|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On August 15 2012 19:26 Tyrseng wrote:Show nested quote +On August 15 2012 19:21 Qikz wrote:On August 15 2012 19:06 Tyrseng wrote:On August 15 2012 18:56 Qikz wrote:On August 15 2012 18:33 Tyrseng wrote:On August 15 2012 18:27 Qikz wrote:On August 15 2012 17:58 Tyrseng wrote:
Doesn't anyone else here feel like TvZ mech isn't really mech? I mean sure, your units are 'mechanical', but the essence of mech is positional play and in-depth strategy over the more speed-centric bio. Thors don't have much value positionally, and the only real difference between bio and Thor-centric mech is the fact that it's not viable to drop Thors, and they're too slow to benefit from good unit control. We only have one positional unit in SC2 - the tank. The tank allows for very good positional play in TvT, but tanks are only good in decent numbers so mech in TvT suffers as you cannot defend all the space necessary to support mech - this is why players like Taeja and MMA rip mech apart with sheer power of unit control and multitasking.
I've kind of given up on mech because even though I win a lot of my games, it's just kind of tedious, constantly building up Raven/Thor/BC and then a-moving with some seeker missiles. That isn't positional play, it's just using the defensive power of the tank to turtle up and win. I play tank centric mech with lots of planeteries for blocking off areas. I find it exactly like mech in TvT if I'm against bio. It's all about defensive positioning and all the same good stuff. Also you don't have to play thor centric mech in TvZ, it only helps slightly against Broodlords and against Ultras tanks work just as well. I think if you play mech correctly then you should never let the game reach that point. Why? I think the whole point of mech is to force the late game. Your mech ball is super powerful in the late and late late game, against ALL compositions. Why wouldn't I just defend and force the late game? Why is there this sudden rule that you HAVE to push against your opponents? Zergs don't do it with broodlords in ZvP, why does Terran? Mech isn't bio, you don't need to timing push to end the game. You can end the game by playing much better at split map situations and defense. I'm assuming your first paragraph is referring to TvP mech, and I agree - I feel TvP mech is viable but it's a lot harder than bio TvP, although the Battle Hellion should help positional TvP (I refuse to think of the Warhound as a mech unit because it's just a-movey and doesn't have any value positionally, which is what mech is/should be). TvZ mech cannot be tank-centric, because then they'll just go pure air and there's not much you can do without mass Thor vs that, no matter how well you're positioned. It's not viable to drop Thors because you can't lift them out - the medivacs will get sniped by corruptors and that's a huge loss. The third paragraph quotes something I didn't say. I know defensive play is positional play, but you're using positional play as a crutch/stool to get to another a-move non-positional composition. My first paragraph was talking about TvZ. Mass air is dealt with with your vikings, your thors (not loads) and turrets. If you've split the map you have so many excess minerals and turrets (with hi-sec) and planetaries together are really, really good for any form of air switches. If your medivac is getting sniped by corrupters, you can't really lift anything out. At the stage of the game where you want to thor drop the cost of one or two thors is very little compared to your bank anyways. If you've that worried about losing them, take vikings with you. You need vikings to deal with Broodlords anyway. Ehhh, but they'll just go pure air and the tanks will just be empty supply, they might as well be bunkered marauders for all the damage they're going to deal to corruptor/bl. The Zerg will just keep you contained because if you move out your Vikings will get fungaled and then will get killed by Corruptors and then you'll get rolled over by a few Broodlords. Sure, it's defensive positional play but you're not allowed to push out at all (well, you can, but it's a very very very slow push). It's just as turtley as teching to BC/Raven/Thor, except it still resembles mech because you're playing positionally. Mech should be able to push out of its base without dying horribly. A big problem I have with TvZ mech is that in the late game, you're only getting tanks to shoot Infestors, which I find ridiculous. There's no reason a unit should be so good that you need an entire tank battery to make sure that your air army can survive. Without Infestors, lategame TvZ tank-centric mech would turn into sky terran because you wouldn't really need tanks any longer. Right, going from my personal experience I really disagree. Your tanks are never useless. You defend with your vikings against corrupters (using the turrets and Thors to help) then kill the Broodlords. After that you'll have your vikings to control the skies and stop him ever going broodlords again and then it forces them into Ultras. Ultras MELT to well positioned/defended tanks. Turrets also stop any drop play and nydus play as you have vision everywhere with sensor towers and the like. You never, ever get into a position where you get fungalled with your vikings. It's boring, but it works and you'll win the majority of the time. If his broods start killing your planetary wall, who cares? It costs like nothing with your bank. The only problem some people would have playing mech this way (I love it) is it looks and feels extremely slow, slowly leapfrogging to more bases and when they over extend you send about 5 tanks to go punish expansions. it's good because it works and there's not much they can do to punish them. Let their broodlords damage you, you've got a split map and if all they have is air, they can't push the fact some of your tanks die before you remax with them. I'm agreeing with you - that is positional play, and I also did say it was very slow and it relies heavily on a viking dance where you're trying to bait his infestors into your tank line so you can kill his air with your vikings. What I'd prefer is a faster paced, non-stalemate mech vs zerg situation where you can push back the Zerg air/infestor army by sectioning off pieces of the map without it ending up in a turtle fest.
