|
1. There is never a good answer for this. It depends on the cannon position an terrain. Hellions are usually an option to run in and kill probes, banshee aren't great against cannons. If its a position you can siege like taldarim, then tanks are great. Otherwise you can always nuke them from outside cannon range. And then run your hellions in if the probes survive.
I like this idea of a delayed hellion run-by after nuke or something else killing cannons, after any army moves away but before cannons are rebuilt. Will have to try and work this situation.
|
On March 22 2012 01:56 Evenfl0w wrote:Show nested quote +1. There is never a good answer for this. It depends on the cannon position an terrain. Hellions are usually an option to run in and kill probes, banshee aren't great against cannons. If its a position you can siege like taldarim, then tanks are great. Otherwise you can always nuke them from outside cannon range. And then run your hellions in if the probes survive.
I like this idea of a delayed hellion run-by after nuke or something else killing cannons, after any army moves away but before cannons are rebuilt. Will have to try and work this situation.
In the super late game if you have a decent Battlecruiser/Banshee force, you can fly in and snipe expansions even if they do have lots of cannons, and fly back before their counter attack hits your lines (if they do choose to counter attack, and teh distance depends on the map). After all, in the late game it's more about sniping expansions than Probes.
|
On February 13 2012 09:17 crocodile wrote:
I greatly respect your attempts at Mech TvP, but I have to say I actually don't think you can beat good Blink Stalker builds or Warp Prism play with it. The problem is that Mech is only cost effective when it's in a big death ball in any matchup, and Protoss is actually much better at punishing this even than Zerg or Terran because of the warp-in mechanic.
Yeah in my opinion, a well timed Blink stalker build completely destroys mech builds. Not only because this build would punish mech in its early stages, when there are not that many tanks, but also because mech has limited to no mobility.
Even leaving a few tanks seiged in base is not going to be cost efficient when stalkers blink up, absorbing the volleys with their shields and pick off the tanks. Then tech labs and infrastructure, economy can be picked off while the stalkers blink out.
If at any point in time you leave one area exposed, you are weak to zealot run bys at natural or a warp prism at either base. This will be sufficient to contain you on 2 base, while the Protoss has impunity to take a 3rd base relatively quickly and there's nothing you can do about it.
Meanwhile you could eventually defend the position, at least from annoying blink stalker harass, but not before the economy of a 3 base Protoss overtakes you and grants Protoss a large enough supply lead to thrash through your mech.
|
On March 22 2012 03:49 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 09:17 crocodile wrote:
I greatly respect your attempts at Mech TvP, but I have to say I actually don't think you can beat good Blink Stalker builds or Warp Prism play with it. The problem is that Mech is only cost effective when it's in a big death ball in any matchup, and Protoss is actually much better at punishing this even than Zerg or Terran because of the warp-in mechanic. Yeah in my opinion, a well timed Blink stalker build completely destroys mech builds. Not only because this build would punish mech in its early stages, when there are not that many tanks, but also because mech has limited to no mobility. Even leaving a few tanks seiged in base is not going to be cost efficient when stalkers blink up, absorbing the volleys with their shields and pick off the tanks. Then tech labs and infrastructure, economy can be picked off while the stalkers blink out. If at any point in time you leave one area exposed, you are weak to zealot run bys at natural or a warp prism at either base. This will be sufficient to contain you on 2 base, while the Protoss has impunity to take a 3rd base relatively quickly and there's nothing you can do about it. Meanwhile you could eventually defend the position, at least from annoying blink stalker harass, but not before the economy of a 3 base Protoss overtakes you and grants Protoss a large enough supply lead to thrash through your mech.
Please read the discussion. This thread is not about Mech's viability, but how to improve mech play. If you have tips for helping people play Mech, that's great! If not, go find somewhere else to talk about that. We've already discussed that to beat Blink harass you need good sim city, sensor towers, a turret ring, and to leave tanks sieged in your base. Hellions are sufficient against Chargelots; they are faster and more efficient at killing Chargelots warped in to harass than bio.
