[D] Discussing the Siege Tank

~I have been a masters terran since season 1, and played terran in BW
(for those that care or find it relevant)

~I do have my own opinions on the tank going in to this, as everyone does, but my goal
is to determine whether they [my opinions] are justified or not based on everyones
experience, not just my own.

~Siege Tanks in particular I want to talk about within the confines of the TvP matchup. As
far as I know, there has not been a consistantly successful strategy that employs tanks
that doesnt consist of heavy 1 base aggression or all-in plays [in the TvP matchup],
and I am curious about whether this can change or not.

~I did have a much larger post going into this, but apparently comparing notes / scripts
from notepad to the thread previewer has a time limit before it times you out, so I will
try to keep this short and sweet on my end for the opener.

150 Minerals
125 Gas
3 Supply
45s Build Time

-Maximum Range 13
-Sight Range 11
-Radial Splash (decreases in damage further from the center)
-Friendly Splash

My concern with the Siege Tank [in TvP], is that right now it does not serve the same "purpose" it did in Broodwar as it does in SC2, and that is consequently hurting variety in gameplay and the Terran lategame in general.

*Note*
+ Show Spoiler +
Essentially, I am worried that where the tank used to function as:

---If attacked while sieged, Terran had the advantage
(which could be mitigated partially by things such as flanks, arbiters, zealot bombs
ect..)

---If attacked while unsieged, tanks were cost-inefficient and put the Terran at a big
disadvantage
(which is mitigated by proper scouting, siege management, ect..)

I believe it now functions as:

---If attacked while sieged, tanks provide a long range poke tool, but lack the
"raw power" to give an adequate advantage in the fight to justify their increased
cost and massive disadvantage if caught unsieged. They fight as just another unit
instead of the "Rock" the army was built around.

---If attacked while unsieged, terran is still at a huge disadvantage, which is now
technically worse as the cost is increased (main concern being in supply,
increasing the amount of "army lost" per tank).

*These are not necessarily bad or good, just things to think about*

~Radial Splash Mechanic
+ Show Spoiler +

~Average Unit HP Increase
(I have no actual mathematical proof of this, but with units such as the colossus, new
ultra, thor, roach ect... I think I can safely say that there are more units with more
hitpoints in SC2 than in BW, so the lower tank damage hurts worse.)

~More Mobility
(Things such as the creep movement speed increase, zergling speed, charge, blink,
and the warpin mechanic bring a much larger amount and variety of mobility to abuse
the tanks immobility with. This coincides with the lack of utility such as spidermines,
which could defend alternate routes, slow the opponents movement, give vision,
and protect your base.)

~"Armorless" Units
(The existance of units that are neither Light nor Armored, which are usually higher
tier units [Ghost, Archon, baneling is an exception] means the tank does "Light" class
damage to things that by all accounts do not need to take the reduced damage, aka
archons, who can take an absurd amount of tank shots being both very large in size
[some might even call it massive D, and taking only 35 damage a shot)

~Earlier and More Air Options
(In BW Corsair Disruption Web was the primary course of non-superlate game air that
could be fielded by protoss, so up until then, you could spam vultures/tanks without
regard for wasteing gas on goliaths, giving a stronger army early. Now Protoss have
Void Rays and even more dangerous imo, Phoenix [tank lifting was a biiiiig problem in
beta, then people just stopped using tanks as much], which means anti ait is required
early, either in marines [army is weaker later vs. collo], thors [big investment in gas,
lowers tank count, uses factory time, questionable effectiveness], or Vikings
[takes gas lowers tank count, are so cost-inefficient on the ground that it shouldnt
be an option].

~Friendly Splash
(Aside from storm, Terran units have been [since BW], some of the only units that
splash your own units [spidermines :< ]. With the increased supply cost of tanks,
you will either be fielding less support units [hellions/marines/ect...] or less tanks.
This means that splashing your own units is more dangerous, eating into your
[fewer] units, destroying your meatshield as you go. While this has always been
a problem, the higher supply cost means less units, and while this is probably the
most insubstantial concern, it is something.)

As Starcraft 2 progresses as a game we will no doubt see more evolution in strategies,
and the tank is no exception. Maybe in the future we will find the ideal mix, and my
opinions on the subject will be moot. Maybe it is just a metagame thing, but as of right now, I think that the key to having a more macro focused Terran late game, as opposed to the micro heavy more fragile bio composition, lies with the tank, the only question is can we get it to work.

Sorry for the length of this, and it may be getting more convoluted as I go (I am getting tired), but I figured I would throw this out to maybe get a "think tank" going about the Siege Tank, not just mech in general.