|
United Kingdom20310 Posts
On December 22 2011 11:56 TangSC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2011 07:45 [17]Purple wrote:
I'm wondering if changing the Tank's supply cost down to 2 would affect it in TvP at all. Since this would obviously be a buff to the late game potential of the tanks (more of them being out at one time), and it would also mean that a maxed mech army with around 15 tanks now would be something around 22 tanks if they cost 2 supply. I'm really unsure how this would affect TvP and would like to ask how much of an impact that would have.
Edit: I'm also unsure how a change like this could affect the early game (if it could have a large impact) or even the TvZ and TvT match-up, though I am only purely considering the change in TvP terms, I would also like to know how this would impact the other match-ups. I think if they changed tank supply cost, MMM would still be the norm in TvP. It's not that tanks aren't at all effective in the matchup, it's just that they aren't mobile enough - in macro games terran has to pressure the protoss with drops, and dropping tanks to pick off probes and structures just isn't as effective. It's also difficult to do "pokes and prods" at the front with tanks: If a battle is going poorly with MMM, you can often stim or pick up your units with minimal losses. If a battle is going poorly with tanks, it takes too long to unsiege and retreat so you end up losing your whole army. Also, it would crush my zerg spirits if tanks were 2 supply lol they're just too strong to be the same supply cost as a marauder.
As stupid as it sounds, i think 2 supply tank would break team games, where turtling is encouraged (shared bases etc) As it is, it is really damn hard to beat someone with an orbital focused economy who just builds a ton of tanks, at 2 supply very tank heavy play would be unbeatable from any of the 3 races even in 1v1 i think.
Why not reduce ROF and increase damage? Brood war tanks shot notably slower than sc2 tanks i think. With game to real time conversion sc2 tanks have about 2.16 second ROF.
It could get nasty in 1-1-1 variations with a ton of tanks though, one in particular that hit me a few weeks ago, he went gas first, and produced constant tanks with only 1 or 2 banshees and hit quite late, it was on shakuras, he threw down a pdd and started to siege on low ground in range of my nexus so i ran down my big natural ramp with like 20 zealots and he instantly killed some 70-80% of my army with the splash damage from the first volley. Of course his marines instantly killed everything left over without him loosing a single tank/banshee and the game ended moments later.
Avoidable with flanks, pre-splitting etc, but the clumping on sc2 units moving up/down ramps is already devastating with this tank damage, increasing it would hurt a lot.
|
On December 22 2011 18:24 Cyro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2011 11:56 TangSC wrote:On December 22 2011 07:45 [17]Purple wrote:
I'm wondering if changing the Tank's supply cost down to 2 would affect it in TvP at all. Since this would obviously be a buff to the late game potential of the tanks (more of them being out at one time), and it would also mean that a maxed mech army with around 15 tanks now would be something around 22 tanks if they cost 2 supply. I'm really unsure how this would affect TvP and would like to ask how much of an impact that would have.
Edit: I'm also unsure how a change like this could affect the early game (if it could have a large impact) or even the TvZ and TvT match-up, though I am only purely considering the change in TvP terms, I would also like to know how this would impact the other match-ups. I think if they changed tank supply cost, MMM would still be the norm in TvP. It's not that tanks aren't at all effective in the matchup, it's just that they aren't mobile enough - in macro games terran has to pressure the protoss with drops, and dropping tanks to pick off probes and structures just isn't as effective. It's also difficult to do "pokes and prods" at the front with tanks: If a battle is going poorly with MMM, you can often stim or pick up your units with minimal losses. If a battle is going poorly with tanks, it takes too long to unsiege and retreat so you end up losing your whole army. Also, it would crush my zerg spirits if tanks were 2 supply lol they're just too strong to be the same supply cost as a marauder. As stupid as it sounds, i think 2 supply tank would break team games, where turtling is encouraged (shared bases etc) As it is, it is really damn hard to beat someone with an orbital focused economy who just builds a ton of tanks, at 2 supply very tank heavy play would be unbeatable from any of the 3 races even in 1v1 i think. Why not reduce ROF and increase damage? Brood war tanks shot notably slower than sc2 tanks i think. With game to real time conversion sc2 tanks have about 2.16 second ROF. It could get nasty in 1-1-1 variations with a ton of tanks though, one in particular that hit me a few weeks ago, he went gas first, and produced constant tanks with only 1 or 2 banshees and hit quite late, it was on shakuras, he threw down a pdd and started to siege on low ground in range of my nexus so i ran down my big natural ramp with like 20 zealots and he instantly killed some 70-80% of my army with the splash damage from the first volley. Avoidable with flanks, pre-splitting etc, but the clumping on sc2 units moving up/down ramps is already devastating with this tank damage, increasing it would hurt a lot.
