|
Completely agree with you about this. Most of the time when i type about how imba TvP is for both sides i get banned or laughed at maybe because my english is limited who knows. I think because of some nerfs to balance other things you are limited to 1 thing and 1 thing only in TvP going bio no matter what your late game comp will be marine,rauders,vikings,ghost with 2-3 medivacs some pros go marine,vikings,ghost lots of medivacs and 2-3 rauders just for slows because their micro is awesome but the point still stays that you are limited to go bio everytime.
I can't see any answers how to make mech viable in TvP if they buff tanks they will make them op in other matchups, hellions are also kinda meh because of how charge works and they die to your own splash and thors are slow and to much resources. I rather have stable builds and just by improving my positioning and decision making to win games then to have this up&down allinish TvP where late game is :
Ups drop in your main, ups run in to ghost emp, ups choke point say hello to aoe in sc2,ups made to much vikings other dude has more hts, ups "special" units got focused now i'm dead and so on.....
The machup is really fragile and I can't see stabilizing soon. Early game toss has to gamble what harass is coming, lategame terran has to gamble what tech switch is coming. Atleast this is my opinion.
|
As a protoss player, I can kind of see what you're saying
I often offrace as Terran, and when I play vs protoss, I'm always taken back by how powerful toss armies are
However, from the toss perspective, I think picking the protoss apart by multitasking (dropping 2-3 things, harassing, sniping buildings) comes pretty easily
If the protoss spreads out to defend everything, your main army can just push in and kill
Also, i believe mech IS viable, I've seen a handful of players consistently pull it off (masters league)
|
On October 02 2011 21:26 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +Edit: Well. Im glad Predy replied and was pretty manner. For those of you terrans recently joining the conversation who have started to shift it to 'terran unwinnable in late game'. Please lets not do that if possible. Jinro's post for example, is nothing but a complete whine that Protoss is > Terran. None of that contributes to a discussion about tanks being used. No it isnt, what the fuck? Guy 1 says if both players played perfect terran should never lose, I disagree I think its the opposite, I just dont think Protoss can play perfect without maphacking. Give protoss maphack and I think T would never beat P, pretty much. Thats fine tho, because P doesnt actually have maphack..... Also, for people complaining about how their race doesnt have the option of doing anything but playing the same thing every game either...... Well, how about you make a thread about that as well? Its not like thats a good thing and all us terrans want to keep it that way -- If only the colossus was a reaver....
You said that, but not much reasoning behind that statement and I am interested why would you think so. And hopefully you mean both players having maphack in your scenario, otherwise the outcome has nothing to do with statement in question.
Anyway why I have different feeling is that lately I see terran late game bio+ghost(ev. vikings) armies demolish late game protoss armies thanks to emp/snipe and smart scans. Of course with maphacks on both sides I see it as more of a stalemate, not in any way decidedly good for protoss.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard?
by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks.
about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front
and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
|
On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff.
The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable.
It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural...
I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead."
As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win.
With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A.
Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays.
Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win."
Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth."
Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP.
And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else.
It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
|
It sounds like you believe sieging and unsieging tanks has more to do with micro than maintaining and organising a large bio army with ghosts + vikings, etc. You're having a laugh, mate. And 2 siege tanks for one expo? Someone else want to help with this guy?
And I don't even know where to begin on all this WG hating. Without WG Protoss are weakened to the point where the entire game has to be redesigned. Rather than whiplash-demanding it be removed, how about we think about ways to slightly tweak it (if that is even necessary). Oh wait, Blizzard are already on that - WG research time increased a couple patches ago...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread was a comment on the playing style of TvP, not a chance for all the loons to come out of the woodwork and whine about balance.
|
Imo there is a lot of micro like what thorzain said on the first page, but the problem is you always need the correct composition otherwise you just insta die, like you said in the last paragraph of 3.2. Especially in late game this is annoying when they can tech switch their deathball instantly and warp in ht/archon anywhere while you have to wait for your ghosts to pop out.
|
On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
ignorance is bliss
so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway.