That's fair enough, but I was just trying to explain that you can win in the way I described. Positional play (defensively) is still incredibly viable and you don't even need ravens/bcs to win. Just pure ground mech, turrets and vikings.
Also I don't bait his infestors, I just position myself above turrets where he's never going to be able to get to me. When he attacks into me I have a massive viking ark and a lot of turrets/thors shooting his corrupters. He's never going to kill my tanks or my air, it's impossible for him if you're defended well enough.
|
Edited my previous post again, and it works as a response for your new comment Tyrseng.
Pumping out 6-8 thors off of 2/4 factories takes a long time - long enough for the Zerg to really reach out and grab bases unless you continue to be aggressive with some sort of harass unit, which at some point hurts you more than it hurts the Zerg unless he is very clumsy because it delays your tech.
With my hellion banshee opener, I can easily max out at around the 14-15 minute mark. 6-8 thors does not take very long at all to make, only about 2 minutes if you start from scratch and are on 3 or 4 bases. Also remember that you don't always need 6-8 thors, that's only IF the zerg decides to go very very heavy on mutas (~30 or more that is), which isn't common as he will probably be spending them on roaches, which are better as you can easily turret up and mutas eat too much gas that he needs to save up for BL/infestor, and he can just drop roaches if he wants. Also don't forget you can also make turrets with your push if you want to move out if he has 30+ mutas and you don't have 6-8 thors.
can either rely heavily on Thors
I'm not sure what you mean. Thors are not the center of the army, tanks still are. Thors + turrets to deal with mutas, tanks to deal with roaches infestors and (thanks qikz, totally forgot,) ultras. You want vikings for the corruptors. If you are sticking with thor/hellion/tank, this may be why you feel it is hard to push out as you are probably making more thors than you need since you aren't making vikings and thus need more thors to deal with the BLs, in turn lowering your tank count.
Also I think some replays can help out this kind of discussion ^^
Edit: Also yeah, I don't find myself needing to bait infestors. Vikings are range 9, Infestor fungal is 11 (including radius), tank 13. BLs have 9.5 So if you have your vikings .5 range infront of your tanks to protect them vs BLs, you have 3.5 spaces of leeway. You don't have to leapfrog many tanks at once, and inching forward isn't that slow. Remember, at this point he isn't swarming you anymore, it's just deathball vs deathball. As the mecher, you are trying to engage properly so you want to position your units carefully to prepare for the engagement. It's not positional play on a grand scale across the map, but it still is much more positional than marine tank as you can't just rely on dropping 2+ places on the map and hope the zerg to mess up.
Also, sectioning off areas of the map is very doable. If he's containing you, he can't contain you from all angles. You should be able to send some units off in another direction, or else you simply let him gain an advantageous ground on you and thus you are playing a harder situation than you should be in. BLs are very slow. If you inch toward his army well, you will eventually be able to either scare him from running away or forcing him to commit to the attack because he cannot run away with his BLs. You are in a much more flexible position.
Edit2: Also I know we are sort of posting in between each other's comments so there is some overlap or redundancy in what we're saying ^^;; oh well.
If he's saying it's viable to Thor drop and lose the Thor in order to kill tech, it's gotten to a point in the game where the Zerg can fund air + infestor army (Scarlett is a great example of this kind of play - somehow, she can max on on 15+ Infestors, 25+ Corrupters, and a lot of Broods on 4/5 base).
Tanks are very good vs Infestor/Roach. If you have enough units in the midgame and he can't overwhelm you with waves of roaches and base denial/counterattacks/drops, then it turns into positional play where a) the Terran wins because he pushes all the way to the Zerg's bases, b) the Zerg wins because the Terran slips up in his positioning/map control as you said, or c) it comes to a stalemate at which point the Zerg gets to BL/Corruptor/Infestor at which point the Terran is forced to transition.
