|
On October 03 2011 07:15 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 07:02 ThatGuy89 wrote: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.
I would imagine they would say something along the lines of "We don't have a vision for one specific unit in a matchup and that we are going for balance as a whole"
|
On October 03 2011 07:21 Beren wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 07:15 Quotidian wrote:On October 03 2011 07:02 ThatGuy89 wrote: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. I would imagine they would say something along the lines of "We don't have a vision for one specific unit in a matchup and that we are going for balance as a whole"
Of course they have a vision or at the very least an opinion about a single unit in a match up, otherwise the Immortal would never have been added to the game. No, they'd probably have some polite, noncommittal response - Browder will probably say he thinks tanks are good in tvp in certain situations, Kim will say something about top Korean pros and that'll be pretty much it. But I still want to hear them talk about it.
|
On October 03 2011 07:17 mcc wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 06:50 avilo wrote: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 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. 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.
I think that was the problem with them. They were just SO powerful and yet so cheap. So I agree, they needed a change they are now still very powerful if you want to drop helions you just need to invest more for the same potential return.
|
Oke i disagree with this one so hard.
First half of you're story is based on your poor opinion on marauders, and that youre facorite BW units cant be used (tank) which makes this 'complaining' about the matchup not based on facts but on your own opinion.
about ur warpgates, you might have a point there, heck i'd like as a protoss myself if i could make units as 'easy' as a terran can so i can focus more on the battle instead of having to look awway to warp in and keep my macro up.
but the micropart? you cannot be serious. first you are saying that its so awesome to micro against banes and fungles in tvz. but seriously you could do the same ammount of micro against storms as puma did amazingly here @ 26:05 or lifting up your units in ur medivacs to avoid FF's as select showcased in a match i cant remember on tal d'arim altar. or MKP in a match i can't remember either on crevasse where he one shotted units with marauders so they go slowed and couldnt get away.
about the micro in a general battle, well just read what thorzain said, seems pretty intense to me tbh.
and again the unitcomposition is biased by your opinion of not liking MM but using the argument "its basicly mmm viking ghost all the time" doesn't make much sens to me either as each matchup has a standard composition, that you dont like this one isnt the games fault.
|
On October 02 2011 11:09 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 01 2011 07:11 eourcs wrote:
TvP is a really odd matchup, where I think someone with perfect control and macro will be unbeatable, regardless of how well the Protoss plays (this is barring 1-1-1 which I do think is imbalanced), but like 99% of players I don't have that, so the matchup is hard as fuck. At the highest level, it's possible that it's imbalanced, but at every other level, the people who complain about Terran are idiots. Lategame TvP is extremely hard, and personally, I have never seen anybody beat Hasuobs when he gets Templar/Collosus and a solid 3-4 base economy, regardless of how far behind he is. I feel the opposite - TvP is a matchup where if both players played perfectly, terran should never ever win. So dependant on getting good drops etc. Of course its pretty damn close to impossible to play the level of perfect that you can consistently every game deny every single drop which might even make it terran favored in reality. Anyway, I agree 100% with PredY's post, bio TvP makes me want to quit -_-
This pretty much sums up how I feel completely. Bio in any match-ups just isn't fun.
|
Good points being made, but hey this ain't BW. We need better solutions than "bring back BW units !!!1" I'm pretty sure.
|
On October 01 2011 06:01 IGotPlayguuu wrote:
Great post and i agree 100% with you.
In TvP the only micro is EMP and maybe storm dodging, but after that, as you said, is just watching if all you have is enough fir the big fight. And is also terrible to see just the same composition every single game.
Yes, it is terrible to see the same unit composition every game. I mean, it's not like SC1 TvP was just Mech+Vessels vs. Dragoon/Zealot+Arbiters. Every. Single. Game.
Now to be fair, that doesn't excuse the current state of SC2 TvP. It could certainly be better. But Terran Mech has a snowball effect, where the more Mech you get, the better it is. Once you start allowing Mech to work, then it is very likely to become standard play. Which basically mean degenerating to SC1 TvP.
Which some people might like. But I'm not one of them. SC1 TvZ was always my favorite matchup: so many viable possibilities on both sides...
|
Northern Ireland117 Posts
great post and needs to be discussed alot alot more. I think you missed the real point though.
TvP there is _NO_ stategy. Every pro will tell you, its you make maruders drop and hope you get enough drop dmg done to hit a timming and every single game is like that. And one of the biggest problems with the warp gate mechanics still so many protoss want to abuse instant proxied reinforcement pushes for free.