But lower ROF and higher damage make Immortals more effect counter to the Tank. Not sure if that's good.
I haven't tried it yet in a real game, but maybe it's viable to make a few Tanks and roll them with your MMM army and siege them up when all Chargelots are all dead since that way it does no/less friendly splash in a battle? Just a random thought, might try this if I get better at the game to actually try stuff. 
|
United Kingdom20310 Posts
1 factory pumping tanks on 2 base with MM focus has come up in a few of my games specifically on metalopolis, and it seems very powerful, im not sure it is "better" than MM though.
The immortals countering harder would be an unintended side effect of ROF decrease, maybe hardened shield could be redesigned as a percentage based decrease? 75% decrease would mean tanks hit them for more burst and dps than they do now, even with 50 dmg, and it would change the marauder vs immortal dynamic a bit in favor of the immortal, which would be nice for early game PvT i think, not sure of balancing, im just kinda throwing ideas around right now. Terrans dont say "Oh shit, he is going to immortal bust me, better make marauders" but then again immortals are already quite powerful vs marauders, the problem comes with the higher ROF of stim allowing them to eat immortals alive before the limited number of them make a meaningful contribution to the battle
|
On December 22 2011 18:40 Mobius_1 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2011 18:24 Cyro wrote:On December 22 2011 11:56 TangSC wrote:On December 22 2011 07:45 [17]Purple wrote:
I'm wondering if changing the Tank's supply cost down to 2 would affect it in TvP at all. Since this would obviously be a buff to the late game potential of the tanks (more of them being out at one time), and it would also mean that a maxed mech army with around 15 tanks now would be something around 22 tanks if they cost 2 supply. I'm really unsure how this would affect TvP and would like to ask how much of an impact that would have.
Edit: I'm also unsure how a change like this could affect the early game (if it could have a large impact) or even the TvZ and TvT match-up, though I am only purely considering the change in TvP terms, I would also like to know how this would impact the other match-ups. I think if they changed tank supply cost, MMM would still be the norm in TvP. It's not that tanks aren't at all effective in the matchup, it's just that they aren't mobile enough - in macro games terran has to pressure the protoss with drops, and dropping tanks to pick off probes and structures just isn't as effective. It's also difficult to do "pokes and prods" at the front with tanks: If a battle is going poorly with MMM, you can often stim or pick up your units with minimal losses. If a battle is going poorly with tanks, it takes too long to unsiege and retreat so you end up losing your whole army. Also, it would crush my zerg spirits if tanks were 2 supply lol they're just too strong to be the same supply cost as a marauder. As stupid as it sounds, i think 2 supply tank would break team games, where turtling is encouraged (shared bases etc) As it is, it is really damn hard to beat someone with an orbital focused economy who just builds a ton of tanks, at 2 supply very tank heavy play would be unbeatable from any of the 3 races even in 1v1 i think. Why not reduce ROF and increase damage? Brood war tanks shot notably slower than sc2 tanks i think. With game to real time conversion sc2 tanks have about 2.16 second ROF. It could get nasty in 1-1-1 variations with a ton of tanks though, one in particular that hit me a few weeks ago, he went gas first, and produced constant tanks with only 1 or 2 banshees and hit quite late, it was on shakuras, he threw down a pdd and started to siege on low ground in range of my nexus so i ran down my big natural ramp with like 20 zealots and he instantly killed some 70-80% of my army with the splash damage from the first volley. Avoidable with flanks, pre-splitting etc, but the clumping on sc2 units moving up/down ramps is already devastating with this tank damage, increasing it would hurt a lot. But lower ROF and higher damage make Immortals more effect counter to the Tank. Not sure if that's good. I haven't tried it yet in a real game, but maybe it's viable to make a few Tanks and roll them with your MMM army and siege them up when all Chargelots are all dead since that way it does no/less friendly splash in a battle? Just a random thought, might try this if I get better at the game to actually try stuff.