'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings'
im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
|
On October 03 2011 06:18 ThatGuy89 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark. ignorance is bliss so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway. 'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive.
It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
|
On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
As the game exists currently, I think any buff to mech should be accompanied by an equal nerf to bio in order to balance out TvP. Also as things stands, I'm wary of buffing the siege tank simply because of the 1-1-1, which is already twice as difficult to hold by the toss as it is the execute by the Terran, and any buff to siege tank would simply make it impossible to hold the 1-1-1.
Also as it is, terran has the easiest time holding expansions and preventing harass because of planetary fortress + turrets. Also the protoss answer to heavy mech in bw - carrier is just ridiculously cost inefficient in SC2, and is hard countered by the insanely long ranged Vikings. All these factors combined make it very hard for Blizzard to buff siege tanks/ mech without horribly tilting the game in terran's favor. Any buff to terran mech would lead to a buff to toss late game, and then we would be literally back to square one.
|
On October 03 2011 06:27 Severus_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:18 ThatGuy89 wrote:On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark. ignorance is bliss so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway. 'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive. It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills".
not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can.
marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game.
Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
|
On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark.
As for the unit composition, but that is true for many other units in many matchups. Fighting marauders with stim with stalkers is also impossible, if you don't have observers/overseers cloaked banshees kill your army, and so on.
In general, the points you said that I agree with(mostly those about positional play making the game better) are not limited to TvP matchup, but to whole design of SC2. It is just designed differently than BW. I might agree with you that some elements are more boring, but the reasons are deeper than lack of ability to mech in TvP. I think whole SC2 was designed with less emphasis on position and more on quick decisions in extremely variable environment. It is just in general game with more fragile states. But I don't think that can be fixed without total overhaul of the game. I think it would be better if it was more like BW and I say that as a person who started sporadically watching BW around the release of SC2, I am not some elitist BW fanboy 
One way that I see as possible to address it at least to some degree (and it would also probably include making tanks more viable in TvP) is Day9's idea to introduce space controlling units (like tanks, lurkers, defilers and to lesser degree hts and reavers in BW). But I think making tanks better would necessitate the removal of marauders or at least make them unable to stim, which might be ok to you, but I doubt Blizzard will ever do that
|
On October 03 2011 06:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff. wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken.
No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something.
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff. The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable. It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... .
Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
|
On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff. wow i dont know the exact cost of tanks, but wanting 2 to defend an expo is completely retarded. If that was possible then terran, and tanks, would be completely broken. No, it's not retarded and it wouldn't be broken. It's like how in BW you could hold chokes with lurkers or siege tanks/mines. Lower amounts of units mattered more - position mattered more, it wasn't all about always just bum rushing into something. Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff. The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable. It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... . Yes, I agree with you... but I think as long as blizzard wants the map pool to be like what it is today, they'll never be able to make the tank what it should be (in any of the match ups). But I think the least they could do is change the damage to 50 (-15 to light) just so that archons aren't basically warp-inable Immortals.
so youre saying that its completely fine for one race to be able to build 2 of the same units and use them to nail down an expansion?
i dont even know how to respond to that........it doesnt make any sense.Tanks would have to be made so strong that if they were used for aggression in anyway it would be completely one sided.
