|
On October 03 2011 06:47 mcc wrote: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... 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.
Ah, the people that were really good at hellion harrass micro'd their hellions very good. You had to time shots perfectly to get the max amount of kills.
Also, how is something like that bad for SC2? SC1 had the reaver, it had psi storm, lurker shots, spider mines that all served the same function as a blue flame hellion shot that can 2 shot workers.
SC2 has banelings still, collosus, storm still, but they all require a lot less micro and simple 1A. A 2 shot blue flame hellion was perfectly fine, you should feel threatened by such a unit, just like you would be threatened by a reaver in your mineral line.
As of the last patch, it simply isn't as threatening anymore.
It's also funny you would argue that hellions are "luck based" as you can control the shot with good micro and waiting for the "line em up." Reavers scarabs and spider mines literally were things that did have random luck influence them. So you can actually say something like the SC2 hellion is less of a luck influenced unit then the vulture was...pretty crazy isn't it?
|
On October 03 2011 06:42 theBOOCH wrote:
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.
i feel your pain man i really do, i share the same experiences :[ , i always feel as if i can get really ahead i take my expansion faster, i feel i build enough raxxes, but i always just feel that i can never engage the protoss after the third base mark... even often times after sniping a nexus with a drop or something that seems like it would snowball me so far ahead, when it comes down to it, you have to kill that army at some point and when that point comes if you don't kill it no matter how much damage you did to their economy, because the way terran works and you can't warp in all your reinforcements into one safe place and keep cycling them there until it's big enough to re engage, the toss can just move into your production and it's a gg. i see a lot of people talking a out dropping and splitting the toss up and what not, but what they are all forgetting is that, eventually there is a time in every game where the protoss gathers all his forces and moves out and that is what we're talking about here the battle when the toss moves out and you are forced to engage the toss army... what do you do? i literally feel that i have to win before the third/fourth bases go up or i will lose the game, i can't recall the last time i've gone to the late game vs a toss and won. i really can't. (mid masters terran)
i think it all just comes down to somehow balancing the game better in the lategame, terran is so strong in the early game but almost every option snowballs weaker into the lategame regardless of composition. we have no choice really but to build more mauraders, or more vikings to counter collosus. i'd like to see the thor more in a tvp scenario, maybe they should finally look into reworking the 250mm cannon strike to make it into something more usefull that could provide some sort of protection for a mech style composition since it's so underused atm
|
First of all
Hyperdub had some sick banshee games in TvP
And I honestly do think mech is stil viable on some maps (shakuras and crossfire comes to mind). I think we could put some blame on map designers here.
However I do agree that TvP is mostly uninteresting... It's even worse if you play P... Con shell is micro killer. Usualy you counter it with FF - another micro killer. Ad warpins into that and you have cure for insomnia. God I hope pros just haven't figured out the game yet.
|
another butt hurt silver leaguer QQ watch high end games of pvt its the most skillfull match up
User was temp banned for this post.
|
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
Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play.
On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote: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. 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
Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond"
It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta.
The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech.
Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
|
On October 03 2011 06:42 Severus_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:33 ThatGuy89 wrote: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.
You have limited micro with marauders? i dont understand that. You have concussive shells and stimm, which allow you to move faster then most ground units and slow other units down. Have you seen the micro involved in early game terran pushes with a few marduers and a few marines and SCV? its probbaly the most amount of micro you'll see
On October 03 2011 06:42 theBOOCH wrote:
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.
you had only 25 more supply in your army then him, thats nothing really when you have unit compisitions like that. Ive seen terran armies with 40 food less then a toss roll them just cos of fucking storm.
it takes a minute to switch from templar to collosus?
please dont come here if you're not gonna know what youre talking about.
Lets assume you already have a robo, you need to build the robo bay (65) then a collosus (75) thermal lance takes 140. So in just over 2 mins you can have 1 collosus with no range upgtade - which is pointless. Or in over 3 mins you'll have 2 with range.
Everyone knows toss has the hardest time changing tech
|
So the OP pretty much boils down to "Make tanks better so that I can use them in TvP, I liked Broodwar TvP more."
Don't really get the point. Tanks don't HAVE to be used in a matchup to make it a good matchup.
|
I really hope Dustin Browder reads this
|
On October 03 2011 06:56 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:33 ThatGuy89 wrote: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 Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play. Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote: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. 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 Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech. Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening.
yea ill 'Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss' when people stop talking nonsene.