Yall are forgetting that the reason thors or any other mech unit arent incorporated into bio army is because they cant stim and are slow. This mean that if you are retreating then they are guarented to die. Not just this, but this also mean you can NOT stim kite because then your mech unit will die aka your tanks but you need to kite otherwise you get FF and get ripped apart by chargelots. This is the reason people dont go tanks because they will usually retreat MMM back anyways and tanks dies before they pay for themselves.
Watch BW mech, the vultures tank for the tanks to shoot. They dont retreat back and let the tanks die. If you are going bio then you are completely disregarding the reason to make tanks.
I think there was a good rule of thumbs that was followed in BW that if a tanks get 3 or so shots off then he has paid for themselves. I think a similar rule of thumbs would also apply but would have to be tested as well to see how many shoots it really does take but who makes tanks anyways in tvp :p
|
On December 22 2011 18:11 ThomasHobbes wrote:
No.
The Tank is an important unit in the TvZ match-up, a match-up which has, traditionally, been Terran favored.
This has nothing to do with whether or not my life is harder, it has to do with balance.
The Tank was nerfed because of imbalance as perceived by the Blizzard balancing staff. That is all. Blizzard will not buff the unit because it will wreck the balance they tried to impose by instituting the nerf in the first place.
I'm sorry if you want to use Tanks in every match-up, it isn't going to happen unless you find a method of using them outside of a buff by Blizzard. The Tank is a powerful unit, it pretty much defines the TvZ matchup after the marine, and in the case of mech instead of the marine. It is not going to be buffed because it would require additional buffs to Zerg units, which in turn would effect Protoss units and require additional buffs on their part as well.
In short, it would be a mess, a mess Blizzard does not want (This is David Kim's stated reason for not wanting to touch the marine, the balancing would be a nightmare).
Please stop directing this towards me, I'm irrelevant in this. The Tank will not be buffed because Terran would be imbalanced with a stronger Tank, they already border on imbalanced as is (no, not according to me, according to winrates at the highest level, especially in Korea, where you see to believe balance should be made).
You are not actually giving any examples, suggestions, or proof. Every post you have essentially said "No, it will break the game for Zerg", and then said nothing more about it except your misguided notion that Blizzard has personally taken up the standard of your cause. Unless you specifically work for blizzard, stop referencing them, it brings absolutely nothing to the table, you do not speak for them.
"The Tank was nerfed because of imbalance as perceived by the Blizzard balancing staff. That is all. Blizzard will not buff the unit because it will wreck the balance they tried to impose by instituting the nerf in the first place."
I have said this in probably every single response post to things you have made, and you do not change your argument. They nerfed the tank based around the metagame, unit effectiveness, and strategies of a game in its infancy. Every single matchup has changed, all of them. Units have changed. Metagames have changed. Build times, actual stats that effect the core values of the game have changed. How many people do you know masterfully executing Muta/Ling/Baneling the first 2 weeks of beta? None. The nerf may have been justified at the time, and hell it may still be justified now, but I am saying give it a shot, too much has changed to assume the same outcome. If you have a better idea, let it out.