edit: warp-inable immortals - that cost 250-300 gas which are completely negated by ghosts
try holding off the stupidly broken 1-1-1 build while a siege tank is dealing 50 damage
|
On October 03 2011 06:33 ThatGuy89 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:27 Severus_ wrote:On October 03 2011 06:18 ThatGuy89 wrote:On October 03 2011 06:06 PredY wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On October 03 2011 05:37 flowSthead wrote:I have no idea why this was spotlighted. So a mod agreed with the sentiment and this get's spotlighted? Seriously? Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 05:49 PredY wrote:1 Introduction, StarCraft 2 philosophy?I believe blizzards intended to make sc2 a fast paced game, which means they wanted to make low tier units useful, Marine+Marauder being the prime example of that. It means that there's rarely a passage in the game where nothing is happening (on the pro level). But does this hurt the game? Are low tier units too strong? Also it seems blizzard wants to make as many units viable as possible in all matchups so they can have variety in the gameplay. In BW, that was not the case, as marines were almost useless in both TvT and TvP besides couple timing attacks (f.e. Deep6). I believe sc2 TvP has the similar issue, but i'll get to that later. I have a few questions right off the bat. What do you mean by hurt the game? Do you mean that it is boring to watch, or boring to play, or both? I'm not sure I understand the sentiment that it hurts the game, unless you give me some qualifications for that statement. Show nested quote +
So what is the reason TvP is all bio? Marauders and warpgates. It's unfortunate that TvP got screwed because tanks were "too strong" in TvZ and were nerfed. Marauders are much more cost effective vs protoss. Hell i hate them, marauders. Such a boring unit. Even more than collosus. You make marine marauder then switch to marine marauder and in late game transition into marine marauder, errrr wait a minute...there's just no option like in other matchups.Warpgates is in my oppinion the worst game mechanic they could put into the game, but that has been discussed to death. I really DO HOPE they will change it in HoTS, but i don't expect so.
Again, you just throw out something random without qualification. What do you mean the marauder is boring? What does that actually mean in terms of gameplay or observing? I happen to like the marauder. I think the marauder introduces variety into the TvT match-up. I like that bio play can play against mech since it punishes mistakes. I like that bio can transition into mech and then into sky terran. I think that actually makes for exciting TvT and the reason TvT is the best mirror. Show nested quote +
How about you having wrong unit composition? He has collosus and you have no vikings? You lose. He has storms and you have no EMPs? You lose. Remember when in BW you had no tanks but you could still kill lurkers with godly micro? Or when you have too many vultures against a lot of dragoons but not enough tanks, you would go in and surround with mines and then 10 goons turned to blue goo? I want THAT!
And this is a problem with any race. Build order losses happen. This has been addressed by other people in the thread. If you have cloacked banshees and your opponent has no form of detection, then you lose. What is your point? I skimmed through this thread and saw a lot of different posts addressing the issues with the OP. I get that the OP wants a more positional game and wants more micro capabilities. That's fine, the OP has a right to his opinion. But why was this spotlighted? This should be a blog post. There is no discussion to be had. The OP hates the marauder, while other people do not. What is it that we are supposed to be discussing? How much the marauder sucks? How is any of this useful either to TL or to Blizzard? by boring marauder i mean the unit has no cool abilities and feels out of place. good low tier units with a lot of HP (and concussive shells) and very good damage, is cheap and easy to get (similar to roach). collosus is for example boring for me as well, since its a big machine with lazers thats just A move. you don't need to deploy it like lurkers or siege tanks. about the unit composition. i meant that there's no way to counter collosus other than with vikings (or corruptors) which means whenever you don't have those around you're doomed, it's not like in tvz where you can "dance" your marines vs blings, in tvp if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings, especially late game. with wall of support units in front and as you mentioned yourself, tvt is an exciting matchup since while the match goes on you climb the tech tree, bio - mech - air. nothing like that happens in tvp where you have units you need since 12 or so minute mark. ignorance is bliss so what youre saying is that you want all your tier 1 units to have 'cool abilities' as if stim and CS arent enough? so you just want every terran unit to be able to do something other then just attack with alot of health, and cost wise, counter anything toss can send out of a gateway. 'if protoss controls his 9range collosi right, theres no way to kill them without vikings' im gonna watch any pro toss player who handles their collosus, and as soon as one dies to a unit which isnt a viking (which happens alot btw) im gonna start hating on them for not keeping it alive. It seems you don't understand the OP he says that units like rauders should be never in the game because their CS limits the game skill and their are to powerful to be skiped and they blow in the lategame where you are limited by your options because of their "cool skills". not entirely sure what youre trying to say here but ill respond the best i can. marauders should be taken out the game, cos they dont have a 'cool skill' that can be used late game. Im sorry but that makes very little sense. Zealots/zerglings are boring cos they have no 'cool skill' (ok you have charge but marduers have CS which is an automated ability so we'll not count it.) but that doesnt stop them being used. Why wouldnt marauders be used late game by terran? They take more of a beating off collosus/storm and deal much more damage to stalkers and such then marines do. Plus,dropping 4 and stimming them into a toss main can do sooooooooo much damage
Maybe i didn't explain it good enough because my english is bad. So i will try again lul  Those units that you said zeals and zerglings they excel in their roles and they have positional advantage (surronds by zergling makes them more effective or puting your zeal to be attacked from only 1 side also makes them more efficent) you can harass with them you can do micro with them. With rauders you have limited micro and you limit your opponets micro also which is dumb in my opinion they can't excel they have 1 purpose and thats it they put skill cap in the game.