Well anything is "viable". It all depends on what your strategy is. Do YOU believe that he has lower multitasking skills than you, and thus you dropping thors will eventually pay off? It's not something that you "need" to do like in marine tank where you must drop to gain a forward position and to harass and such, but it is an option, especially for us lower players who want to punish our opponent as much as we can. Even in high level games though, they do not often protect their tech enough (think of all the times zerg gets sniped by MMM drops, losing pool or hive or greater spire) or they are not keeping up with the terran. Since people don't play perfectly, thor drops can be used successfully as well.
And again, i don't feel you are forced to transition at all. Viking thor hellion tank is a versatile enough composition to deal with zerg's endgame. Terran has the nice bonus of being able to add in more air for an even stronger army, but you don't need to transition into a dominantly air based army. You are still relying on your mech army, you are just using vikings and ravens to support -- they are still a minor part of your army. And the later the game goes, the more army supply you will have thanks to MULEs. A zerg having to fight with a 140 food army with 60 drones (that's not even that high, he has to hope that he can stockpile enough money in time to remax) is kind of funny to see against a 170 food terran army with 30 SCVs and 10-15 OCs.
Again though, I don't think we're going to get anywhere constructively unless we discuss some replays, since each of our experiences and observations will be different.
|
What the hell are you guys arguing about? Not starcraft, that's for sure. Looks like a big semantics clusterfuck.
I don't remember who said what and I'm not quoting any posts.
The guy who said mech isn't positional is an idiot. How do you beat broodlord/infestor/corruptor? You put a pf in a spot he has to attack, put turrets around that, then position your thors relative to that in phalanx, then position your tanks where you need them (which is only behind the thors if he still has a lot of roach or if you have plenty of ghosts, else they have to be on the side or in front to go after the infestors), while positioning your air units so they don't get fungal'd away from scv/mule/turret.
The guy who said mech isn't mech because it isn't using tanks endgame is silly. There are different ways to play the game, and while tanks are wonderful in the midgame, they don't beat broodlords, and can't attack vs ultra. So obviously you need something else if your intention is to win the game. Mech isn't defined by your opening, isn't strictly defined by your unit composition, and isn't defined by your tactics.
The guy who said mech takes less multi-task than bio is awfully misinformed. Just because you aren't splitting marines in 3 spots doesn't mean you don't need to be as fast as you possibly can. If anything bio takes less multi-task, just more micro. Most people playing bio just play relatively low econ and make a lot of units and attack until they win/lose. With mech you're microing your hellion/banshee in multiple spots on map, scouting enemy's army position and composition so that you can move portions of your army and position them perfectly to handle whatever the enemy chooses to do while carefully starting a production cycle of exactly the right units relevant to what you've scouted, building defenses to facilitate your expansion and army movement/reinforcement, building up your inftrastructure (making the right extra buildings, turning ccs into the right thing at the right spot, etc), and assessing everything else that you have to make sure it's completely efficient. Bio is mindless, the macro is just making more marines, ghosts, and vikings. The micro is intense, but that's all you're doing. And if you blunder your unit control ever it's not "oops I guess I'll have to make more marines and micro them well", it's "oh, I just lost my entire army minus some defenders, now I need to figure out which defenders I need to move just to survive, and need to figure out which units to remake first to rebuild my composition while staying alive".
Ghosts are obviously superior to tanks at getting rid of ghosts.
You can never forgo factory units altogether, I don't care how many bcs, ravens, and ghosts you have. So it's still mech. I have a ton of games where I simply can't afford to add in higher air tech anyway.
It's almost impossible to argue about mech in this thread when the participants are from a range of skill levels using a range of styles.
As far as aggression vs turtling goes, there isn't much difference between mech and bio in that regard vs zerg. Bio can't be aggressive because of fungal and 100 lings, mech can't be aggressive because it needs every engagement to be as favourable as possible, which inherently involves fighting around static defense.
|
On August 16 2012 02:45 Nightmarjoo wrote:
What the hell are you guys arguing about? Not starcraft, that's for sure. Looks like a big semantics clusterfuck.
I don't remember who said what and I'm not quoting any posts.
The guy who said mech isn't positional is an idiot. How do you beat broodlord/infestor/corruptor? You put a pf in a spot he has to attack, put turrets around that, then position your thors relative to that in phalanx, then position your tanks where you need them (which is only behind the thors if he still has a lot of roach or if you have plenty of ghosts, else they have to be on the side or in front to go after the infestors), while positioning your air units so they don't get fungal'd away from scv/mule/turret.
The guy who said mech isn't mech because it isn't using tanks endgame is silly. There are different ways to play the game, and while tanks are wonderful in the midgame, they don't beat broodlords, and can't attack vs ultra. So obviously you need something else if your intention is to win the game. Mech isn't defined by your opening, isn't strictly defined by your unit composition, and isn't defined by your tactics.