And yes, I know that original quote is from me, but I have since changed my position on Mech and also have realized that what I said then is not relevant to the discussion now.
|
I would also like to add something about mech's viability discussion.
Lots of people are bashing about mech, and the main things we see are :
-Openings vulnerable to some allins
-Protoss can just get a fast third and roll over you
-Weak lategame (i rofl hard when i see this one) due to mass warp-ins.
Ok, so now, STOP. Read what i said, read your own arguments, and now think about the classic bio . . . are you going to say that your bio opening can't be punished be an allin ,that a toss can never try to get an early protoss without getting crushed instantly (and in fact, does the protoss need to get that 3rd early to crush you?) , and that your army deal easily with lategame mass warp? . . . Oh wait.
And suddenly, bashing mech seems kind of pointless , because a lots of 'flaws' (most of them being imaginary . . .) are also found with most bio strats . . .
|
It's just like Day9 said in the Day9 Daily on TvP mech. If mech was the standard and people were suggesting bio for TvP, people would say "Bio is not viable: you're super vulnerable to force fields, and Protoss AoE is absurdly strong. You can't kill Archons easily, and you have no good way to deal with Chargelots. Also drops are useless because of warp in. And your late game army is so weak! I don't know why people even bother experimenting with bio you should stop wasting your time and use mech like the pros."
The fact is people will always resist change and be naturally closed minded. You can't convince them, Lyyna, just write that guide for the rest of us who are newer to Mech to use, and ignore the haters.
|
On March 22 2012 04:15 Lyyna wrote:
I would also like to add something about mech's viability discussion.
Lots of people are bashing about mech, and the main things we see are :
-Openings vulnerable to some allins
-Protoss can just get a fast third and roll over you
-Weak lategame (i rofl hard when i see this one) due to mass warp-ins.
Ok, so now, STOP. Read what i said, read your own arguments, and now think about the classic bio . . . are you going to say that your bio opening can't be punished be an allin ,that a toss can never try to get an early protoss without getting crushed instantly (and in fact, does the protoss need to get that 3rd early to crush you?) , and that your army deal easily with lategame mass warp? . . . Oh wait.
And suddenly, bashing mech seems kind of pointless , because a lots of 'flaws' (most of them being imaginary . . .) are also found with most bio strats . . .
Pointing out strong deficiencies, or bashing if you prefer, is how you improve a build/ style. If a build just rolls over and dies to a common all in then it's not a good build, is it?
The point is to identify weaknesses and smoth them out. Thats what a good build is about. I belive it's called stress testing.
|
Saying stuff like "omg You're a noob this will never work because XXX" without anything to back up your 'flaw', when people have already shown how to take care of that is free and retarded bashing. And this is what people are doing about mech since, well . . . beta?
|
On March 22 2012 04:27 Sapphire.lux wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2012 04:15 Lyyna wrote:
I would also like to add something about mech's viability discussion.
Lots of people are bashing about mech, and the main things we see are :
-Openings vulnerable to some allins
-Protoss can just get a fast third and roll over you
-Weak lategame (i rofl hard when i see this one) due to mass warp-ins.
Ok, so now, STOP. Read what i said, read your own arguments, and now think about the classic bio . . . are you going to say that your bio opening can't be punished be an allin ,that a toss can never try to get an early protoss without getting crushed instantly (and in fact, does the protoss need to get that 3rd early to crush you?) , and that your army deal easily with lategame mass warp? . . . Oh wait.
And suddenly, bashing mech seems kind of pointless , because a lots of 'flaws' (most of them being imaginary . . .) are also found with most bio strats . . . Pointing out strong deficiencies, or bashing if you prefer, is how you improve a build/ style. If a build just rolls over and dies to a common all in then it's not a good build, is it? The point is to identify weaknesses and smoth them out. Thats what a good build is about. I belive it's called stress testing.
