|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 22 2011 04:45 Morghaine wrote:
You'd like to see Tanks vs Protoss?
What about... me liking to see Hydras against... oh wait.
A unit with range 13 with sick splash without really needing micro, single handedly defending an expo in the midgame from the high ground looks fine to me.
Friendly splash is only really relevant when there are absolutely no medivacs due to combat shields. I recognize that zerg players especially those who played BW want to see the hydra again. Most of the I want the tank to be useful vs protoss comes from people who have experience watching or playing BW. This may or not be true but I feel most of the players who are wanting the hydra to be more affective have the same mind set. "The hydra was massable and all around useful in about every situation in BW now it just flat out sucks." *makes thread about hydras* To me it sounds similar to terrans wanting to use tanks vs protoss. I look at it this way imagine for a second that back in alpha blizzard renamed the hydra the roach and the roach the hydra. Now you would effectively have your massable hydra back that is good in most situations. Just they decided to cut the "hydras" range down and cut its AA in exchange for making it beefier. I think you would have less complaints about the hydra if that were the case. Then it would just be this new unit the "Roach" how do use it how do you make this unit viable vs X threads that would pop up. To those people say that no buff or change could help the tank vs protoss without completely crushing the zerg are not thinking logically. Changing the base armor damage to the primary target would not affect the current metagame the only unit that would really be affected would be the ultra as the infestor and roach would still die in the same number of hits if the tanks primary target recieved just a little more damage. Then of course there could be other things such as say reducing its supply or cost in exchange for say other disadvantages such as removing smartfire. Removing smartfire would be a buff to the zerg without helping the protoss as much.
On topic I think the primary reason that tanks are not as good as they were is they do not have very good meat shields with the addition of the collosus. Vultures did very well against light and could still buffer pretty well against armored due to mines. Hellions can still buffer a bit vs armored but not as well but they are better vs light units that tanks are not supposed to be good against the real problem however is that a critical point of collosus just kills everything in one hit so your meat shields move forward to take the hit they all melt in one hit and then zealots move in and kill everything. I always thought that instead of getting rid of KA they should of gave storm like a 5-10 sec cooldown after warped in and then changed the collosus like they did the tank make it do reduced damage to light or something so the collosus wouldn't be good against everything.
On a side note ive been experimented alot more with mech and instead of getting vikings as my AA I'm getting ravens and is strangely affective at least against the people I play against. (Note a reactored starport pumping out vikings for and a techlabed starport pumping out ravens will use the same amount of gas after factoring in the build time.)
The ravens are useful against not only the air units they would build but can sit behind your army and occasionally throw down turrets in front of your tanks to bait charges and act as meatshields and they can throw down pdds behind your army which will still reach your tanks which makes them harder to feedback. If no templar are in the battle you can be more aggressive with your ravens and seeker missile key units. Of course I am not pro so I obviously not only is my micro and macro not good but neither is my opponents. And yes I know ravens can be fedback but as long as you keep them in the back of your army when templar are present they shouldn't get fedback too much.
My personal opinion is that mech is not bad its just many pro terrans are too stubborn to play with it long enough to figure it out. Plus HOTS should be solving some of the mech problems hopefully.
|
On December 24 2011 00:53 avilo wrote:
I dun think a lot of people understand. Brood war tanks were good because they did the same amount of damage to all units. It was 75 iirc? There was none of this hard counter non-sense where suddenly your entire army became obsolete because your opponent built 3 "counter units."
Can you imagine having a siege tank vulture army and your opponent built 3 reavers and suddenly you are auto-raped? Well, that is how SC2 is in TvP - you build siege tank + hellions and the opponent build like 4 immortals suddenly you're army is worthless in comparison.
But now imagine you can build mass of almost any protoss unit to make siege tanks worthless...that's SC2. Every protoss unit counters the tank, and the tank is given no chance to counter other units because they mistakingly changed it to make it a specific counter to "armored." So instead of actually being able to kill stuff like zealots and blink stalkers when you already have a pre-sieged army, the opponent instead 1A's into you without thought and comes out ahead.
In beta, and when tanks had damage strong to all, and they didn't stupidly change zealot armor type to make it easy mode versus mech, tanks could actually kill stuff before they closed in.