Yea its the marines that deal the damage, and no the extra damage wouldnt help against immortals.
But this is where that micro thing comes in. You dont focus the tanks onto the immortals, thats what marines are for.
And the tanks stop a toss from being able to engage the terran wher and when they want. Otherwise with decent poisitioning and FF and with guardian shield, you can rip the marines apart.
If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
|
On October 03 2011 06:57 Lobotomist wrote:
So the OP pretty much boils down to "Make tanks better so that I can use them in TvP, I liked Broodwar TvP more."
Don't really get the point. Tanks don't HAVE to be used in a matchup to make it a good matchup.
No, what tanks make possible is that you can actually barely hold or barely win. TvP right now has no middle ground. Have you ever seen toss hold first 1/1/1 push by the skin of his teeth? Well, he will die to the next batch of units then. Same for terran, you get caught by 2+ colossi or storms without EMP and you are going to lose horribly.
Same goes for toss to some extent, unless you use force field, you have no way to survive against overwhelming odds.
|
Dont know how you can say TvP isnt micro intensive o.o if protoss plays good he wont have all ht's emp'd and will block ghosts from reaching ht's and then you are left to dodge storms while him having colossus late game and you cant let your vikings die into stalkers.
Even with all that I find it easier to play TvP late game with nukes and 200 vs 200 than playing vs 2 base immortal allins early game
Warpin is terrible mechanic from start of SC2, they should make it at least being able to warp-in in range of your expos, warping in 20-30 zealots late game in middle of fight is dumb and would stop allining 1 or 2 base more or less.
Mech isnt viable because of the zealots in TvP, they make your tanks kill your units more than his, if you try bio/tank once zealots charge into marines tanks destroy your marines along with warp prism immortal drops on tanks and storm drops on marines. In HoTS if blizzard wants mech to be fun and good they need to remove thor because TvP mech now you make helion/tank/ghost and you make 1-2 thors to act as walls.
For me thor as unit makes no sense its slow attacking high dps unit serving to kill stuff like ultras and then it has ability 250mm C that is another high single target dps skill  Add goliath or maybe some new unit but I dont think vultures mines are good, chargelots would be just stronger vs mech (unless mines explode instantly).
Another problem with mech atm is that on maps like Tal'darim protoss can make pylons everywhere and harass your expos with blink stalkers because your army is very slow, he can even just base trade vs mech on big maps. Overall dont really know how to make mech playable in TvP but some changes need to be made, if you add siege tank 60 damage that would make zealots easier to handle but would make TvT into more mech fest and would make TvZ broken and it would still mean terran mech cant be played on big maps. Even on small maps protoss can just go blink stalker/colossus base trade blinking into your main base and T needs some unit that would be able to handle blink stalkers and make T army more mobile without breaking other 2 MU's which is just hard and even with that by denying blink stalker counter attacking what is protoss supposed to do vs mech on maps like shattered - just get rolled over , maybe we'll just play MMM forever
Oh and about some guy saying derp he makes colossus you make vikings he makes ht you make ghost, I wish thats how game always goes, good protoss will know when to do tech-switch and if you arent prepared you just die. Terrans cant tech switch to mech and kill protoss because like PredY said any P unit can kill tanks (except sentries).
|
Russian Federation367 Posts
the only one question to topic starter: have you ever saw dSelecT games? If you did: why you still think that there is no micro in TvP when terran playing bio?
|
On October 03 2011 07:05 Empire.Beastyqt wrote:
Oh and about some guy saying derp he makes colossus you make vikings he makes ht you make ghost, I wish thats how game always goes, good protoss will know when to do tech-switch and if you arent prepared you just die. Terrans cant tech switch to mech and kill protoss because like PredY said any P unit can kill tanks (except sentries).
Terrans can't tech switch this is true, but they also don't have to bother with tech switch. MMM is insanely powerful, and with ghost and viking support can beat any tech switch. Scout it out, and if you're prepared you'll have no problem with the tech switches.
|
Personally I think it boils down to its been a little over a year since the game came out. There has been no expansion and we are still comparing it to BW. In a year the builds and strats have evolved immensely. I think saying you want the game to be like it was with a specific unit comp is wrong. You seems to miss specific units and mechanics of those units that weren't fully realized until (i honestly don't know) later in the game history.