But there hasn't been any identification of weaknesses, or suggestions for improvement, which WOULD be good ways to help improve a build. Instead people just join the thread to explain why Protoss is better than mech and that we should stop trying Regardless of the fact that we've discussed ways to deal with all of the things people keep bringing up, new people keep coming in and posting something to that effect. It's frustrating.
|
On March 22 2012 04:32 Lyyna wrote:
Saying stuff like "omg You're a noob this will never work because XXX" without anything to back up your 'flaw', when people have already shown how to take care of that is free and retarded bashing. And this is what people are doing about mech since, well . . . beta?
Wel, yeah, just ignore the "OMG" idiots.
However, i think it's silly to talk about late game PF and nukes and etc when you don't have the early game figuered out.
Take bio. "Standard" builds do a nr of things:
-Set up a decent timed expo
-Set the production and upgrade times to have a good mid/ late game transition and/or have timings to punish the opponent
-NOT die to ANY known Protoss timings. Sure, some things will be a lot harder to hold then others but, you have realistic "counters" available to any Protoss agresion. By counters i mean the posibility to adapt to whatever you might scout (within reason)
When i read about mech builds that die (do not have the possibility to adapt in a resonable/ realistic time) to common things like 4G/ blink all in/ stargate play, i call it a "gamble" build, or TBH, a bad build.
Again, having a weakness it's ok, being hard countered by a build it's not.
|
On March 22 2012 04:43 crocodile wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2012 04:27 Sapphire.lux wrote:On March 22 2012 04:15 Lyyna wrote:
I would also like to add something about mech's viability discussion.
Lots of people are bashing about mech, and the main things we see are :
-Openings vulnerable to some allins
-Protoss can just get a fast third and roll over you
-Weak lategame (i rofl hard when i see this one) due to mass warp-ins.
Ok, so now, STOP. Read what i said, read your own arguments, and now think about the classic bio . . . are you going to say that your bio opening can't be punished be an allin ,that a toss can never try to get an early protoss without getting crushed instantly (and in fact, does the protoss need to get that 3rd early to crush you?) , and that your army deal easily with lategame mass warp? . . . Oh wait.
And suddenly, bashing mech seems kind of pointless , because a lots of 'flaws' (most of them being imaginary . . .) are also found with most bio strats . . . Pointing out strong deficiencies, or bashing if you prefer, is how you improve a build/ style. If a build just rolls over and dies to a common all in then it's not a good build, is it? The point is to identify weaknesses and smoth them out. Thats what a good build is about. I belive it's called stress testing. But there hasn't been any identification of weaknesses, or suggestions for improvement, which WOULD be good ways to help improve a build. Instead people just join the thread to explain why Protoss is better than mech and that we should stop trying Regardless of the fact that we've discussed ways to deal with all of the things people keep bringing up, new people keep coming in and posting something to that effect. It's frustrating.
I agree. And TBF, i'm talknig mostly about the op and the "Weaknesses" section.
"I have yet to find out how to stop these but luckily for me they are relatively uncommon all ins." this is a MAJOR problem IMO.
I'm pointing it out because i play mech in every MU since BETA and i know how hard i've tryed to find good all rounded builds. Except for the reactor rax with A LOT of marines i havent seen any 
|
On March 22 2012 03:49 zmansman17 wrote:Show nested quote +On February 13 2012 09:17 crocodile wrote:
I greatly respect your attempts at Mech TvP, but I have to say I actually don't think you can beat good Blink Stalker builds or Warp Prism play with it. The problem is that Mech is only cost effective when it's in a big death ball in any matchup, and Protoss is actually much better at punishing this even than Zerg or Terran because of the warp-in mechanic. Yeah in my opinion, a well timed Blink stalker build completely destroys mech builds. Not only because this build would punish mech in its early stages, when there are not that many tanks, but also because mech has limited to no mobility. Even leaving a few tanks seiged in base is not going to be cost efficient when stalkers blink up, absorbing the volleys with their shields and pick off the tanks. Then tech labs and infrastructure, economy can be picked off while the stalkers blink out. If at any point in time you leave one area exposed, you are weak to zealot run bys at natural or a warp prism at either base. This will be sufficient to contain you on 2 base, while the Protoss has impunity to take a 3rd base relatively quickly and there's nothing you can do about it. Meanwhile you could eventually defend the position, at least from annoying blink stalker harass, but not before the economy of a 3 base Protoss overtakes you and grants Protoss a large enough supply lead to thrash through your mech.