What happened was a certain balance designer got very afraid when he started to see mech was completely viable, especially with ghosts, so he pre-emptively nerfed it before it even had a chance to be used and pre-emptively before everyone actually learned how to play SC2.
Tanks with beta damage vs protoss would actually be fine right now, mainly because the overall skill level of protoss has gone waaaaaaay up since that time, when all protoss knew how to do was 1A collosus. It took a year for protoss to use warp prisms, just wrap your heads around that guys. An entire year (ok except white-ra cause he was smart) for warp prisms to be seen as "useful."
It just seems to me like every time mech has ever shown viability they immediately nerfed it into the ground asap. The series of MC vs thorzain got thors nerfed right after that series...a knee jerk balance design reaction...and that reaction has always happened with MECH. It took MONTHS for infestors to even be considered needing a nerf when people were making 40 a game lol.
Big J is right about the damage typing. Broodwar tanks did 70 Damage base, but damage modifiers for Explosive Type Damage [Siege tanks had explosive damage] were 1.0 for "Large" units [ex. goons, reavers, archons, lurkers], .75 for "Medium" units [ex. vultures, hydras] and .5 for "Small" units [ex. Zealots, Marines, Zerglings]. Essentially the difference damage wise between BW Tanks and SC2 Tanks is the [imo] MASSIVE 20 damage nerf to armored targets between the games, especially with high HP unit like colossus walking around. They removed a dragoon attack worth of damage every shot.
So in short-
~Tanks lost 20 damage vs. armored in a game where unit HP is at an all time high.
Damage is further reduced by the amount of tanks you will have, as higher gas count, and higher supply cost does
reduce the number of possible tanks at any X point in time.
~Blizzard essentially removed the "Medium" unit size, meaning tanks lose the additional balancing component of a intermediate amount of damage between min and max. It either hits for the minimum of 35 or the current max of 50 to all units.
On a side note I think there is a sort of fear aura radiating from tanks to people who have not actually had to use them themselves. The time when tanks got their nerf, as I have said before [and I was pretty damn high in the ratings during pre-masters beta, playing people like Drewbie, Antimage, Liquid'Tyler when they were the talk of town, not to belittle them in any way] was when I can very clearly remember slow pushing the close positions on Lost Temple and PFing then gold base on the way while just having roaches thrown at me. There was no muta micro [or harass for that matter] at that time, or really stable build orders. Thorship was a very strong build. This was a different era of SC2. So I think it should be re-evaluated.
*note*
If tanks got buffed for + X dmg vs. Armored, the only units this would effect in matchups other than TvP are marauders TvT, possibly making pure bio a worse prospect, and Roach/Ultralisk in TvZ [did not include infestor as it gets 2 shot either way.]
That does not seem like it would be a nightmare to balance.
And as for the Cant use Hydra <-----> Cant use tank comparison, my opinion is that the hydra is getting essentially metagamed out of the matchup. Same way marines got metagamed out of BW, they were great against protoss units except storm, and amazing reaver control, so it worked in some cheese like the Deep 6. I feel the tank is in a different situation because it really just doesnt fight anything very well in the matchup.
|
I think Blizz agrees with you. HOTS fixes a lot of your issues.
The battle Hellions will be the meatsheilds and will take less friendly splash damage.
The shredder will give you the ability to block off alt routes of attack, as well as using it in conjunction with siege tanks to protect from flanking/trap enemy units. (I think that shredders will be very much like reusable spider mines.)
and as far as collisi go, I think the warhound will be a good answer to it. I am not sure, but it looks like it will attack ground and air at the same time with a small range of 7, but they will do 24 damage to a colosi per hit.
|
On December 21 2011 22:32 frantic.cactus wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2011 22:25 Willzzz wrote:
TvT seems to be roughly 50/50 mech/bio atm, so I wouldn't say that mech is considered to be "FAR superior" by a majority of players. I disagree, mech IS considered far superior by the top top Korean terrans. I don't care about the majority, just the likes of MVP, Bomber etc. Also tanks in a head on engagement in the right composition can beat a 200/200 Protoss army head on. The drawbacks I always hear are, "too immobile" or "urgh, I make one mistake and I lose."
MMA Slaughters everyone on the planets mech play with seemingly ease using Bio all the time.
I don't care, unless someone can actually show us mech consistantly beating MMAs bio I can't believe anyone that mech is better. His style is just brilliant, and transitions into marine tank very well.