"The Tank is a powerful unit, it pretty much defines the TvZ matchup after the marine"
Lets think about this a different way. If banelings were not in the game, would tanks be used at all in TvZ? Tanks in TvZ are almost a direct response to the threat of banelings, able to thin the numbers before they arrive. The damage of the tank is irrelevant in the context of muta/ling/baneling as they serve the sole purpose of sniping banelings, which die regardless of changes in damage in the positive direction. The only thing you would have to account for is roaches when using full mech, which you do not see at the top level, it is not explored because no one has too. I am saying lets explore it.
"(This is David Kim's stated reason for not wanting to touch the marine, the balancing would be a nightmare). '
Please do not take direct quotes out of context. He specifically stated:
Q. A lot of the people says that Marines in general are way too powerful. Are you guys planning to balance the Marines?
A. (David Kim) In the patch 1.4, Bionic units were very powerful. We are trying to make it so that Terran players play bio half the time and mechanic the other half the time. Marines are the basic foundation of the Terran units and tweaking such a unit will create a lot of problems. Therefore we are trying to avoid it.
As you can see, he specifically stated he did not want to balanced the marine beause it is a foundation unit, being the first unit you can make, it directly influences every single build Terran can do, early game defense, ect... This is clearly not the case with the tank, which is generally an addition to your army later. Also, drawing attention to his quote of
"We are trying to make it so that Terran players play bio half the time and mechanic the other half the time."
then you can see that they also have an interest in mech. They are not talking specifically about TvZ here, this is every matchup, so how about giving the tank a re-evaluation instead of throwing it in everyones face here that improving tanks WILL break the game, and that you herald some unannounced opinions at blizzard.
|
On December 22 2011 11:22 Tropical Bob wrote:You forgot to mention smart-fire AI: Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 22:29 Sm3agol wrote:
I am still a major proponent of removing all "instant attack" animations(marine, tank, immortal...are there any more?) because smart fire is just leagues better than any micro a player can do most of the time, and makes things like actually spreading your tank fire out much more efficient, and enables tank/marine/etc damage to be bumped up even more, since really good micro will be required to maximize the damage output. Tanks don't have anywhere near the overkill as they did in BW. Making it so that a Tank line doesn't need to be watched so that all your Tanks unload on only a few units and waste an immense amount of damage. If Tanks were to get any buff, they'd need to remove smart-fire AI for them. Not that any unit should have it anyway.As far as any sort of viablity in TvP goes, that's just a result of Protoss being designed around countering the Tank. It almost feels like it was all done intentionally to avoid more Mech TvP like in BW.
I just have to say that there isn't smart fire AI in the game as stated by Dustin Browder over a year ago. It only has a little delay between attacks which makes it so that tanks (or any other unit in the game) won't waste shots on a unit that is already dead.
Link to the Q&A thread. It is in the multiplayer section.
|
On December 22 2011 20:22 Mehukannu wrote:I just have to say that there isn't smart fire AI in the game as stated by Dustin Browder over a year ago. It only has a little delay between attacks which makes it so that tanks (or any other unit in the game) won't waste shots on a unit that is already dead. Link to the Q&A thread. It is in the multiplayer section.
Just for clarity, here is the important part:
-- Browder on why they can't remove tank overkill: "To help with perfomance, units do not fire all at once. There is a tiny offset between different units firing their weapons. From the users perspective it is almost simultaenous, but the shots are actually 1/8-1/16th of a second apart. Since units cannot target units that are already dead and since Siege Tanks hit their targets instantly, this creates the situation you are describing, where Siege Tanks waste fewer shots."
And here are the amusing / nostalgia parts: [off topic but worth it  ]
+ Show Spoiler +
-- Blizzard does not believe that there is an issue with EMP in TvP.
-- No plans for Carrier buffs (seems strong to them), but they will re-evaluate in a month or two.
-- TvZ stats show approx 50/50 balance. Thinks there may be an issue with tanks, but stats don't show it yet. They will be watching closely this matchup.
-- No plans to change Psi Storm, but first logical change may be to make it not have to be researched.
-- Terran is the most popular MP race. Unknown if this is because it's default, their expansion, familiar, or perceived as OP.
