On January 17 2011 20:37 BroodjeBaller wrote: Then you take the name of the play way too literally. And this could be the cause of your losses. If someones army is tank/thor heavy with some vikings/medivacs and a lot of marines I would still refer to it as mech based play. You are blaming the whole strategy when you dont even play it properly.
Jinro made 0 marauders and almost no marines. That is the mech we are talking about. You are talking about biomech, which is not as strong as pure mech and which will die against HT + zealot.
On January 17 2011 20:37 BroodjeBaller wrote: Then you take the name of the play way too literally. And this could be the cause of your losses. If someones army is tank/thor heavy with some vikings/medivacs and a lot of marines I would still refer to it as mech based play. You are blaming the whole strategy when you dont even play it properly.
Jinro made 0 marauders and almost no marines. That is the mech we are talking about. You are talking about biomech, which is not as strong as pure mech and which will die against HT + zealot.
So you're saying that what Jinro did was not mech? I mean he used medivacs and vikings. Also, he didn't make "almost no marines", I saw a lot of marines. Perhaps we weren't watching the same games.
I am really getting tired of this "if you make anything but tanks/thors/hellions it can no longer be called mech". Well call it biomech or whatever the fuck you want then, point is that it works. At least it's not as bad you're trying to make it out to be.
So please, tone down your bullshit and try to learn how to play the freaking game without complaining about imbalances all the god damn time!
On January 17 2011 20:37 BroodjeBaller wrote: Then you take the name of the play way too literally. And this could be the cause of your losses. If someones army is tank/thor heavy with some vikings/medivacs and a lot of marines I would still refer to it as mech based play. You are blaming the whole strategy when you dont even play it properly.
Jinro made 0 marauders and almost no marines. That is the mech we are talking about. You are talking about biomech, which is not as strong as pure mech and which will die against HT + zealot.
I just gave an example. If you are talking about jinro he made medivacs/marines/banshees/raven besides mech, so thats not mech either in your eyes, tho I think most people would still refer to it as mech play. Anyway I would still like to see a replay where protoss walks around terrans contain. You could even load some tanks into medivacs to reposition your tank line faster. Hellion/banshees harass could be devastating if a toss tries to do this.
Okay you guys are right about Mech being able to be abused for it's immobility but you over exaggerate to what level that can be abused. Back in BW 99% of TvP's were Mech, Protoss didn't have warp in but their overall army was still way more mobile than in sc2 as collossi and immortals are really slow and zealots are slower in sc2 as instead of speed upgrade they have a charge ability.
If the fact that Mech is slow means it auto-loses then Terrans never would have won a game in BW.
The only problem I have with Mech is not it's mobility but rather it's cost. 125 gas for a Siege Tank should really be lowered to 100 prevent the need for such long games, for every 4 current patch tanks could be another siege tank or extra factory to get a slightly earlier mass which is one of the problems Jinro stated with it is that you will always get a super long game. But meh.
Getting contained doesn't seem like it would be much of an issue as you can simply slow push out with your tanks and he wouldn't be able to charge forward and stop you without being shelled by the rear tanks.
On January 17 2011 21:08 Raiznhell wrote: Okay you guys are right about Mech being able to be abused for it's immobility but you over exaggerate to what level that can be abused. Back in BW 99% of TvP's were Mech, Protoss didn't have warp in but their overall army was still way more mobile than in sc2 as collossi and immortals are really slow and zealots are slower in sc2 as instead of speed upgrade they have a charge ability.
If the fact that Mech is slow means it auto-loses then Terrans never would have won a game in BW.
Difference being: spider mines and 2 supply tanks(along with goliath > thor for the most part). I'm not going to say mech isn't viable or anything, just that you can't really compare sc mech vs sc2 mech, since the differences are so huge.
I love playing vs mech, templar n' phoenixes all the way! Though, Thors still give me loads of trouble.... I feel like well played MMM is more taxing than Well played mech. I feel like vs MMM execution is what is important, but with mech preparation is more important.
On January 17 2011 21:03 BroodjeBaller wrote: Anyway I would still like to see a replay where protoss walks around terrans contain. You could even load some tanks into medivacs to reposition your tank line faster.
Ok I just decided to stop discussing with you after reading this line. We are talking about mech on MASTER level, not gold. Good luck transporting tanks with medivacs against 25+ stalkers and 5 collossae. Since you still haven't seen strelok vs naniwa, I will post the replay link. Watch it! http://www.sc2rep.com/replays/(T)mouzStrelok_vs_(P)nAni_lost_temple_sc2rep_com_20110110/4305
You probably never ever tried mech by yourself. MC attacked into jinro's bunkers on both lost temple and scrap station. That is a freewin for the terran. I never lose a tvp when the protoss just attacks into my bunkers. I never saw mc getting more then 3 bases in both games. I never saw mc abusing the mech immobility. Ofcourse you make vikings and ravens and some rines. Jinro his army was 95% metal aka mech.