And tanks do absolutely terrible against Tier 3 Protoss. Collosus, Immortals, Charlots and Blink Stalkers all make tanks look like a joke. And that isn't including Protoss air options as well.
|
The factory for Terran is what the stargate is for protoss. Not really good unless used in cheese.
On topic id say that the tank is one of those awkward units. Tanks arent imbalanced at all in my opinion. My guess is that tank play is so extremely unforgiving. I dont have a clue though how to buff it to make it more user friendly.
Adding damage, siege time reduction or anything else would just break other matchups.
I also think a problem is, players havent really experimented with timings and strategies enough. Bio play vs protoss is so much more explored and refined, if you just decide your going to be "the guy that makes mech from now on" your going to lose a lot.
|
Tanks aren't supposed to be good vs Protoss late game (and they're still great early game), what do you want, emp to remove shield and tank to finish the protoss army?
|
On December 24 2011 02:56 weikor wrote:
On topic id say that the tank is one of those awkward units. Tanks arent imbalanced at all in my opinion. My guess is that tank play is so extremely unforgiving. I dont have a clue though how to buff it to make it more user friendly.
Adding damage, siege time reduction or anything else would just break other matchups.
I also think a problem is, players havent really experimented with timings and strategies enough. Bio play vs protoss is so much more explored and refined, if you just decide your going to be "the guy that makes mech from now on" your going to lose a lot.
There are two problems here that I see:
1) Everyone who is skeptical says "Buff to tanks breaks other matchups", but they don't back it up. The only two suggestions for why it would break so far is something about ultras are bad, please don't buff other units so they might get worse, and that it would severely impact the effectiveness of roaches against mech. The roaches thing is a legitimate concern which would need to be looked into, while the ultra thing sounds silly.
2) You have no proof that players haven't experimented with the timings. How do you know GoOdy didn't play mech vs. P solid for 2 months 12 hours a day? I have no proof of the contrary either, but you cannot just count on hoping people haven't tried it.
Extenz:
Tanks aren't supposed to be good vs Protoss late game (and they're still great early game), what do you want, emp to remove shield and tank to finish the protoss army?
What? Aren't supposed to be good vs. Protoss late game? Who says?
For the sake of trying to remove the 'Buff Tanks --> Break Game' argument [at least ones without actual points, unlike the roach one] lets looks at how units would be effected by a BONUS TO ARMORED BUFF [for emphasis.]
Current Tank: [assuming 0 upgrades]
35 to light, 50 to armored
TvT
vs. Marauder: Kills in 3 shots
vs. Tanks: Kills in 4 shots
vs. grounded vikings: lol
TvZ
vs. Roach: Kills in 3 shots
vs. Infestor: Kills in 2 shots
vs. Ultralisk: Kills in 11 shots
TvP
vs. Stalker: Kills in 4 shots
vs. Immortal: Kills in 15 shots
vs. Colossus: Kills in 8 shots
Buffed Tank: [assume return to 60 vs. Armored, 0 upgrades]
35 to light, 60 to armored
TvT
vs. Marauder: Kills in 3 shots
vs. Tanks: Kills in 3 shots
vs. grounded vikings: lol
TvZ
vs. Roach: Kills in 3 shots
vs. Infestor: Kills in 2 shots
vs. Ultralisk: Kills in 9 shots
TvP
vs. Stalker: Kills in 3 shots
vs. Immortal: Kills in 14 shots
vs. Colossus: Kills in 6 shots
Total units effected by the change:
Tanks from 4 to 3 shots. [TvT, both have this change]
Ultralisk from 11 to 9 shots. [not counting chit plating]
Stalker from 4 to 3 shots.
Immortal from 15 to 14 shots. [1 less shot with upgraded tanks, down to 13]
Colossus from 8 to 6 shots.
As you can see, the most / biggest changes effect TvP, in particular the feared colossus gets easier to down. TvT is essentially a negligible change, since both sides get the effect and only tanks are directed on a shot-kill ratio. TvZ the ultralisk definitely takes a hit to effectiveness vs. tanks, but honestly tanks were never the problem for ultras, and the [predicted] charge upgrade from HoTS should help negate even this.