This is not BW. While it has alot of similarities it just isn't the same game and with the units that are currently in the game it will never be that way.
|
On October 03 2011 07:02 ThatGuy89 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:56 Quotidian wrote:On October 03 2011 06:33 ThatGuy89 wrote: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 Marauders should be taken out of the game simply because their function overlaps with siege tanks without being nearly as cool and "terran-y" It's also counter-intuitive to keep making marauders all game long, because logically what you want by endgame is aoe. But against toss, siege tanks simply do not work - so all terran has is emp, which can't actually kill anything, nor can it really enforce positional play. On October 03 2011 06:38 ThatGuy89 wrote:On October 03 2011 06:34 Quotidian wrote: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. 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 Stop being such a touchy and defensive toss - I don't think anybody here cares. No one is forcing you to respond when you admittedly "don't know even know how to respond" It wouldn't matter if tanks did 60 damage or 35 damage in a 1-1-1 situation, since it's the marines that makes the push so effective and an immortal wouldn't take any more damage from a tank doing the same damage that it did back in the beta. The biggest reason why 1-1-1 is so strong is because warp gate units HAVE to be relatively weak early game because of warp tech. Considering how immobile a siege tank is, their damage should be more in line with this immobility. Two siege tanks would only be threatening up to a point, but right now a PF on the gold on Xel naga with a 72-food siege tank line walled off against chargelots with depots will fall to a standard colossus based army, and the subsequent round of warp ins will win the protoss the game. That's just completely disheartening. . If you've built a 72 food siege tank army, when the toss is going collosus, and you ahve no vikings, you deserve to lose. No unit, no compisition and no build is unbeatable in this game, if its scouted. If you lose a game like that its your own fault for not knowing what he was doing
Who said anything about not having vikings? Unlike tanks, colossus actually dictate a specific response from a player other than simply continuing to mass the units you were going to make anyway and a-moving. The fact is, you need just as many vikings if you're going mass tank/hellion/ghost or something, as you need when going bio. That alone makes zero sense to me. And considering how mobile colossus are, they should be significantly weaker than mass siege tanks. But no, they can just tip toe into a tank line like it's nothing - the terran army, along with the PF, will die.
I'd love it if someone here goes to Blizzcon this year and asks a very specific question at a game design panel about Blizzard's "vision" for mech and specifically for siege tanks in tvp.
|
@avilo
I see your point, however, I'm suggesting that in the design of the game, it's pretty obvious that Blizzard didn't mean for every unit of every race to be used in every single MU. Some MUs require tanks - TvT positional play, TvZ to avoid being rolled by banes - but TvP doesn't. My opinion is only that such diversity in the game is something to be celebrated. Each MU is different, requiring different strategies and styles of play to succeed. If you're someone who enjoys a good strategic TvT with massive tank lines in the middle of the map, great. If you're someone who wants to run around shooting shit with your marauders, laughing as some poor bastard's stalkers can't get out of the way, great too.
That being said - I agree that anything that allows a wider range of strategies to be used in a MU is something to be looked at, but what this thread seems to be forgetting is that all these units and abilities exist for a reason - and while these reasons may not be readily apparent in TvP, by changing them to alter only one MU, you're possibly breaking others. I also suggested that the game is only one year old. Yes, I did play BW and know that it took a lot of work and more than a year's worth of patches to get the state of the game to the pinnacle at which it is now. I also think it's hard to argue that SC2 isn't evolving week-to-week, and just because we can't see how something is viable now, doesn't mean it still won't be later this month.
Just my thoughts.
|
On October 03 2011 06:50 avilo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:47 mcc wrote: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... 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. Ah, the people that were really good at hellion harrass micro'd their hellions very good. You had to time shots perfectly to get the max amount of kills. Also, how is something like that bad for SC2? SC1 had the reaver, it had psi storm, lurker shots, spider mines that all served the same function as a blue flame hellion shot that can 2 shot workers. SC2 has banelings still, collosus, storm still, but they all require a lot less micro and simple 1A. A 2 shot blue flame hellion was perfectly fine, you should feel threatened by such a unit, just like you would be threatened by a reaver in your mineral line. As of the last patch, it simply isn't as threatening anymore. It's also funny you would argue that hellions are "luck based" as you can control the shot with good micro and waiting for the "line em up." Reavers scarabs and spider mines literally were things that did have random luck influence them. So you can actually say something like the SC2 hellion is less of a luck influenced unit then the vulture was...pretty crazy isn't it?
By luck based I did not mean that by better control you could not get better results, just that even with terrible control you could get the same results with luck and with bf hellions it happened quite often.