|
Good observations. To me TvP is at the same time the easiest and the hardest match up. It's super easy to play, but in the end you either just win or just lose, no middle ground. And you're right, theres nowhere to go in TvP. M&m&m and more m&m&m. If you try to transition to thors or bcs, you get rolled because they take too long and aren't that good. Ghosts make things a little better, but it takes like a minute for P to switch between templar and colossus (because unlike thors or bcs, 3 colossus will turn the game) and even faster after that. Vikings have opportunity cost associated with them, and with warp in, harassment isn't very effective. It's just boring. What's worse is that you can't sit back and out macro a Protoss. I mean you CAN get a better economy, but it doesn't mean shit. Your army has to be bigger than theirs at all times because you can't rebuild faster than them if you lose or trade in a battle. The last TvP I played, I had 105 scvs on 5 bases when he had 60 probes on 3. I had 200 food when he had 136. I traded armys a couple times, he colossus switched I didn't have ENOUGH vikings, and he won one battle, I remaxed off of 16 raxes and he still rolled me because he had 3 colossus and once production cycle ahead of me and I couldn't build vikings fast enough. Really, really frustrating.
|
For me three things ruin the TvP matchup.
spoiler tags because it's long. + Show Spoiler +
The first is marauders. Why? Marauders literally run circles around early-game protoss options (stalkers and zealots). They're not necessarily imbalanced, but they do demand a reaction. This in turn forces protoss to acknowledge the threat, except protoss cannot really "defend" in the same way that T can put up bunkers or Z can plant spines. So instead of defending, Protoss often tilts to go hyper-aggressive to circumvent the potential early marauder pressure. Then what happens is a spiral of increasingly aggressive builds that just turn TvP into a pseudo cheese fest. e.g. the 1-1-1 from terran, the void ray all-in from protoss. the 3rax conc. shell timing, even the 4gate. The fact that marauders even exist in this way also brings Terran the opportunity to exploit protoss' vunerability early game (and lets face it, the pros have cracked how to hold early game protoss pressure, and not just in TvP). I also dislike marauders because their high hp, damage vs armoured and speed means that Terran never really has to tech switch vs Protoss (which is pretty much what the OP said). tl;dr I blame marauders for the pathetic TvP metagame.
The second "problem" I'd point out is Protoss' severe lack of defence (cannons suck. ffs are as much an offensive tool as a defensive one). This forces hyper-aggression and thereby diminishes Terran's role in the matchup to zerg-esque T1 fast units ("I'm going to harrass you to death and supply cap before you"). Tanks work wonders in TvT and TvP because tanks shit all over turtling players (who don't have tanks) due to their range, which forces a positioning battle and adds a dynamic to the match-up. I really think that if Protoss had better defending options, that this may encourage more passive play from protoss, which might lessen the effectiveness of Zerg-esque MMM armies and make mech more viable in the matchup.