*note*
+ Show Spoiler +
Essentially the increase in damage will also increase the splash inflicted to other units around the target, and the biggest problem I see for this would be for TvT vs. Bio and TvZ when meching while Z goes heavy roach. Honestly since the radial damage degradation is reduced by a % base rather than a flat number, the gains from pre buff splash to buffed splash would be quite small.
|
On December 22 2011 18:17 TheDwf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2011 12:05 Lobotomist wrote:
Well I don't get to use hydras in any games in any matchup Then wake up, because Hydras are used in ZvZ and ZvP.
Then let's start a thread about how we should be able to use the hydra in ZvT and how blizz could change the game because some of us want to use the hydra. So what if the hydra beats marines? It won't necessarily mess up game balance. In fact, you're just complaining because it will make the game harder for you, just like how stronger siege tanks would make the game harder for a zerg.
Satire Rant
In other words: I think this thread is stupid. If you want siege tanks to be possible in TvP, make about 10 rax and float them with your army and land them so zealots are worthless. Or, use them for an early game contain to set up your economy as seen in Inca vs someone in the up and down matches. But, there is a designated balance discussion thread, and this isn't it. Proposing changes is balance discussion.
|
On December 24 2011 09:36 Bippzy wrote:Show nested quote +On December 22 2011 18:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 22 2011 12:05 Lobotomist wrote:
Well I don't get to use hydras in any games in any matchup Then wake up, because Hydras are used in ZvZ and ZvP. Then let's start a thread about how we should be able to use the hydra in ZvT and how blizz could change the game because some of us want to use the hydra. So what if the hydra beats marines? It won't necessarily mess up game balance. In fact, you're just complaining because it will make the game harder for you, just like how stronger siege tanks would make the game harder for a zerg. Satire RantIn other words: I think this thread is stupid. If you want siege tanks to be possible in TvP, make about 10 rax and float them with your army and land them so zealots are worthless. Or, use them for an early game contain to set up your economy as seen in Inca vs someone in the up and down matches. But, there is a designated balance discussion thread, and this isn't it. Proposing changes is balance discussion.
Complaining about something that makes the game harder for you, isn't that exactly what you are doing? If it does not break balance, which you do not know if it will or not, why do you care? This is a thread of Terrans saying from experience that tanks are ineffectual, and how can it be changed. If you want to discuss the intricacies of the Terran race, maybe you should actually play them some time, or at least give some actual reason why they should be, instead of this "it would make it easier for terran and we have no reason to give them that" crap. Zerg has multiple ways to play every single match-up with a variety of units in each one, each with its own benefits to different parts of the game. Why can Terran not have this? Instead of blatant race hate, how about you actually consider the position first? You would be for or against PTR tests of this? Why would it make the game easier in TvZ, really, I want to hear it, lets get something constructive in here.
If you mass of zergs really think there is a fatal flaw in the design of the hydra, spit it out, make your own thread. I think there is something wrong with tanks, so I made this thread. I did not go into every thread about Zerg complaining about it.
|
On December 24 2011 00:53 avilo wrote:
I dun think a lot of people understand. Brood war tanks were good because they did the same amount of damage to all units. It was 75 iirc? There was none of this hard counter non-sense where suddenly your entire army became obsolete because your opponent built 3 "counter units."
Can you imagine having a siege tank vulture army and your opponent built 3 reavers and suddenly you are auto-raped? Well, that is how SC2 is in TvP - you build siege tank + hellions and the opponent build like 4 immortals suddenly you're army is worthless in comparison.
But now imagine you can build mass of almost any protoss unit to make siege tanks worthless...that's SC2. Every protoss unit counters the tank, and the tank is given no chance to counter other units because they mistakingly changed it to make it a specific counter to "armored." So instead of actually being able to kill stuff like zealots and blink stalkers when you already have a pre-sieged army, the opponent instead 1A's into you without thought and comes out ahead.
In beta, and when tanks had damage strong to all, and they didn't stupidly change zealot armor type to make it easy mode versus mech, tanks could actually kill stuff before they closed in.
What happened was a certain balance designer got very afraid when he started to see mech was completely viable, especially with ghosts, so he pre-emptively nerfed it before it even had a chance to be used and pre-emptively before everyone actually learned how to play SC2.