Also I would argue that compared to all other harass options that you mentioned in SC2 being perceptive and aware and running your workers is good enough defense. Not so much for hellions.
Also saying bf hellion 2-shots workers is slightly misleading as it could 2-shot workers, but it could also 2-shot whole mineral line And investing into reaver/lurker drop(other way to get them into position)/storm drop is slightly more expensive than bf hellion especially compared to results. And I know about intelligence of scarabs(or mines) but the actual act of reaver dropping well is much more skill based and the loss of reaver(+shuttle eventually) is more painful, again especially compared to possible results.
But those are just opinions, my point was that bf hellion harass damage is too loosely correlated with the skill of the harass, it is still correlated, but too little.
And just to note even after patch bf hellion harass is still threatening, just not in TvP, but that was mostly the case even before the patch.
EDIT:moved a paragraph
|
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.
Right, Marauders are not positional units. But most units are not positional units. Marines, zealots, stalkers, zerglings, marauders, roaches, hydralisks, etc. all are not positional units. Why is the marauder the exception that makes it boring? I can understand the issue with the Colossus because it is a siege unit, but it works similarly to how Broodlords/Guardians work in that it can be taken out by air and has a long ground range. I don't understand what you mean by out of place.
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
I'm not sure I agree with your interpretation. You do not dance your marines vs banelings unless you are going predominantly with marines. Your siege tanks take care of the banelings and your marines protect the tanks from mutalisks and occasionally from zerglings if they are right next to a sieged tank. The zerg then tries to overrun the Terran by forcing him to run away his marines and kill the tanks with the mutalisks. There is a dance, but it is not purely marine versus baneling. Either way, the tanks are there to control space.
The Protoss deathball does not work in quite the same way, but it is comparable. Essentially, the space control is in front of the Colossus which is moving, rather than the stationary position of a tank or lurker. The zealot/stalker/sentry force in front of the Colossus protects the Colossus so that it can deal the damage from afar. You are right in that there isn't much of dance there unless there are Vikings. But then the dance exists by virtue of Vikings + Marauder versus Colossus + Stalker. If the Terran manages to separate the Colossus from the support units, then either all of the Colossus die and the Protoss ground army becomes vulnerable, or all of the ground army dies and the Colossus die to Marines and Marauders super easily. I'm not sure what the problem is, except that a deathball may not be as interesting to watch as a positional tank placement. But again, that is subjective. A person may find the moving deathball more exciting than the tank slow push.
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.
True, but you climb the tech tree in different ways. You get upgrades and vikings and ghosts. You do not get BCs and Thors, but then again you don't get those in a typical TvZ either. Most TvZs revolve around the Terran getting Marine/Medivac/Tank. If the Zerg manages to get up to Broodlords (in other words, either you havent died to Muta/ling/bling, or he hasn't died) then you make Vikings/ghosts against the Broodlords, or just ghosts against Ultralisks (or marauders). Look at that. The only difference between TvZ and TvP is the marauder exchange for the tank. Vikings still factor in and so do ghosts if it goes super late game. Hellions exist in both match up. Thors are rare, but I have seen them in both (although more so in TvZ).
I would actually argue that if anything the Viking is the problem with TvP, not the marauder, from the Terran side. The Protoss side has the damn sentry which kills strength from the ground force and that has been discussed. But the Viking kills all possible air play from the Protoss. Vikings and Marines in combo means that a Stargate is really only useful for early game Void-Ray harass. I have seen Phoenixes used to kill Medivacs, but only when the Terran does not go Vikings, and then keeps his Medivacs slightly head or behind of his Marine force (in other words, Terrans not used to seeing Phoenixes not microing their medivacs away from the Phoenixes).
To put it another way, Vikings are such a hard counter to both Colossi and Stargate play, that the question is not if the Vikings will kill the Colossi/Voidrays/Phoenixes, but when. You are right that this is not the case with TvZ. In TvZ the question is always if or will, as in "will the Mutas kill the tanks" or "will the banelings kill the marines". In TvP it is "when will the Vikings kill the Colossi".
|
I hate playing TvP in SC2, now even more when immortals are getting popular.
Give me back my beta-siege tanks! :p
|
I think the main idea is that even MMM is very powerful, Ts want something else to be viable even if it's a bit weaker. Something that can work under some circunstances.
And tanks are very far from that role as they get destroyed by everything.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