The third problem (and one so brilliantly addressed in this thread thusfar) is Warp gate technology. As a protoss player, I loathe the mechanic. But, to avoid getting fallacious, what it essentially does is make Toss pseudo-omnipresent in the matchup. Against mech (which relies SO much on positioning), it is a pure hard counter. However bio- play circumvents the presence of warp tech and thus makes the matchup "easier" for terran (maybe a better word would be "possible"). Warp Gate technology also negates distance, and so allows protoss to be so massively aggressive in the matchup (which ties into what I was saying earlier).
Of all the ways to best "address" WG, the one I agree with most is to make it ultra-late game tech (i.e. templar achives), switch the Gateway and Warp Gate build/cooldown times, and slightly buff gateway units. That or make the warp gate a separate building that needs to be build after the upgarde (and also make warp gates more expensive and switch the "build" delay/time).
At the moment WG tech makes protoss 200/200 feel like "I have 50 zealots/stalkers that are shepherding 3collosi/ 5HT. Even with charge/blink, gateway units suck in the MU, and this becomes augmented when Terran gets ghosts. Hence, TvP basically becomes "if protoss goes colossi i go vikings, if not I go ghost/ medivac". And with scans (and observers) the matchup becomes stale and monotonous. I'd love to see mech-play become popular; not just too add to Terran's diversity, but also to make units like the phoenix and carrier available to protoss.
|
On October 03 2011 06:15 Churchill wrote:
It sounds like you believe sieging and unsieging tanks has more to do with micro than maintaining and organising a large bio army with ghosts + vikings, etc. You're having a laugh, mate. And 2 siege tanks for one expo? Someone else want to help with this guy?
And I don't even know where to begin on all this WG hating. Without WG Protoss are weakened to the point where the entire game has to be redesigned. Rather than whiplash-demanding it be removed, how about we think about ways to slightly tweak it (if that is even necessary). Oh wait, Blizzard are already on that - WG research time increased a couple patches ago...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but this thread was a comment on the playing style of TvP, not a chance for all the loons to come out of the woodwork and whine about balance.
No one was whining about balance, and the thread starter is pointing out that you can only do one thing TvP that works - which is going bio + ghost + viking. He pointed out that warp gate is one of the contributing factors to why mech sucks, and it's true. No one is asking for it to be nerfed. It was a design flaw from the very beginning to be able to have no travel time on reinforcements, so it won't be changed.
And before you start "protoss needs warpgate" - did you ever play brood war? "Warp gate" aka arbiter recall was an ability that took forethought and skill, and sneakyness, you weren't given it for free for every gateway you created + building a cyber core
Anyways, the discussion is more about how tanks suck tvp and as a Terran you're forced into bio play. Lots of people are remeniscent about brood war tvp for good reason too - to be blunt, brood war tvp required more skill on both sides of the coin.
Also, btw, don't know if you did play brood war, or much mech in SC2, but what you said about sieging and unsieging etc taking more skill than maintaining a bio army...here is the difference for you.
If you get caught out of position with a bio/viking/ghost army, you simply can run away and reposition.
If you do not spot ahead for your mech army and are not sieged that instant that you need to have already been sieged, you lose your entire army.
So yes, there is a huge difference, as one is much easier to do than the other, mech you aren't sieged you lose everything; bio you are out of position you run away and keep entire army alive.
Huge difference.
|
I don't know if anyone has mentioned this, but this is exactly why we saw so much 111 all inning recently. Nobody wants to play a straight game vs toss because it feels to random. Same with all the harassing in TvZ, kind of, but at least in TvZ you can still come out ahead if you outplay your opponent.
|
On October 03 2011 06:13 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 05:54 Quotidian wrote:
I wish the OP never mentioned "micro" in this context, because how fast someone a-clicks and presses s/h isn't what makes a match up fun to watch or interesting to play, regardless of whether there are tanks on the map or not. Like what has been stated already, the fact that tanks aren't viable in tvp means that there is no fighting for position. It's all just mashing two lumps of groups together and hoping you do whatever magical thing it is that you need to do in order to win engagements.