The guy who said mech takes less multi-task than bio is awfully misinformed. Just because you aren't splitting marines in 3 spots doesn't mean you don't need to be as fast as you possibly can. If anything bio takes less multi-task, just more micro. Most people playing bio just play relatively low econ and make a lot of units and attack until they win/lose. With mech you're microing your hellion/banshee in multiple spots on map, scouting enemy's army position and composition so that you can move portions of your army and position them perfectly to handle whatever the enemy chooses to do while carefully starting a production cycle of exactly the right units relevant to what you've scouted, building defenses to facilitate your expansion and army movement/reinforcement, building up your inftrastructure (making the right extra buildings, turning ccs into the right thing at the right spot, etc), and assessing everything else that you have to make sure it's completely efficient. Bio is mindless, the macro is just making more marines, ghosts, and vikings. The micro is intense, but that's all you're doing. And if you blunder your unit control ever it's not "oops I guess I'll have to make more marines and micro them well", it's "oh, I just lost my entire army minus some defenders, now I need to figure out which defenders I need to move just to survive, and need to figure out which units to remake first to rebuild my composition while staying alive".
Ghosts are obviously superior to tanks at getting rid of ghosts.
You can never forgo factory units altogether, I don't care how many bcs, ravens, and ghosts you have. So it's still mech. I have a ton of games where I simply can't afford to add in higher air tech anyway.
It's almost impossible to argue about mech in this thread when the participants are from a range of skill levels using a range of styles.
As far as aggression vs turtling goes, there isn't much difference between mech and bio in that regard vs zerg. Bio can't be aggressive because of fungal and 100 lings, mech can't be aggressive because it needs every engagement to be as favourable as possible, which inherently involves fighting around static defense.
Before you go about insulting people, you should probably read what they write - otherwise, you just sound extremely pretentious.
I did not say mech is not positional play - I said the exact opposite.
I did not say mech in the lategame isn't mech without tanks. I said mech in the lategame isn't mech without positional play (This post sums that up pretty nicely - I think you'll find a lot of support behind what was stated there, too)
I did not say mech takes less multi-task than bio. I said it does not rely as heavily on it.
If you want to join what was a constructive discussion, by all means, feel free to do so. However, ignoring 90% of what was discussed in the discussion and calling the participants "idiots", "mis-informed", and "silly" isn't helpful, and it makes you look really stupid when you were calling someone an idiot over something they actually didn't say.
You're making it sound like this discussion was a petty argument, and you're the pretentious douchebag who's supposed to come break it up - on the contrary, we were discussing positional play in late game TvZ and you somehow felt it necessary to belittle the statements and insult the discussers.
|
Sure sounds petty and silly to me.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
Guys, guys, can't we all get along? The people we all have problems with is those people who refuse to make mech standard! T_T
In other news I don't know what the heck I've done but I've not lost a TvT in ages. I just seem to be really good at never getting broken. People keep trying to early tank/marine push me, I push that and eventually split the map. They go into an air transition and I win due to all my turrets and the 8 starports I have pumping out vikings when I notice them switch.
|
United Arab Emirates439 Posts
On August 16 2012 06:12 Tyrseng wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 02:45 Nightmarjoo wrote:
What the hell are you guys arguing about? Not starcraft, that's for sure. Looks like a big semantics clusterfuck.
I don't remember who said what and I'm not quoting any posts.
The guy who said mech isn't positional is an idiot. How do you beat broodlord/infestor/corruptor? You put a pf in a spot he has to attack, put turrets around that, then position your thors relative to that in phalanx, then position your tanks where you need them (which is only behind the thors if he still has a lot of roach or if you have plenty of ghosts, else they have to be on the side or in front to go after the infestors), while positioning your air units so they don't get fungal'd away from scv/mule/turret.
The guy who said mech isn't mech because it isn't using tanks endgame is silly. There are different ways to play the game, and while tanks are wonderful in the midgame, they don't beat broodlords, and can't attack vs ultra. So obviously you need something else if your intention is to win the game. Mech isn't defined by your opening, isn't strictly defined by your unit composition, and isn't defined by your tactics.