(early-midgame situation)I think we should build our supply depot in parallel with the border. If the stalker blink they'll be trap in the wall of depot. That can give you an extra 5 second to bring you tank in your base. Or even better, if you see the blink coming you can let some tank in your base, and if they blink they'll be trap and the tanks will have a good dps. Obviously make sensor tower and turret ring.
(early-midgame situation) Sometime its work but not always. If you have see the stalker coming for your main. You can take a thors in a medivac, or viking and snipe the observer.
(lategame situation)
Dont build all your production building in your main. If you see the stalker coming, you can lift your building, maybe put your building in the center of the map where you cut the map in half. The protoss can kill your supply depot of your main but anyway you'll have mass OC for the supply. For the far expansion, you need planetary and sensor tower.
|
On March 22 2012 04:32 Lyyna wrote:
Saying stuff like "omg You're a noob this will never work because XXX" without anything to back up your 'flaw', when people have already shown how to take care of that is free and retarded bashing. And this is what people are doing about mech since, well . . . beta?
You guys are really just wasting your time with threads like this. A very small miniority of players are even willing to try new things in their game play, while an overwhelming majority are more than eager to tell you how dumb you are for experimenting. Nothing you say will convince people on the internet of the merits of your arguments. As someone in this thread said already, it doesnt matter if mech is viable or not, bio play is the standard and thats what people want to do. None of you in this thread are named IM_MVP, SlayerS_MMA, or MarineKingPrime. Thus, you shall all be ignored as irrelevant sources of strategy. The vast majority of players (including pro players) do not have the ingenuity to experiment with new builds. Just about everyone picks a style they like that another player uses and they copy it as best they can manage.
For those like me and who enjoy the mech play style and are just trying to figure out how it can be done better, I would recommend private conversations amongst yourselves with PMs or chat rooms or whatever. The only thing thats going to happen on an internet forum is bickering and name calling.
|
On March 22 2012 05:12 Banex wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2012 04:32 Lyyna wrote:
Saying stuff like "omg You're a noob this will never work because XXX" without anything to back up your 'flaw', when people have already shown how to take care of that is free and retarded bashing. And this is what people are doing about mech since, well . . . beta? You guys are really just wasting your time with threads like this. A very small miniority of players are even willing to try new things in their game play, while an overwhelming majority are more than eager to tell you how dumb you are for experimenting. Nothing you say will convince people on the internet of the merits of your arguments. As someone in this thread said already, it doesnt matter if mech is viable or not, bio play is the standard and thats what people want to do. None of you in this thread are named IM_MVP, SlayerS_MMA, or MarineKingPrime. Thus, you shall all be ignored as irrelevant sources of strategy. The vast majority of players (including pro players) do not have the ingenuity to experiment with new builds. Just about everyone picks a style they like that another player uses and they copy it as best they can manage. For those like me and who enjoy the mech play style and are just trying to figure out how it can be done better, I would recommend private conversations amongst yourselves with PMs or chat rooms or whatever. The only thing thats going to happen on an internet forum is bickering and name calling.