Another note: watch this vod. It's jinro going mech against a protoss on lost temple. He faces the exact problem I was describing.
On January 17 2011 21:08 Raiznhell wrote: Okay you guys are right about Mech being able to be abused for it's immobility but you over exaggerate to what level that can be abused. Back in BW 99% of TvP's were Mech, Protoss didn't have warp in but their overall army was still way more mobile than in sc2 as collossi and immortals are really slow and zealots are slower in sc2 as instead of speed upgrade they have a charge ability.
If the fact that Mech is slow means it auto-loses then Terrans never would have won a game in BW.
The only problem I have with Mech is not it's mobility but rather it's cost. 125 gas for a Siege Tank should really be lowered to 100 prevent the need for such long games, for every 4 current patch tanks could be another siege tank or extra factory to get a slightly earlier mass which is one of the problems Jinro stated with it is that you will always get a super long game. But meh.
Getting contained doesn't seem like it would be much of an issue as you can simply slow push out with your tanks and he wouldn't be able to charge forward and stop you without being shelled by the rear tanks.
Give me spidermines and I will not complain about mech immobility.
On January 17 2011 21:03 BroodjeBaller wrote: Anyway I would still like to see a replay where protoss walks around terrans contain. You could even load some tanks into medivacs to reposition your tank line faster.
Ok I just decided to stop discussing with you after reading this line. We are talking about mech on MASTER level, not gold. Good luck transporting tanks with medivacs against 25+ stalkers and 5 collossae.
I saw jinro do this on LT to reposition his tanks, he sure is gold level. inb4 "but the stalker will just kill the medivacs" no they wont because earlier you were talking about the situation where the toss army was all the way around the tank line into the terrans main.
You probably never ever tried mech by yourself. MC attacked into jinro's bunkers on both lost temple and scrap station. That is a freewin for the terran. I never lose a tvp when the protoss just attacks into my bunkers. I never saw mc getting more then 3 bases in both games. I never saw mc abusing the mech immobility. Ofcourse you make vikings and ravens and some rines. Jinro his army was 95% metal aka mech.
Its obviously not a freewin since mc still had a lead supply wise after those attacks. And I dunno if you watched more of MC's games, but he really doesnt care about bunkers and still wins most of the times. Against rainbow he attacked into 4 bunkers and won anyway. And a few posts ago mech was just thor, tank, hellion, viking.
I understand the point your trying to make, but lets say you move your tanks to the bushes, by the time you have seiged up, his units can just move deeper into your base OR if he has sufficient units, he can just crush your unseiged tanks which he will definitely see via obs. Its still risky to move them around unseiged, and again I'm assuming sensor tower which I think is a generous assumption on 2 bases early-midgame.
Going even beyond this, there is a certain critical mass of tanks but a chargelot/immortal army can totally crush through a mech army through much of the game, throw in like 1 collosus to deal with marines and tanks are just countered by so many things that protoss has its very hard. I have seen protoss win this kind of engagement attacking into 10 seiged up tanks (protoss army was a bit bigger but it still seems counter intuitive)...its pretty ridiculous.
Broodje, Dente and I are both masters, I'm guessing that your a spectator general, I know that Jinro made it seem easy, but the true success behind the games was in LT the hellion drop and in scrap MC's questionable decision to make mass phoenix followed up by carriers which got composition countered. Close positions helped. Try playing a long macro game on metal when the opponent can just go around your tank line to your other expansions. You can't just unsiege and run over to the opponent because your gonna get rocked with your unseiged tanks, or he can make a switch to carriers, your beyond f'd if you dont see it coming (try scouting 3 stargates hidden discretly in a 5base metal match). The 2base scenario we have been discussing so far is the BEST CASE for terran, once you move to a 3base game the problems compound and it just gets worse from there.
Maybe someone should write a guide for mech TvP, Jinro? To have the things we know and the things we think need to be figured out in an order.
I think Sensor Towers are essential for mech play. Not only they give you a heads up warning but, maybe, with a few well placed ST, you can keep your tanks unsieged for a faster response. It might be the answer for what happened to strelok, goody, etc (the blink, colossie thing). They are so darn expensive though...