Tanks with beta damage vs protoss would actually be fine right now, mainly because the overall skill level of protoss has gone waaaaaaay up since that time, when all protoss knew how to do was 1A collosus. It took a year for protoss to use warp prisms, just wrap your heads around that guys. An entire year (ok except white-ra cause he was smart) for warp prisms to be seen as "useful."
It just seems to me like every time mech has ever shown viability they immediately nerfed it into the ground asap. The series of MC vs thorzain got thors nerfed right after that series...a knee jerk balance design reaction...and that reaction has always happened with MECH. It took MONTHS for infestors to even be considered needing a nerf when people were making 40 a game lol.
I just thought i'd add this to the "siege tank" discussion, because they were in fact viable over a year ago, but blizzard purposely changed it so they weren't because of some irrational fear that SC2 would...become like brood war...the greatest game ever...pretty crazy i know.
I wrote a guide about ghostmech in beta, and i'm completely convinced it would have been very standard in macro games by now if mech hadn't been gimped patch after patch. Instead, we're all currently stuck with the marauder.
The problem with reverting the tank nerf is that you also affect TvT. Some people like how mech isn't the default go to thing in that matchup, but 50 damage tanks will put us back to that boring tank/viking vs tank/viking mu from the beta. Dull.
|
I think the fact that a tank in siege need one more shot to kill a stalker than it needed to kill a dragon had a huge impact for tanks in TvP. :/
|
Huh? If someone is making stalkers to counter your mech play, then you should probably write to Websters and inform them you have just discovered a new definition of the word Justice.
|
On December 24 2011 11:14 iaguz wrote:
Huh? If someone is making stalkers to counter your mech play, then you should probably write to Websters and inform them you have just discovered a new definition of the word Justice.
Haha.
Yeah it's still chargelots, immortal, and all that stuff that make mech hard to do in TvP.
But in a battle, tanks waste more shots because they usualy need more shot per unit than in BW. And for protoss unit, the improved IA from SC2 don't make up from the loss of damage per shot.
|
On December 24 2011 11:02 PaleBlueDot wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 09:36 Bippzy wrote:On December 22 2011 18:17 TheDwf wrote:On December 22 2011 12:05 Lobotomist wrote:
Well I don't get to use hydras in any games in any matchup Then wake up, because Hydras are used in ZvZ and ZvP. Then let's start a thread about how we should be able to use the hydra in ZvT and how blizz could change the game because some of us want to use the hydra. So what if the hydra beats marines? It won't necessarily mess up game balance. In fact, you're just complaining because it will make the game harder for you, just like how stronger siege tanks would make the game harder for a zerg. Satire RantIn other words: I think this thread is stupid. If you want siege tanks to be possible in TvP, make about 10 rax and float them with your army and land them so zealots are worthless. Or, use them for an early game contain to set up your economy as seen in Inca vs someone in the up and down matches. But, there is a designated balance discussion thread, and this isn't it. Proposing changes is balance discussion. Complaining about something that makes the game harder for you, isn't that exactly what you are doing? If it does not break balance, which you do not know if it will or not, why do you care? This is a thread of Terrans saying from experience that tanks are ineffectual, and how can it be changed. If you want to discuss the intricacies of the Terran race, maybe you should actually play them some time, or at least give some actual reason why they should be, instead of this "it would make it easier for terran and we have no reason to give them that" crap. Zerg has multiple ways to play every single match-up with a variety of units in each one, each with its own benefits to different parts of the game. Why can Terran not have this? Instead of blatant race hate, how about you actually consider the position first? You would be for or against PTR tests of this? Why would it make the game easier in TvZ, really, I want to hear it, lets get something constructive in here. If you mass of zergs really think there is a fatal flaw in the design of the hydra, spit it out, make your own thread. I think there is something wrong with tanks, so I made this thread. I did not go into every thread about Zerg complaining about it.
The problem is that things snowball extremly fast with small buffs. you kill 5 extra roaches when they charge in, so yoz lose one less tank so you kill more roaches with it and so on and in the end you have 5more tanks than in the nonbuffed fight. (random numbers, just want to show the principle)
Also other stuff has to be taken into account:
If 1tank is better at holding cheeses like roach rushes, terran can get aeay with a little more greed. if midgame roachswitches are less efficient, terran can be spread thinner compositionwise. etc etc et
for tvp: 1-1-1 is already a cheese that has better stats then a lot of macro strategies (so it may already be considered as standard play). +10 more dmg vs stalkers and immos in that scenario is not a small buff. it might cripple protoss into one or two superspecific openings if it is not straight up broken. (notbto mention that there are also 2base tank allins in tvp etc)
Im not seeing how this kind of buff would not lead to some other buffs for P/Z as well or other nerfs for T. And after all that work it might just turn out that terrans still wont use tanks in tvp...