And most importantly of course:
-- UED don't play a major role in Terran campaign but perhaps a greater role in the future campaigns.
Long live the UED!
|
PaleBlueDot -> I'm going to break this down one last time.
If Terran, in the TvZ matchup, is either balanced or overpowered, how on earth is buffing the tank, an essential unit in both of Terran's main TvZ compositions, a good idea in terms of balance?
If the change in damage is small, how does this change TvP? If the damage buff is sizeable, how does this not effect TvZ (both in terms of the roach, ultralisk, and speedlings before tanks get +1)?
Can you answer these questions? Yes or no?
You keep going on about how the Ultralisk does fine against tanks. Great, but how does making the Ultralisk less effective (by increasing tank damage) help its already signifcant problems against bio units?
You keep talking about the changing metagame, that isn't relevant. If TvZ is balanced now (and lets, for your benefit, assume it is), buffing the tank will not help maintain that balance due to the factors already mentioned (roach, ultralisk, and pre-upgrade speedlings).
I'm sorry that you don't get more powerful tanks because you want them. Too bad. The TvZ match-up often centers around tanks as a key unit. Making tanks more powerful adds another buff to what is an already very powerful unit / race. It would require counter-buffs which would make the entire balancing act hopelessly complex.
It will not happen, it should not happen, and time will continue to demonstrate this. Stop what amounts to blatant race pandering . Your reasoning (We don't know if we haven't tried it, so lets try it) can be extended to any change, regardless of magnitude. Yes, I want to try out some hydralisks with no light tag, additional range, and twice the speed. Sucks to be me.
|
On December 22 2011 20:42 ThomasHobbes wrote:
PaleBlueDot -> I'm going to break this down one last time.
If Terran, in the TvZ matchup, is either balanced or overpowered, how on earth is buffing the tank, an essential unit in both of Terran's main TvZ compositions, a good idea in terms of balance?
If the change in damage is small, how does this change TvP? If the damage buff is sizeable, how does this not effect TvZ (both in terms of the roach, ultralisk, and speedlings before tanks get +1)?
Can you answer these questions? Yes or no?
You keep going on about how the Ultralisk does fine against tanks. Great, but how does making the Ultralisk less effective (by increasing tank damage) help its already signifcant problems against bio units?
You keep talking about the changing metagame, that isn't relevant. If TvZ is balanced now (and lets, for your benefit, assume it is), buffing the tank will not help maintain that balance due to the factors already mentioned (roach, ultralisk, and pre-upgrade speedlings).
I'm sorry that you don't get more powerful tanks because you want them. Too bad. The TvZ match-up often centers around tanks as a key unit. Making tanks more powerful adds another buff to what is an already very powerful unit / race. It would require counter-buffs which would make the entire balancing act hopelessly complex.
It will not happen, it should not happen, and time will continue to demonstrate this. Stop what amounts to blatant race pandering . Your reasoning (We don't know if we haven't tried it, so lets try it) can be extended to any change, regardless of magnitude. Yes, I want to try out some hydralisks with no light tag, additional range, and twice the speed. Sucks to be me.
You could easily bring back full tank damage to shields from bw and not touch tvz.
|
On December 22 2011 20:42 ThomasHobbes wrote:
PaleBlueDot -> I'm going to break this down one last time.
If Terran, in the TvZ matchup, is either balanced or overpowered, how on earth is buffing the tank, an essential unit in both of Terran's main TvZ compositions, a good idea in terms of balance?
If the change in damage is small, how does this change TvP? If the damage buff is sizeable, how does this not effect TvZ (both in terms of the roach, ultralisk, and speedlings before tanks get +1)?
Can you answer these questions? Yes or no?
You keep going on about how the Ultralisk does fine against tanks. Great, but how does making the Ultralisk less effective (by increasing tank damage) help its already signifcant problems against bio units?
You keep talking about the changing metagame, that isn't relevant. If TvZ is balanced now (and lets, for your benefit, assume it is), buffing the tank will not help maintain that balance due to the factors already mentioned (roach, ultralisk, and pre-upgrade speedlings).
