus they did nerf warpgates you shmuck MMM isnt the ONLY way to go, but it is the EASIEST, thats why you will see alot of diamond players using it because they got to diamond with it and some can't do anything else witch sucess. | ||
|
Damaskinos
Germany139 Posts
On October 17 2010 18:01 Everlong wrote: edit: Im not complaining about balance. I would like to see marauder nerfed for example to see, how Terrans used the rest of their arsenal. I play Terran btw. To make this clear. Why do you want to see? Play yourself and post your finds for us! To nerf an unit, to force the Terrans to use the others? Wow! I think a have seen this movie before. It was called the Reaper-Nerf-Series.  Not that reapers were really nerfed. Only their use in the early game.For my part, I watched the MLG games and I watch a lot of replays and tournament streams, and I wonder, as you do: "Fuck, why dont this guy mix 2-3 Ghost against Protoss? This would even open the door for siege tanks" or "2-3 Thors would be nice". MMM is used heavily because the have a good synergy and it's easily producable. Thors, tanks you have to siege and unsiege, are slow, unflexible. They can be used but they need an change in the playstyle. Being slower. Slower equals to: other races can outmacro u. (Yes I know, we have Mules. Mules=More minerals, rising the natural gathering ratio of 3:1 minerals/gas of each base to 4:1. Which units do you optimaly produce with an ratio of 4:1? Marauders! And Marines + Medivacs (6:1)). Terrans dont have chronobost. They cannot produce 30+ units at once, as Zerg can. They simply try to find their way. Some are "lazy" and rise MMM+Viking against Protoss to an art. See Select and others. Some are generaly more creative, see TLO. By the way: why do Terrans have to rely to their fast units? Because their units are generaly slow AND they have the worst static defence!!! Yes, the worst, not the best, as generaly claimed. As the game proceeds they cant just build Photon Canons or Spine Crawlers (those are dynamic-static! as IdrA showed us!) in their bases to defend their SCVs and Military Facilities from harassment, while the army is moving out. Yes, we have the "imba" Planetary Fortress. Usualy it's our 3rd Base, far away from the Barracks, Factories, Starports. And they cant be positioned in the base in a way to protect everything. They are too clumsy for that. But they could be used to build Strongholds on some points of the map. Resuming: MMM+Vikings overpowered? I am not sure. Are there other ways to play? Maybe. Could we see some more units in the mix? Definitely. Do Terrans have weaknesses? A lot! How old is the game? 2 Months! Relax and watch it evolving and to return to the begining: be creative yourself! | ||
| ||