Ghosts are also very important i think. Just one or two, for the brute "dps"done to shields can increase the cost effectiveness of your army dramatically.
What i really loved about Jinro's play were the banshees. I just realized that cloaked banshees can be superb for scouting. They are faster then observers (pre speed).
On January 17 2011 21:03 BroodjeBaller wrote: Anyway I would still like to see a replay where protoss walks around terrans contain. You could even load some tanks into medivacs to reposition your tank line faster.
Ok I just decided to stop discussing with you after reading this line. We are talking about mech on MASTER level, not gold. Good luck transporting tanks with medivacs against 25+ stalkers and 5 collossae.
I saw jinro do this on LT to reposition his tanks, he sure is gold level. inb4 "but the stalker will just kill the medivacs" no they wont because earlier you were talking about the situation where the toss army was all the way around the tank line into the terrans main.
You probably never ever tried mech by yourself. MC attacked into jinro's bunkers on both lost temple and scrap station. That is a freewin for the terran. I never lose a tvp when the protoss just attacks into my bunkers. I never saw mc getting more then 3 bases in both games. I never saw mc abusing the mech immobility. Ofcourse you make vikings and ravens and some rines. Jinro his army was 95% metal aka mech.
Its obviously not a freewin since mc still had a lead supply wise after those attacks. And I dunno if you watched more of MC's games, but he really doesnt care about bunkers and still wins most of the times. Against rainbow he attacked into 4 bunkers and won anyway. And a few posts ago mech was just thor, tank, hellion, viking.
Well then explain why both strelok and goody lost to naniwa's collossus + stalker. Did you actually watch those games? They perfectly show why mech is not viable at all.
What Jinro did against MC in game 2 100% countered MC's immortal/carriers/stalkers.
Obviously he's proving Mech is viable in a TvP but it doesn't mean that he and every terran should immediately 4-factory every TvP that makes it to the late game. It was just right for the time.
Well then explain why both strelok and goody lost to naniwa's collossus + stalker. Did you actually watch those games? They perfectly show why mech is not viable at all.
Doesn't really mean much, haven't seen the vods but i'll find them when i get home. Jinro had enough viking support to take out any colossus perfectly fine. What MC did charging into the tanks and bunkers might have worked against TSL_Rain but not jinro :D
On January 17 2011 21:03 BroodjeBaller wrote: Anyway I would still like to see a replay where protoss walks around terrans contain. You could even load some tanks into medivacs to reposition your tank line faster.
Ok I just decided to stop discussing with you after reading this line. We are talking about mech on MASTER level, not gold. Good luck transporting tanks with medivacs against 25+ stalkers and 5 collossae.
I saw jinro do this on LT to reposition his tanks, he sure is gold level. inb4 "but the stalker will just kill the medivacs" no they wont because earlier you were talking about the situation where the toss army was all the way around the tank line into the terrans main.
You probably never ever tried mech by yourself. MC attacked into jinro's bunkers on both lost temple and scrap station. That is a freewin for the terran. I never lose a tvp when the protoss just attacks into my bunkers. I never saw mc getting more then 3 bases in both games. I never saw mc abusing the mech immobility. Ofcourse you make vikings and ravens and some rines. Jinro his army was 95% metal aka mech.
Its obviously not a freewin since mc still had a lead supply wise after those attacks. And I dunno if you watched more of MC's games, but he really doesnt care about bunkers and still wins most of the times. Against rainbow he attacked into 4 bunkers and won anyway. And a few posts ago mech was just thor, tank, hellion, viking.
Well then explain why both strelok and goody lost to naniwa's collossus + stalker. Did you actually watch those games? They perfectly show why mech is not viable at all.
so your basing of a few gamse that mech if not viable at all and there is no way anyone can beat naniwa with mech play ?
Okay well Dente is clearly just that dude in a forum that tries to lie to himself and prove it to others. In Dente's logic MMM shouldn't even be viable at all because even MMM doesn't win 100% of the time. It's like if a couple guys lose a couple games that makes it completely impossible to do lol. But if the strategy was able to beat the best protoss in the world I don't care how it happened I think it's "viable" if it eliminated the best protoss in the world from a tournament.
And as for not being able to compare sc1 Mech and sc2 Mech you are absolutely 100% able to compare them. Why? Because they are both Mech for pete's pepper.
Anything you say sc2 Mech doesn't have from BW Mech there's garanteed to be a benefit from sc2 Mech to replace it.
For examples. Lack of spider mines,
Hellions do Splash damage, bunkered marines accomplish the same job in keeping stuff away from your tanks long enough for your tanks to shell the enemy. (Besides spider mines often could be used against you imagine a mine following a chargelot in sc2...)