I'm sorry that you don't get more powerful tanks because you want them. Too bad. The TvZ match-up often centers around tanks as a key unit. Making tanks more powerful adds another buff to what is an already very powerful unit / race. It would require counter-buffs which would make the entire balancing act hopelessly complex.
It will not happen, it should not happen, and time will continue to demonstrate this. Stop what amounts to blatant race pandering . Your reasoning (We don't know if we haven't tried it, so lets try it) can be extended to any change, regardless of magnitude. Yes, I want to try out some hydralisks with no light tag, additional range, and twice the speed. Sucks to be me.
Yes yes TvZ just got balanced, absolved you of any former difficulty, and changing anything in the game from this point forward will damn us all to stagnation. You dont contribute, your points were invalidated twelve posts ago, and you throw out claims of "race pandering" [bias], when you are absolutely covered in it. I do not know if you will ever get this message, as you apparently have great difficulty reading the other ones. Lets not read that a buff to +armored would not effect speedlings at all and would be negligable against something with 500HP that is made en masse and is getting a charge upgrade. Lets not read that I am not a pro player and do not have the forsight required to absolutely know that increasing tank damage will straight up break the matchup (how did you aquire this ability? bitten by a radioactive idra?).
Here is my question. By your own words, you believe TvZ at this point in time is balanced. Cool.
So the logic goes:
Balanced TvZ ---> Buff to tank changes balance ----> game is irreparably broken and cannot be reverted if it is to much.
but also:
Balanced TvZ ---> Buff to ultralisk because it was "underperforming" ---> no change in matchup balance. game is fine.
Enjoy the thread, im done wasteing my time talking to someone who does not wish for any improvements, just the intent to spread his opinion that any change to terran is a bad change for you zerg.
|
My thread about the bipolar nature of muta vs thors and archons and the use of magic box was closed at 2 pages after it got hijacked by people claiming balanced or imbalance.
How is this still open at 5 pages?
|
On December 22 2011 21:11 attwell wrote:
My thread about the bipolar nature of muta vs thors and archons and the use of magic box was closed at 2 pages after it got hijacked by people claiming balanced or imbalance.
How is this still open at 5 pages?
Shock paddles and an iron lung.
|
To be fair, we shouldn't bring HotS to this discussion, because as blizzard has already stated the units and upgrades we saw at blizzcon are not final. For all we know they could have already scrapped such ideas as viper or reaper health regeneration.
Still blizzard wants us to discuss these new addition from HotS but they are not relevant to this thread at all since we are talking about tanks in WoL (more notably in TvP match up) and not about tanks in HotS.
Also people chill a little no reason to talk down on each other right?
On December 22 2011 21:11 attwell wrote:
My thread about the bipolar nature of muta vs thors and archons and the use of magic box was closed at 2 pages after it got hijacked by people claiming balanced or imbalance.
How is this still open at 5 pages?
PM a mod perhaps? And at least post something that is relevant to this thread please.
|
Beeing a protoss player i haven't tried this but what about in TvP:
Tank + Ghost + Marine .. sure its costly but you emp the incoming forces and that should 1 shot zealots with fewer tank numbers...
|
Palebluedot, all Thomas is trying to say is if you look at the big picture, does tank really need a buff? The answer would be no. Tanks already do good in all the other match up. I can understand that you want tanks to be in TvP but that doesnt mean it can be in TvP simply because it already a good unit so there no reason to buff a already good unit. The tank already has it purpose in the game. While a unit like Ultralisk, hydra, or carriers is rather undefined and doesnt really have time to use it.
I believe HOTS basically shows that blizzard is trying to make mech viable in TvP and it basically them saying that buffing tanks would ruin everything else which is why they arent buffing tanks or terran in general because terran already strong. They are going to wait till their expansion where they have more time to beta test everything out. I would hate to have someone like DRG or Nestea get kicked out of code S simply because terran got a slight buff to tanks for testing it viability in TvP.