The guy who said mech takes less multi-task than bio is awfully misinformed. Just because you aren't splitting marines in 3 spots doesn't mean you don't need to be as fast as you possibly can. If anything bio takes less multi-task, just more micro. Most people playing bio just play relatively low econ and make a lot of units and attack until they win/lose. With mech you're microing your hellion/banshee in multiple spots on map, scouting enemy's army position and composition so that you can move portions of your army and position them perfectly to handle whatever the enemy chooses to do while carefully starting a production cycle of exactly the right units relevant to what you've scouted, building defenses to facilitate your expansion and army movement/reinforcement, building up your inftrastructure (making the right extra buildings, turning ccs into the right thing at the right spot, etc), and assessing everything else that you have to make sure it's completely efficient. Bio is mindless, the macro is just making more marines, ghosts, and vikings. The micro is intense, but that's all you're doing. And if you blunder your unit control ever it's not "oops I guess I'll have to make more marines and micro them well", it's "oh, I just lost my entire army minus some defenders, now I need to figure out which defenders I need to move just to survive, and need to figure out which units to remake first to rebuild my composition while staying alive".
Ghosts are obviously superior to tanks at getting rid of ghosts.
You can never forgo factory units altogether, I don't care how many bcs, ravens, and ghosts you have. So it's still mech. I have a ton of games where I simply can't afford to add in higher air tech anyway.
It's almost impossible to argue about mech in this thread when the participants are from a range of skill levels using a range of styles.
As far as aggression vs turtling goes, there isn't much difference between mech and bio in that regard vs zerg. Bio can't be aggressive because of fungal and 100 lings, mech can't be aggressive because it needs every engagement to be as favourable as possible, which inherently involves fighting around static defense. Before you go about insulting people, you should probably read what they write - otherwise, you just sound extremely pretentious. I did not say mech is not positional play - I said the exact opposite. I did not say mech in the lategame isn't mech without tanks. I said mech in the lategame isn't mech without positional play ( This post sums that up pretty nicely - I think you'll find a lot of support behind what was stated there, too) I did not say mech takes less multi-task than bio. I said it does not rely as heavily on it. If you want to join what was a constructive discussion, by all means, feel free to do so. However, ignoring 90% of what was discussed in the discussion and calling the participants "idiots", "mis-informed", and "silly" isn't helpful, and it makes you look really stupid when you were calling someone an idiot over something they actually didn't say. You're making it sound like this discussion was a petty argument, and you're the pretentious douchebag who's supposed to come break it up - on the contrary, we were discussing positional play in late game TvZ and you somehow felt it necessary to belittle the statements and insult the discussers.
I would like to join the discussion!
I really don't agree that the Tank has to be the heart of Mech play (as the link you gave makes the claim) , and I do think Mech is still very positional in the late game vs Zerg. Obviously more so in TvT (and TvP if you play that). But positioning is still very important at all stages of TvZ. The only time I find it really isn't is when you have essentially 'won' because the Zerg just hasn't gotten the appropriate tech in time or has just too weak of an economy, but because Zerg can reinforce so quickly you have to fight off an army or two before you truly have won. Anyways, back to late game TvZ. Vs Brood Lord Infestor you do, suddenly, have the more mobile army. And so the positioning becomes a bit different. Positional play is, in my humble opinion, being mindful of where best to put your units to maximize their effectiveness. Every race and style uses this, but in most situations, Mech lives and dies by it more than the other races. And this is true for every Mech unit I have found. Hellions help you both scout your enemies position, but also abuse it. It also requires specific positioning during engagements: Either behind your Mech army to roast Zerglings, Broodlings, and Banelings (to an extent), or in front of it to shield from Roaches and Ultralisks. This makes it a very positional unit. The Siege Tank I won't explain as you agree it is a very positional unit. In some ways the most. The Thor is essentially the Siege Tank against Mutalisks. Against Mutalisks it serves almost the exact same role as Siege Tanks do against Roaches. You position in key places to defend from Mutalisk attacks. On top of this Thor can be used as a mobile sim-city of sorts (especially with SCV repair), when positioned to protect your Siege Tanks and/or Hellions, depending on the composition you face. The same goes against Ultralisks, and yes, even Brood Lords, it is just a completely different type of positioning.
Anyways, I would like to address something that seems to be at the heart of this Positioning debate. That Positioning is the only tactical emphasis for Mech. I would like to put forth the idea that in SC2 Mech is reliant on 2 key Tactics, not just 1. Positioning AND Target Fire. Positioning is something you do before battles, it's what keeps you active on the map and aware of your opponents army. But Focus Fire is just as central to SC2 Mech and makes all the difference in battles. This difference from BW is, IMO, due to the increased amount of Splash for Mech units, meaning you can do multiple times more damage with Target Fire. Every single unit has it. And on the same token, the increased clumping makes Target Fire considerably more important. So just because a unit isn't very heavy on the positioning side doesn't make it not Mech, IMO, as long as it is balanced by being heavy on the Target Fire side. Hellions are 50/50 between positioning and target fire. Tanks favor the positioning aspect, and Thors favor the target fire aspect. There are situations for all 3 units where one Tactic is far more important than the other. I think this balance among the units is something we definitely see in HotS. While Widow Mines are literally all positioning, the Warhound is, or appears to be, 100% target fire. I don't think it is even up for debate whether or not High Level players will be turning off auto-cast on Warhounds to pick out Immortals and Siege Tanks and ignore Sentries, Stalkers, and Hellions. The unit will be almost all about target firing key units. So while I understand the complaint that it has no positioning and thus isn't a true Mech unit, I do not think that is what Mech is all about anymore. Like it or not.