I do go mech in tvp and omg it is hard. I actually think one of the biggest problems is the mech units themselves are kind of awful in some ways the helion is just a bad unit. Having mines was super important in BW to hold flanks if you just flank with zealots you loose your mech army for free in sc2.
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
Then think about tanks in tvp is so extremely stupidly easy for protoss to catch a terran un-sieged like its unbelievable how easy it is with units like the immortal.
Or if they decide to go mass collosus you would be suprised wat that will do to a mech army or if they go for a wierd immortal push you have to have 2 or 3 good emps or you just loose insantly.
And in the end if you want to go into more detail you need to think about the meta game, the reason terran could start to push out and pressure the protoss so they couldn't just go carriar in BW was that they had to be +1 expansion of the terran. and you had the timing to move out.
But it still comes down to the fact that there are still 100000 things that protoss can do to just kill your mech army super super easily. and really the problem is siege tanks in the end do sooooooooooo little dmg to protoss units its kind of depressing and coulpled wit the fact mech anti air options are awful and expenisve because 1 thor wont do shit and you have to invest so much into them and so much supply for bad anti air options compared to goliaths and then we havbe no mines to help defend flanks.
And say this was all fixed then we would _need_ arbiters back. because the mothership just seems like the wrong idea for what its meant to do.
I personally really hate maruders abut i hope some day this will be adressed so skill actualy comes to play in tvp
|
Do you remember when tanks did 60 damage? Actually I don't 
TvP is really great imo. I don't 1-1-1 so I'll ignore that. When going either player opens with a pressure build, the first micro engagement is very intense, and the slightest MC can direct the course of the game. If focusing on macro, holy cow does the macro race get insane. There's no other MU where both players can expand at such a rate and still be neck and neck. It's not passive, engagaments are very common. Often I think that it becomes the player with the better mechanics wins, more than any other MU (bar ZvZ).
|
On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote:
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
|
Northern Ireland117 Posts
On October 03 2011 08:20 eXwOn wrote:Actually I don't TvP is really great imo. I don't 1-1-1 so I'll ignore that. When going either player opens with a pressure build, the first micro engagement is very intense, and the slightest MC can direct the course of the game. If focusing on macro, holy cow does the macro race get insane. There's no other MU where both players can expand at such a rate and still be neck and neck. It's not passive, engagaments are very common. Often I think that it becomes the player with the better mechanics wins, more than any other MU (bar ZvZ).
I dont agree with that to be honest TvZ i think really is the matchup if you want to see people with good mechanics because it requires multi tasking and thought (strategy) if both players play properly and standard. TvZ is actually an amazing matchup in many ways but i do think the maruder needs removed and mech buff'd or changed.
|
On October 03 2011 08:26 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote:
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee.
In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing.
|
you should play SC2BW. your love of tanks and vultures will be rewarded; tanks and spider mines do twice their regular damage. your complete failure to understand starcraft 2 balance will not be rewarded in standard starcraft 2 however, nor will your failure to understand that there are 22 terrans in code s gsl out of 32 players for a reason
|
No one cares about Code S. The reason there are so many terrans there is also a result of the tournament structure, not just balance.
This thread is obviously about someone who wants to play the game a certain way, but is forced into a stereotyped match up because terran only has one viable unit comp lategame that isn't stable, fun or rewarding to use at all.
I'd love to play something that took what's good about SC2 and mixed it with SC2BW though.
|
On October 03 2011 08:33 Horseballs wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 08:26 flowSthead wrote:On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote:
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee. In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing.
I don't have that much experience with Mech in TvP which is why I asked for a replay, but the Protoss shouldn't be free to expand all over the place. Yes, they should be expanding more than the Terran, but don't the hellions then go around trying to harass? I'm missing something in this clearly.
|
The development of the Marauder
Dustin Browder was playing Quake 2 because it's a badass game. He came across his first Tank (it's a heavy infantry enemy) and was like OMG THIS THING IS SUPER POWERFUL!! :O
However, he realized that the Tank was extremely slow, and just peeking around a corner, firing a railgun slug, hiding, rinsing and repeating, could easily kill them while suffering no damage.
He really loved the Strogg Tank infantry, but cried that it was too slow. But he knew what to do! He would put a human version of the Strogg Tank in SC2! It would move as fast as Marines, not < 1 mph like the Tank! It would have the same ungodly firepower of the Tank! AND SO THE MARAUDER WAS BORN!!!