Long story short, I think mech just isnt meant to work in Wings of liberty or blizzard can not make it work without altering the game enough that distort balances which is why they are pushing to make it work in HOTS with new mech units.
On December 22 2011 21:24 stinger_ro wrote:
Beeing a protoss player i haven't tried this but what about in TvP:
Tank + Ghost + Marine .. sure its costly but you emp the incoming forces and that should 1 shot zealots with fewer tank numbers...
Collosus
|
I think you overestimate the strength of BW tanks. It was the combination of tanks + vultures + spidermines that dominated the grownd, so protoss had to adapt.
And sometimes the speedy vultures(+mines) were more difficult to handle than the tanks.
|
As much as I hate to play against the tank, I love the siege mech and the battles it enforces. Since vsZ tanks are the core unit more often than not, trying different stratts against it is so much fun for me.
P.S spoiler inside a spoiler inside a spoiler..spoilception?
|
Buffing tanks would break TvZ. Wait for HotS to play TvP mech.
thanks
|
On December 22 2011 20:42 ThomasHobbes wrote:
PaleBlueDot -> I'm going to break this down one last time.
If Terran, in the TvZ matchup, is either balanced or overpowered, how on earth is buffing the tank, an essential unit in both of Terran's main TvZ compositions, a good idea in terms of balance?
If the change in damage is small, how does this change TvP? If the damage buff is sizeable, how does this not effect TvZ (both in terms of the roach, ultralisk, and speedlings before tanks get +1)?
Can you answer these questions? Yes or no?
You keep going on about how the Ultralisk does fine against tanks. Great, but how does making the Ultralisk less effective (by increasing tank damage) help its already signifcant problems against bio units?
You keep talking about the changing metagame, that isn't relevant. If TvZ is balanced now (and lets, for your benefit, assume it is), buffing the tank will not help maintain that balance due to the factors already mentioned (roach, ultralisk, and pre-upgrade speedlings).
I'm sorry that you don't get more powerful tanks because you want them. Too bad. The TvZ match-up often centers around tanks as a key unit. Making tanks more powerful adds another buff to what is an already very powerful unit / race. It would require counter-buffs which would make the entire balancing act hopelessly complex.
It will not happen, it should not happen, and time will continue to demonstrate this. Stop what amounts to blatant race pandering . Your reasoning (We don't know if we haven't tried it, so lets try it) can be extended to any change, regardless of magnitude. Yes, I want to try out some hydralisks with no light tag, additional range, and twice the speed. Sucks to be me.
I feel it is a pretty important question to ask, were you playing around the time the tank got nerfed? There was really only 1 thing the nerf really effected, hydras. Zlings* and blings were effected in a rather minor way, mostly just slightly reducing the splash. Did it help these 2 units stay alive? Sure, but it wasn't like it took 2x more shots to kill the blings, it more like reduced the blings killed from 7 to 6, which in the great scheme of things likely didn't change a whole lot.
Now I'm all for making hydras viable in ZvT, but the rine+medivac is the reason the hydra sucks ZvT, not the tank, so they'd need to nerf the rine first before hydra would ever truly become viable**.
Heck just the added splash the rines take from tanks firing on zlings is likely to make up for everything except that hydras will still infact suck ZvT.
* zlings were mostly effected via giving the zerg an upgrade timing where tanks dont 1 shot them, which doesn't really matter in the great scheme of things since nowadays if the tank is firing on zlings instead of the blings he was a waste of money and shouldn't have been made.
** which I've said they need to do, since terran's reliance on keeping this unit alive through the fight while other units are simply there to keep aoe away from it is redicilous.
|
On December 21 2011 22:07 PiPoGevy wrote:I too would love to see Tanks in TvP Hopefully people figure out something  Edit: OMG my Pic is a marine now YEEH!
I use tanks all the time in tvp , I just marine, tank, raven , banshee push. 1/1/1 with bunker at entrance is what makes it possible vs 4 gates
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