|
On August 16 2012 11:30 ZjiublingZ wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2012 06:12 Tyrseng wrote:On August 16 2012 02:45 Nightmarjoo wrote:
What the hell are you guys arguing about? Not starcraft, that's for sure. Looks like a big semantics clusterfuck.
I don't remember who said what and I'm not quoting any posts.
The guy who said mech isn't positional is an idiot. How do you beat broodlord/infestor/corruptor? You put a pf in a spot he has to attack, put turrets around that, then position your thors relative to that in phalanx, then position your tanks where you need them (which is only behind the thors if he still has a lot of roach or if you have plenty of ghosts, else they have to be on the side or in front to go after the infestors), while positioning your air units so they don't get fungal'd away from scv/mule/turret.
The guy who said mech isn't mech because it isn't using tanks endgame is silly. There are different ways to play the game, and while tanks are wonderful in the midgame, they don't beat broodlords, and can't attack vs ultra. So obviously you need something else if your intention is to win the game. Mech isn't defined by your opening, isn't strictly defined by your unit composition, and isn't defined by your tactics.
The guy who said mech takes less multi-task than bio is awfully misinformed. Just because you aren't splitting marines in 3 spots doesn't mean you don't need to be as fast as you possibly can. If anything bio takes less multi-task, just more micro. Most people playing bio just play relatively low econ and make a lot of units and attack until they win/lose. With mech you're microing your hellion/banshee in multiple spots on map, scouting enemy's army position and composition so that you can move portions of your army and position them perfectly to handle whatever the enemy chooses to do while carefully starting a production cycle of exactly the right units relevant to what you've scouted, building defenses to facilitate your expansion and army movement/reinforcement, building up your inftrastructure (making the right extra buildings, turning ccs into the right thing at the right spot, etc), and assessing everything else that you have to make sure it's completely efficient. Bio is mindless, the macro is just making more marines, ghosts, and vikings. The micro is intense, but that's all you're doing. And if you blunder your unit control ever it's not "oops I guess I'll have to make more marines and micro them well", it's "oh, I just lost my entire army minus some defenders, now I need to figure out which defenders I need to move just to survive, and need to figure out which units to remake first to rebuild my composition while staying alive".
Ghosts are obviously superior to tanks at getting rid of ghosts.
You can never forgo factory units altogether, I don't care how many bcs, ravens, and ghosts you have. So it's still mech. I have a ton of games where I simply can't afford to add in higher air tech anyway.
It's almost impossible to argue about mech in this thread when the participants are from a range of skill levels using a range of styles.
As far as aggression vs turtling goes, there isn't much difference between mech and bio in that regard vs zerg. Bio can't be aggressive because of fungal and 100 lings, mech can't be aggressive because it needs every engagement to be as favourable as possible, which inherently involves fighting around static defense. Before you go about insulting people, you should probably read what they write - otherwise, you just sound extremely pretentious. I did not say mech is not positional play - I said the exact opposite. I did not say mech in the lategame isn't mech without tanks. I said mech in the lategame isn't mech without positional play ( This post sums that up pretty nicely - I think you'll find a lot of support behind what was stated there, too) I did not say mech takes less multi-task than bio. I said it does not rely as heavily on it. If you want to join what was a constructive discussion, by all means, feel free to do so. However, ignoring 90% of what was discussed in the discussion and calling the participants "idiots", "mis-informed", and "silly" isn't helpful, and it makes you look really stupid when you were calling someone an idiot over something they actually didn't say. You're making it sound like this discussion was a petty argument, and you're the pretentious douchebag who's supposed to come break it up - on the contrary, we were discussing positional play in late game TvZ and you somehow felt it necessary to belittle the statements and insult the discussers. I would like to join the discussion! I really don't agree that the Tank has to be the heart of Mech play (as the link you gave makes the claim) , and I do think Mech is still very positional in the late game vs Zerg. Obviously more so in TvT (and TvP if you play that). But positioning is still very important at all stages of TvZ. The only time I find it really isn't is when you have essentially 'won' because the Zerg just hasn't gotten the appropriate tech in time or has just too weak of an economy, but because Zerg can reinforce so quickly you have to fight off an army or two before you truly have won. Anyways, back to late game TvZ. Vs Brood Lord Infestor you do, suddenly, have the more mobile army. And so the positioning becomes a bit different. Positional play is, in my humble opinion, being