2 supply tanks,
Tanks don't overkill with their fire so they don't really need the 70 damage and the 2 supply as much, the gas cost sucks but I guess blizzard deems the extra 25 gas being there as essential to balance for some dumb reason :/. In BW you needed more tanks because 6-10 of your forward tanks would shot at the first 3 zlots in the charge.
As for the Goliath problem having to produce the marine for the bunkers if enough of a deterrence to allow you to build up the required amount of vikings to deal with anything in the air but you should be making a few vikings the whole time anyways so. Vikings are basically Goliaths they have basically all the same stats except vikings cost a bit more but fly.
And I think anyone who says Mech is not "viable" is dumb because all a strategy needs to be viable is to work and Mech has worked so. I think some people don't like it because you actually have to think when going Mech rather than going Marauders lol.
On January 18 2011 02:51 Raiznhell wrote: And as for not being able to compare sc1 Mech and sc2 Mech you are absolutely 100% able to compare them. Why? Because they are both Mech for pete's pepper.
Anything you say sc2 Mech doesn't have from BW Mech there's garanteed to be a benefit from sc2 Mech to replace it.
For examples. Lack of spider mines,
Hellions do Splash damage, bunkered marines accomplish the same job in keeping stuff away from your tanks long enough for your tanks to shell the enemy. (Besides spider mines often could be used against you imagine a mine following a chargelot in sc2...)
Hardly, spider mine gives you a lot more presence on the map and encourages harassment to replenish vultures and therefore for more spider mines. You can place mines and run off with the vulture, the hellion is stuck next to your army. Hellions strength comes from worker roasts, they are imo far worse for straight up combat usefulness.
On January 18 2011 02:51 Raiznhell wrote:2 supply tanks,
Tanks don't overkill with their fire so they don't really need the 70 damage and the 2 supply as much, the gas cost sucks but I guess blizzard deems the extra 25 gas being there as essential to balance for some dumb reason :/. In BW you needed more tanks because 6-10 of your forward tanks would shot at the first 3 zlots in the charge.
While this is true to an extent, it's countered via splitting your tanks up. 2 supply tanks = a lot longer tank line, which again reduces the impact of immobility, since your army covers more ground. Ontopic, if you have such a spread that 6-10 tanks shoot before something dies(in sc1) then immos are basically your issue in SC2. It's painful to watch when a toss has immo in front and take the first volley from basically all the tanks and then watch chargelots run in, without a scratch.
On January 18 2011 02:51 Raiznhell wrote:As for the Goliath problem having to produce the marine for the bunkers if enough of a deterrence to allow you to build up the required amount of vikings to deal with anything in the air but you should be making a few vikings the whole time anyways so. Vikings are basically Goliaths they have basically all the same stats except vikings cost a bit more but fly.
They however aren't produced from the same structure and don't share upgrades. This a lesser issue though. Mind you though, that marines cost supply, spider mines don't. So while they do help with AA, your meatshield is starting to decrease your tank line even further(if anything, if I was to use rines for AA, I'd likely rather just build turrets, which are stronger in sc2 tho).
On January 18 2011 02:51 Raiznhell wrote:And I think anyone who says Mech is not "viable" is dumb because all a strategy needs to be viable is to work and Mech has worked so. I think some people don't like it because you actually have to think when going Mech rather than going Marauders lol.
It really depends on the definition of viable. From what I've seen, you have to outplay your opponent and tbh in that case be better off just going MMM. I mean you can win with it as has been proven, but from my testing of it, it kind of just felt like handicapping myself. Rather skip tanks alltogether, since for their cost they just don't feel useful enough and there are plenty of other good units in the terran arsenal that provide similar results and don't have as gaping weakness. One of the reasons I play terran is due to the siege tank though, so I'd love to be convinced that it could offer better results than other builds/unit combos.
On January 18 2011 03:17 Dente wrote: Well okay then, it's viable lads, but make sure protoss doesn't build stalkers + collo or immortals with zealots!
hellion/thor/siege tank is extremely effective against these builds in a straight up fight. Thors take and deal an incredible amount of ground damage. Siege tanks also do lots of damage, and its splash. Hellions + blue flame do absurd amounts of damage to zealots. I would be interested to see someone do some unit tests with a mass mech army vs various mass protoss armies to see how they match up. I think that a mech army would do very well against most unit compositions in a head on battle, however as its been pointed out many many times it's very immobile so positioning and scouting is everything.
EPT
To have the things we know and the things we think need to be figured out in an order. 