Its really not worth to gamble with whole parts of the balance, just forbthe chance that the one matchup that is not at least partially developed around the tank might develop some tankplay.
And for the hydra stuff: hydras suck due to them overlapping with roaches, infestors and mutalisks in roles. It's not really a thing of stats, its rather that due to their universal suckiness there is hardly any reason to ever getbthem over one of the 3named specialists. this will stay this way as long as there is no way to play nonreactive zerg in which blindly relying on universal compositions is available.
|
For tvp: 1-1-1 is already a cheese that has better stats then a lot of macro strategies (so it may already be considered as standard play). +10 more dmg vs stalkers and immos in that scenario is not a small buff. it might cripple protoss into one or two superspecific openings if it is not straight up broken. (notbto mention that there are also 2base tank allins in tvp etc)
Im not seeing how this kind of buff would not lead to some other buffs for P/Z as well or other nerfs for T. And after all that work it might just turn out that terrans still wont use tanks in tvp...
Its really not worth to gamble with whole parts of the balance, just forbthe chance that the one matchup that is not at least partially developed around the tank might develop some tankplay
The buff to Tank damage could be in vehicle weapon upgrades (for example from +5 to +10). That way, tanks are not more powerful in the early game but scale better late game which is what people really want to buff anyway. That fixes the potential 111 imbalance but still makes tanks more useful late game.
|
Personally, I think that tanks can work well as a "backbone" of a bio-mech army in all of the matchups. As long as you're careful to keep them in position with the rest of your bio army, you can do wonders with an early push similar to that seen in many TvZs.
|
I've had many cases where I try to mech in TvP. There were really stupid cases where I was 3/3 while the protoss was 3/1/1 and he just A moved his 200 vs my 200 and won. Isn't mech suppose to be cost effective? I still have the replay and that is a pure example of a design flaw. I remember in BW where the protoss would actually be really happy if he was able to kill half of a maxed mech with his maxed army. Remember when 2 tanks could take out 6 stalkers head on. There seriously needs to be a patch to fix mech for TvP no question about it. Don't just jump on the Artosis bandwagon and say it just hasn't been figured out. That is just nonsense. The game has acclerated quicker than BW did like 6-8 bw years. Don't you think someone would atleast be able to pull off mech consistantly by now with the millions of ppl who play this game.
If you were to say that mech isn't figured out then only reason behind it is its very hard to do. But my replay just shows how rewarding it is to mech. Absolutely zero. If its this non-rewarding and so pain staking hard to do its not a viable strat.
I have a more easier time to mech in TvT and TvZ because its actually rewarding, I see the benefits of cost effectivness in my mech army. I can see that my 200 army can beat his 200 army head on. I can see outnumbered well positioned tanks able to hold off armies. I don't however see it in TvP. Aswell as the amount of annoyance the pylon warpins change the dynamic of the game makes opening factory expand non-viable opening.
As a High Master KR, I've played roughly 100+ TvP mech games, and like 1000+ TvZ + TvT mech games. Here's a list of what I believe makes mech non-viable TvP.
1. Pylon warpins - This changes everything when trying to do a factory expand like in BW. Having too many angles to cover when expanding with one tank makes this opening non-viable. This can be fixed by doing a different opening or change in map but still having more options in openings would make this game more diverse. Other than that it isn't that much of a problem after you gain a couple more tanks.
2. Immortal - This is my largest concern. Why do you have a unit that totally hard counters anything that comes out of a factory. If I need to have ghosts with my army this isn't mech. When I think of mech I think of an army that is able to hold off on its own, doesn't need anything else for support because it is a support unit in itself. Besides making ghosts costs gas which means less tanks, less tanks means slower expo timings. I agree ghosts + mech is prob that best composition for TvP for sure. But getting there is a different story.