I disagree, this thread convices me to play mech.
|
@Banex : This is something i want to change,and this is why i'm going to release my guide soon . . .and i'll try to keep it alive with updates for a long time
|
On March 22 2012 05:12 Banex wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2012 04:32 Lyyna wrote:
Saying stuff like "omg You're a noob this will never work because XXX" without anything to back up your 'flaw', when people have already shown how to take care of that is free and retarded bashing. And this is what people are doing about mech since, well . . . beta? You guys are really just wasting your time with threads like this. A very small miniority of players are even willing to try new things in their game play, while an overwhelming majority are more than eager to tell you how dumb you are for experimenting. Nothing you say will convince people on the internet of the merits of your arguments. As someone in this thread said already, it doesnt matter if mech is viable or not, bio play is the standard and thats what people want to do. None of you in this thread are named IM_MVP, SlayerS_MMA, or MarineKingPrime. Thus, you shall all be ignored as irrelevant sources of strategy. The vast majority of players (including pro players) do not have the ingenuity to experiment with new builds. Just about everyone picks a style they like that another player uses and they copy it as best they can manage. For those like me and who enjoy the mech play style and are just trying to figure out how it can be done better, I would recommend private conversations amongst yourselves with PMs or chat rooms or whatever. The only thing thats going to happen on an internet forum is bickering and name calling.
Great idea! Mech chat channel on EU? :D
|
This thread convinced me to play mech instead of doing biomech 2 base allins.
|
The chat room idea is nice Banex. I created "TvP Mech" on EU server for people interested
|
A guide can peak people's interest I suppose, but if you ask me everyone will get much more out of playing, observing, and chatting about games and working to improve together in real time. Problem is i've never been able to find a group of people like that, not to mention protoss players willing to practice frequently. Perhaps you'll have better luck.
|
On March 22 2012 05:08 Gyro_SC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On March 22 2012 03:49 zmansman17 wrote:On February 13 2012 09:17 crocodile wrote:
I greatly respect your attempts at Mech TvP, but I have to say I actually don't think you can beat good Blink Stalker builds or Warp Prism play with it. The problem is that Mech is only cost effective when it's in a big death ball in any matchup, and Protoss is actually much better at punishing this even than Zerg or Terran because of the warp-in mechanic. Yeah in my opinion, a well timed Blink stalker build completely destroys mech builds. Not only because this build would punish mech in its early stages, when there are not that many tanks, but also because mech has limited to no mobility. Even leaving a few tanks seiged in base is not going to be cost efficient when stalkers blink up, absorbing the volleys with their shields and pick off the tanks. Then tech labs and infrastructure, economy can be picked off while the stalkers blink out. If at any point in time you leave one area exposed, you are weak to zealot run bys at natural or a warp prism at either base. This will be sufficient to contain you on 2 base, while the Protoss has impunity to take a 3rd base relatively quickly and there's nothing you can do about it. Meanwhile you could eventually defend the position, at least from annoying blink stalker harass, but not before the economy of a 3 base Protoss overtakes you and grants Protoss a large enough supply lead to thrash through your mech. (early-midgame situation)I think we should build our supply depot in parallel with the border. If the stalker blink they'll be trap in the wall of depot. That can give you an extra 5 second to bring you tank in your base. Or even better, if you see the blink coming you can let some tank in your base, and if they blink they'll be trap and the tanks will have a good dps. Obviously make sensor tower and turret ring. (early-midgame situation) Sometime its work but not always. If you have see the stalker coming for your main. You can take a thors in a medivac, or viking and snipe the observer. (lategame situation) Dont build all your production building in your main. If you see the stalker coming, you can lift your building, maybe put your building in the center of the map where you cut the map in half. The protoss can kill your supply depot of your main but anyway you'll have mass OC for the supply. For the far expansion, you need planetary and sensor tower.
Certainly a sensor tower is required if you go mech. I will definitely agree with that. I'm just adding my two cents as a Top master player who has done my share of experimentation with mech. I'll believe it when I see it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