mindful of where best to put your units to maximize their effectiveness. Every race and style uses this, but in most situations, Mech lives and dies by it more than the other races. And this is true for every Mech unit I have found. Hellions help you both scout your enemies position, but also abuse it. It also requires specific positioning during engagements: Either behind your Mech army to roast Zerglings, Broodlings, and Banelings (to an extent), or in front of it to shield from Roaches and Ultralisks. This makes it a very positional unit. The Siege Tank I won't explain as you agree it is a very positional unit. In some ways the most. The Thor is essentially the Siege Tank against Mutalisks. Against Mutalisks it serves almost the exact same role as Siege Tanks do against Roaches. You position in key places to defend from Mutalisk attacks. On top of this Thor can be used as a mobile sim-city of sorts (especially with SCV repair), when positioned to protect your Siege Tanks and/or Hellions, depending on the composition you face. The same goes against Ultralisks, and yes, even Brood Lords, it is just a completely different type of positioning. Anyways, I would like to address something that seems to be at the heart of this Positioning debate. That Positioning is the only tactical emphasis for Mech. I would like to put forth the idea that in SC2 Mech is reliant on 2 key Tactics, not just 1. Positioning AND Target Fire. Positioning is something you do before battles, it's what keeps you active on the map and aware of your opponents army. But Focus Fire is just as central to SC2 Mech and makes all the difference in battles. This difference from BW is, IMO, due to the increased amount of Splash for Mech units, meaning you can do multiple times more damage with Target Fire. Every single unit has it. And on the same token, the increased clumping makes Target Fire considerably more important. So just because a unit isn't very heavy on the positioning side doesn't make it not Mech, IMO, as long as it is balanced by being heavy on the Target Fire side. Hellions are 50/50 between positioning and target fire. Tanks favor the positioning aspect, and Thors favor the target fire aspect. There are situations for all 3 units where one Tactic is far more important than the other. I think this balance among the units is something we definitely see in HotS. While Widow Mines are literally all positioning, the Warhound is, or appears to be, 100% target fire. I don't think it is even up for debate whether or not High Level players will be turning off auto-cast on Warhounds to pick out Immortals and Siege Tanks and ignore Sentries, Stalkers, and Hellions. The unit will be almost all about target firing key units. So while I understand the complaint that it has no positioning and thus isn't a true Mech unit, I do not think that is what Mech is all about anymore. Like it or not.
I sort of agree with this and yet disagree at the same time. Mech is quite hard to define as of now, is it a style or is it just a composition? As a style, tanks play a very central role and Mech is very focused on positional play. On the other hand, if you say it is a composition, then styles like warhound hellion in HoTS or Thor Banshee Hellion in WoL is also considered mech. The problem is now that units function differently and the tank is weak compared to other, stronger mechanical units, it seems mech isnt one cohesive composition AND style together, it's split.
Anyway, on a different point I think in all three match ups where you choose to engage is very important. Less so in TvT but along the lines of TvP and TvZ its very important. For example, in TvZ if they get a huge surround with mass roaches you could get crushed while if you get a great position on a ramp or something similar, you could utterly destroy them. In TvP its very similar, if they get a huge concave or flank with immortals and chargelots, you'll get screwed over and if you get a narrow choke, you'll destroy him. I think mech really hinges on harassing a lot with hellions to distract the enemy while u get bases and a critical mass of tanks. once u get that critical mass of tanks and upgrades, you can push and destroy your opponent. Either that or you could somehow just expand on certain maps and match with eco and do some huge one punch push that hits a certain timing with like 2/1 upgrades and hit that timing window and obliterate everything. I think probably though, choosing when to mech and when to bio and on what maps will be important to learn if you want to mech at a very high level of play.
|
Yoshi, what do you feel about Hellion's place in TvZ matchup. I mean, obviously to take out lings/harass but how much do you generally have? When I play TvZ Mech, I always don't feel good about my unit composition.
|
They're for defending thors from lings and broodlings and scouting zerg's composition letting you make the right units in your next production cycle.
|
http://drop.sc/239454
can someone help me out here?
I played really poorly, and I'm not too sure how to stop him from getting such a huge bank.
My mindset during this was actually that I felt like I was either even or ahead for a good deal of the game, but when I pushed with BC's/Thors/Tanks, and found that I got crushed with the remax in Corruptors, I was just like oh. I went back and saw the replay and saw that his bank was like 2-3x bigger than mine ever was.