3. Void Ray - In BW toss had the scout which did garbage damage to ground and 1 turret can take on like 4 scouts. This isn't the case in sc2. The void ray forces the terran to take gas out of tanks and put them either in starport + viking or armory + thor. BW terrans had to make turrets anyway so that isn't factored in. But once u can get 4+ void rays it makes expanding so slow. We don't have goliths and thors are terrible and slow can't cover enough angles fast enough. Prob the main problem here is that the anti air for mech is plain garbage this is not however saying that turrets suck. Imo they are fine the way they are.
4. No map control - There is nothing in mech that can be used to zone out parts of the map other than PFs. This is extremely important since the introduction to blink stalkers. There needs to be something that can slow down but not kill of the army just enough so that tanks can get repositions from being seiged. I cannot put how important having this would greatly improve mech. I think is the the largest problem out of everything. Needs something that can slow down the armies so tanks can fire a couple more shots before being taking out. Since we dont' want another BW, could possible create a mine that does no dmg but either stuns of slows the targets. But its already too late for this, just hope HOTS fixes this issue. I personally don't like the new mine in HOTS mainly because it takes food to make which means less tanks and with the way mech is we need every tanks we can get.
|
On December 24 2011 11:09 iaguz wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 00:53 avilo wrote:
I dun think a lot of people understand. Brood war tanks were good because they did the same amount of damage to all units. It was 75 iirc? There was none of this hard counter non-sense where suddenly your entire army became obsolete because your opponent built 3 "counter units."
Can you imagine having a siege tank vulture army and your opponent built 3 reavers and suddenly you are auto-raped? Well, that is how SC2 is in TvP - you build siege tank + hellions and the opponent build like 4 immortals suddenly you're army is worthless in comparison.
But now imagine you can build mass of almost any protoss unit to make siege tanks worthless...that's SC2. Every protoss unit counters the tank, and the tank is given no chance to counter other units because they mistakingly changed it to make it a specific counter to "armored." So instead of actually being able to kill stuff like zealots and blink stalkers when you already have a pre-sieged army, the opponent instead 1A's into you without thought and comes out ahead.
In beta, and when tanks had damage strong to all, and they didn't stupidly change zealot armor type to make it easy mode versus mech, tanks could actually kill stuff before they closed in.
What happened was a certain balance designer got very afraid when he started to see mech was completely viable, especially with ghosts, so he pre-emptively nerfed it before it even had a chance to be used and pre-emptively before everyone actually learned how to play SC2.
Tanks with beta damage vs protoss would actually be fine right now, mainly because the overall skill level of protoss has gone waaaaaaay up since that time, when all protoss knew how to do was 1A collosus. It took a year for protoss to use warp prisms, just wrap your heads around that guys. An entire year (ok except white-ra cause he was smart) for warp prisms to be seen as "useful."
It just seems to me like every time mech has ever shown viability they immediately nerfed it into the ground asap. The series of MC vs thorzain got thors nerfed right after that series...a knee jerk balance design reaction...and that reaction has always happened with MECH. It took MONTHS for infestors to even be considered needing a nerf when people were making 40 a game lol.
I just thought i'd add this to the "siege tank" discussion, because they were in fact viable over a year ago, but blizzard purposely changed it so they weren't because of some irrational fear that SC2 would...become like brood war...the greatest game ever...pretty crazy i know.
I wrote a guide about ghostmech in beta, and i'm completely convinced it would have been very standard in macro games by now if mech hadn't been gimped patch after patch. Instead, we're all currently stuck with the marauder. The problem with reverting the tank nerf is that you also affect TvT. Some people like how mech isn't the default go to thing in that matchup, but 50 damage tanks will put us back to that boring tank/viking vs tank/viking mu from the beta. Dull.
Pretty sure beta tanks were 60 damage, actually. I think Avilo's interpretation of what happened is exactly correct. I would just like to add that for whatever reason Blizzard is willing to almost instantly nerf something that people don't like about Terran, where as Protoss and Zerg don't get the same treatment. Tanks, Thor energy, Hellions, 5 second barracks extra build time, etc...these nerfs were done very quickly in response to recent developments. I don't even think 60 damage tanks would be "op" in any way. 60 is overkill on lings and blings anyway, and the extra +10 versus armored would actaully be a fine buff versus ultras. For TvP ofc that would be an amazing buff that would go a long way in addressing Colossus and Chargelots versus tanks in particular. TvT...well, Mech is already viable on a lot of maps (like Metalopolis).
|
On December 27 2011 21:13 Scila wrote:Show nested quote +On December 24 2011 11:09 iaguz wrote:On December 24 2011 00:53 avilo wrote:
I dun think a lot of people understand. Brood war tanks were good because they did the same amount of damage to all units. It was 75 iirc? There was none of this hard counter non-sense where suddenly your entire army became obsolete because your opponent built 3 "counter units."