Btw, thank you id for making such incredible shooters. It's been a great 18 years playing your games .
|
On October 01 2011 06:49 TheSurgeonTV wrote:
tvp is a major concern late game for me as well. something not mentioned here is how fast P can catch up to 3-0-3 upgrades against T mid/late game. also, the food mechanic favors Protoss as zealots,stalker,archon has higher HP/food ratio than marine, marauder, ghost.
another thing worth tweaking would be the EMP spell. Change the spell to reflect BW, that is it drains all energy and shields. this would make ghosts more viable against archons as you need to hit 3 emps on each archon to deal
maxiumun damage. another thing would be to reduce the food requirement for ghosts to 1 food instead of 2.
I would also like to see the tank's food reduced to 2. scv mining time+depot costs are high mid game for terrans who want to mech.
any thoughts?
I don't know when you got sc2, but EMP was exactly the same as it was in Brood War until a few months ago when it got nerfed multiple times.
1 supply ghosts and 2 supply tanks would likely be overpowered, too.
|
On October 03 2011 08:39 flowSthead wrote:Show nested quote +On October 03 2011 08:33 Horseballs wrote:On October 03 2011 08:26 flowSthead wrote:On October 03 2011 08:18 redbrain wrote:
Also the thor is in some ways a broken unit if the protoss decides to instantly go 2 stargate carriar you have to go viking. and you mech army is non existant.
What? Are you seriously trying to argue that 2 stargate carrier is cheaper than than Vikings? That if you go Vikings your mech army will be small, but the Protoss army will be big? Do you have a replay or something because that is the craziest thing I have ever heard. Double stargate is so expensive for a Protoss that you could probably just kill him with one cloacked banshee. In my experience trying to mech as terran, the protoss is free to expand all over the place and has the capabilities to have a huge warpgate infrastructure and transition into carrier. If you can survive the carriers with vikings, your ground army is so much smaller that the warpgates can easily roll you over now that you have a bunch of vikings doing nothing. I don't have that much experience with Mech in TvP which is why I asked for a replay, but the Protoss shouldn't be free to expand all over the place. Yes, they should be expanding more than the Terran, but don't the hellions then go around trying to harass? I'm missing something in this clearly.
I've had games where I kill like 40 probes, but can't actually move out and push because my tanks will just get crapped on by mass gateway units. So even though I can constantly be trying to harass with hellions it isn't enough to keep the protoss army from getting out of hand and it doesn't stop them from expanding. They figure out pretty quickly what's going on and drop a few cannons at expansions like in PvZ and pretty quickly hellions stop doing as well.
The games I have won playing mech vs P (which I've stopped doing) are either because I did an absurd amount of early damage either by opening banshees or by opening hellion drop (in which case I would have just as well won with bio) or I was playing against a protoss that was just really bad at macro and knowing how to play vs mech.
|
Northern Ireland117 Posts
yeah but thing is with warp gates countering around the map with helions works nothing like vultures in BW because they juist warp in some units and they die. So protoss doesnt even really have to invest into cannons when they should have to. bnelive me protss has so many options it all comes back to the fact that you can catch them unsiged very easily as well as the fact even when they dont tanks dont do much dmg and you have to find a timming to push out to pressure the protoss so they cant just take the map and go carriar.
And considering if your going mech. your _ONLY_ anti air is thors which is just a huge investment. and going viking makes your mech army awful and you need to make quiote alot of vikings if protoss dedicates to an air force its different if they go phoenix you can just make 3 thors and your fine but void ray timmings or just straight carriar its a nightmare to start going viking unless you have a big advantage
|
On October 01 2011 06:16 Thorzain wrote:
I feel that TvP IS really micro intensive. EMP everything, move your units out of storms, focus fire individual colossi with vikings and kite zealots if he's zealot heavy. And while you're kiting zealots you have to move back your ghosts so that they dont all get killed in the blink of an eye. All these things at the same time. It's freaking hard if you ask me!
Couldn't agree more with this. I love playing Terran because I find it to be a dynamic race to play with a lot of different attack paths etc., but in the end when it comes down to a straight up army on army battle it's always the Terran player who has to counter the two other races' fearsome units. Vikings against broodlords, colossi, and ghosts to EMP High Templars. Imo. that's the biggest problem I have with playing terran. Not having one of those big scary units such as colossus, HT, broodlord or even ultra that can catch the enemy player off guard completely and win you the game, or at least force him down a tech path. Terran has to do A LOT compared to protoss. I played random for the first year of my Starcraft life, and with protoss I've pretty much been fine with just attackmoving and letting the battle happen while I did other things. Hell, if you can't be arsed to use psi storms, just warp them into archons immediately and attack move. ^^ I find this really frustrating to lose against, because I feel like you can be a better player as terran, but it's just so much easier to get close to skillcap as protoss because certain aspects off the race are so easy to execute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