I think tvp is going to remain a really lame match up throughout the life of SC2 and all its expansions. No way are Blizzard going to remove warp gate tech, even though the game would be much better off if they did. Blizzard also has this really flawed design mentality of wanting to cater to every style of play, via map size/style (rush vs marco). This basically means that it is impossible to balance the tank properly. A 60-70 damage per round siege tank is broken on rush maps, and a 35 (+15) damage tank is too weak on a "macro" map the size of tal darim, where you don't always want all your tanks in one big ball, but rather have smaller groups of units in different key locations. 2 siege tanks protecting an expo isn't a deterrent to any of the races at the moment.
Seriously, the way protoss is designed really makes me want to make an RTS mod for DOTA2 or something - just take the advances blizzard made over BW and disregard all the retarded stuff. The siege tank was balanced in beta against protoss. You could build them and it was worthwhile to go mech. And viable. It was only "impossible to balance" on retardedly designed maps such as steppes of war where it takes about 5 seconds to cross the entire map, along with being 3 siege tank shot lengths away from your opponent's natural... I remember being one of the first/few in beta to be playing mech/ghostmech against protoss, and i would have sick macro games where tanks actually didn't get insta-gibbed and holding a position actually meant something. Protoss had to be smart like in brood war to engage you, not just "hello 1A into your tank line at any angle i want to and come out ahead." As it stands right now, you cannot hold a position with mech like you could in the beta because of the tank nerf. Protoss actually feared your tanks and if they played bad (and most did because they apparently all forgot their brood war skills) then they were punished for 1Aing in bad positions/bad spots. As of now, protoss is not punished for you gaining a better position on them because siege tanks just tickle their units, or you can mass collosus+blink stalker and walk around their army 100% of the time and base trade with DTS + warpgates + sniping the remaining orbitals = protoss win. With the recent hellion nerf, TvT is back to more of "I build more marines than you." How anyone can not see that this is horrible for SC2 is beyond me. It's just another nerf that makes positioning mean less, and micro mean less. Because now TvT for example, you can mass marines and come out ahead due to the extra shots hellion take on marines. Marines easily will out dps every other unit and the only micro required? Pre-spread into an arc and 1A. Mech actually took forethought, overarching strategy, spotting, and positioning that is difficult, very difficult (ala brood war difficulty) for a player to learn. With bio, you can blindly run in, and as long as you make an arc, you are good to go no matter how intricate or good your opponent's positioning was, because that's how bio plays. Bio plays very linearly "make more of these tier1 units, throw them at your opponent for gain, when they die, make more and do it again. If you have less you lose, when you have more u win." Siege tanks on the other hand, if they had their beta damage back, and you had a few on a cliff, it's not suddenly "i do not have an equal army supply to the protoss so i'm going to die 100%" but it is "i have better position, if he runs up he's going to lose more units than it is worth." Right now, 99% of the time tanks do not scare protoss because they had their balls removed, so instead of beta where you could hold that position with tanks and protoss would HAVE to back off, they instead 1A into your tanks or blink into them or charge or whatever and they trade cost effectively and will always come out ahead. It's why mech is not viable in TvP. And don't cite goody as an example. Just because you can do something and it will work against lower tiered protosses or once in a best out of 5, does not mean you should 100% of the time. There are Terran players with 10x better multi-tasking that don't queue up 5 tanks in one factory and 5 SCVS in one CC that still get thrashed by protosses when they try to mech and it's not because they're doing it any less better than goody or anyone else. It's disheartening really just how bad mech is in TvP. =/ also keep in mind one of the key ways mech had to harrass protoss was with blue flame hellions that actually could kill workers. Now it is worthless to even try that because they 3 shot workers, it's the difference between successful harass and killing 2 probes and having protoss laugh at you for wasting the resources while their 1A ball just grew in size for free.
As for the hellion nerf, I think the problem is that it is one of the worst designed units in SC2 that do not fit in the game. Unlike vultures, with reasonable amount of luck(opponent just slightly misclicks) 2 bf hellions could kill even 25+ workers in one shot, now you need 3. And the killcount was too dependent on luck as compared to micro/planning. In already fragile game this makes it even worse.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