Can you imagine having a siege tank vulture army and your opponent built 3 reavers and suddenly you are auto-raped? Well, that is how SC2 is in TvP - you build siege tank + hellions and the opponent build like 4 immortals suddenly you're army is worthless in comparison.
But now imagine you can build mass of almost any protoss unit to make siege tanks worthless...that's SC2. Every protoss unit counters the tank, and the tank is given no chance to counter other units because they mistakingly changed it to make it a specific counter to "armored." So instead of actually being able to kill stuff like zealots and blink stalkers when you already have a pre-sieged army, the opponent instead 1A's into you without thought and comes out ahead.
In beta, and when tanks had damage strong to all, and they didn't stupidly change zealot armor type to make it easy mode versus mech, tanks could actually kill stuff before they closed in.
What happened was a certain balance designer got very afraid when he started to see mech was completely viable, especially with ghosts, so he pre-emptively nerfed it before it even had a chance to be used and pre-emptively before everyone actually learned how to play SC2.
Tanks with beta damage vs protoss would actually be fine right now, mainly because the overall skill level of protoss has gone waaaaaaay up since that time, when all protoss knew how to do was 1A collosus. It took a year for protoss to use warp prisms, just wrap your heads around that guys. An entire year (ok except white-ra cause he was smart) for warp prisms to be seen as "useful."
It just seems to me like every time mech has ever shown viability they immediately nerfed it into the ground asap. The series of MC vs thorzain got thors nerfed right after that series...a knee jerk balance design reaction...and that reaction has always happened with MECH. It took MONTHS for infestors to even be considered needing a nerf when people were making 40 a game lol.
I just thought i'd add this to the "siege tank" discussion, because they were in fact viable over a year ago, but blizzard purposely changed it so they weren't because of some irrational fear that SC2 would...become like brood war...the greatest game ever...pretty crazy i know.
I wrote a guide about ghostmech in beta, and i'm completely convinced it would have been very standard in macro games by now if mech hadn't been gimped patch after patch. Instead, we're all currently stuck with the marauder. The problem with reverting the tank nerf is that you also affect TvT. Some people like how mech isn't the default go to thing in that matchup, but 50 damage tanks will put us back to that boring tank/viking vs tank/viking mu from the beta. Dull. Pretty sure beta tanks were 60 damage, actually. I think Avilo's interpretation of what happened is exactly correct. I would just like to add that for whatever reason Blizzard is willing to almost instantly nerf something that people don't like about Terran, where as Protoss and Zerg don't get the same treatment. Tanks, Thor energy, Hellions, 5 second barracks extra build time, etc...these nerfs were done very quickly in response to recent developments. I don't even think 60 damage tanks would be "op" in any way. 60 is overkill on lings and blings anyway, and the extra +10 versus armored would actaully be a fine buff versus ultras. For TvP ofc that would be an amazing buff that would go a long way in addressing Colossus and Chargelots versus tanks in particular. TvT...well, Mech is already viable on a lot of maps (like Metalopolis).
Because TvZ and TvP keep/kept on being terranfavored just like Z and P gets nerfs and buffs whenever ZvP gets to onesided.
And though I agree that I would like to see more Mech in TvP it is simply not a time in which terran would need any buff and it would be pretty unreasonable to risk the amount of balance in all the 3Terran MUs just for a possible viability of siege tanks in TvP.
|
Many people seem to gloss over the fact that protoss could often fly dropships and sometimes even arbiters over top of a terran army with general impunity. Any factory time spent making goliaths was factory time not spent making tanks, which sort of would defeat the point up until you saw a carrier switch. In SC2 terran always has a ton of barracks that are always making marines and they always have a reactored starport. Mech TvP balance in SC1 depended on weaker air units and weaker anti air, especially on the terran's part.
If you want to rebalance the tank you need to take a long hard look at the marine, viking and banshee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