I shouldn't have sacced the scvs, and probably should've made more CC's and harassed more. Also I could've been much better with upgrades and maybe included ravens since he clumped up a LOT of his corruptors.
However, if a Zerg expands as heavily as he did, with spines, how do I go about stopping that?
On August 17 2012 02:08 Nightmarjoo wrote:
They're for defending thors from lings and broodlings and scouting zerg's composition letting you make the right units in your next production cycle.
thanks. I think I always have too many hellions
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
I think I've finally found the way I can feel safe against broodlord switches. I mean I always usually hold them off anyway, but what I've started to do is when I get my first starport I just start building and hiding vikings. It doesn't take up too much supply and I stop at about 10-11 then add on starports when i get my fourth. Seemed to work like a charm this last game and I switched into a lot of ravens.
EDIT: Could anyone take a look at this replay and see if I can do anything to end the game quicker? I knew I had the game won due to my positioning but he wouldn't attack in to me and I knew it'd be incredibly dangerous to attack in to him. It eventually ended with me switching to BCs and Vikings since he massed Blink stalkers and void rays, but since he wouldn't attack into me it kind of stale mated. I knew with his warp gates that if I attacked in and lost a single battle I'd lose the game so did everything I could do try and avoid that happening, but it took ages.
I don't mind games like this, but is there anything I can do with any units to maybe force a fight without losing my positioning?
http://drop.sc/239576
|
On August 17 2012 02:23 Chaggi wrote:http://drop.sc/239454can someone help me out here? I played really poorly, and I'm not too sure how to stop him from getting such a huge bank. My mindset during this was actually that I felt like I was either even or ahead for a good deal of the game, but when I pushed with BC's/Thors/Tanks, and found that I got crushed with the remax in Corruptors, I was just like oh. I went back and saw the replay and saw that his bank was like 2-3x bigger than mine ever was. I shouldn't have sacced the scvs, and probably should've made more CC's and harassed more. Also I could've been much better with upgrades and maybe included ravens since he clumped up a LOT of his corruptors. However, if a Zerg expands as heavily as he did, with spines, how do I go about stopping that? Show nested quote +On August 17 2012 02:08 Nightmarjoo wrote:
They're for defending thors from lings and broodlings and scouting zerg's composition letting you make the right units in your next production cycle. thanks. I think I always have too many hellions
Mostly bad macro. From early on you missed depots and didn't use your factories constantly. You never expo'd yourself. Suiciding your banshees made preventing his expos impossible. If hellions can't kill drones, use nukes. A few banshee could help kill expos too.
On August 17 2012 06:17 Qikz wrote:I think I've finally found the way I can feel safe against broodlord switches. I mean I always usually hold them off anyway, but what I've started to do is when I get my first starport I just start building and hiding vikings. It doesn't take up too much supply and I stop at about 10-11 then add on starports when i get my fourth. Seemed to work like a charm this last game and I switched into a lot of ravens. EDIT: Could anyone take a look at this replay and see if I can do anything to end the game quicker? I knew I had the game won due to my positioning but he wouldn't attack in to me and I knew it'd be incredibly dangerous to attack in to him. It eventually ended with me switching to BCs and Vikings since he massed Blink stalkers and void rays, but since he wouldn't attack into me it kind of stale mated. I knew with his warp gates that if I attacked in and lost a single battle I'd lose the game so did everything I could do try and avoid that happening, but it took ages. I don't mind games like this, but is there anything I can do with any units to maybe force a fight without losing my positioning? http://drop.sc/239576
You could've made good units before 40 minutes.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
By good units do you mean the air switch? I'm always really apprehensive about making the switch to air as sometimes I just die when I do it. x_x
|
|
|
I mean units that aren't tanks and vikings. You just sat on 35 tanks and did nothing. If he went carrier you'd lose an expo or two and a fair amount of tanks before you pumped vikings out, then he'd laugh and storm them and/or kill with archon/stalker. You couldn't defend your vikings with tanks because carriers are far more mobile. Just making more turrets isn't an answer either because he can just run zlots into them and your tanks will kill them. I don't consider mass tank viable tvp, which is why so many terrans think mech can't work: they're just massing tanks.
|
Just want to say, in the recent and still going IEM, they have already released replay packs. There are some TvT mech and TvZ mechby Mvp. No TvP mech so far im afraid.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On August 17 2012 10:00 Nightmarjoo wrote:
I mean units that aren't tanks and vikings. You just sat on 35 tanks and did nothing. If he went carrier you'd lose an expo or two and a fair amount of tanks before you pumped vikings out, then he'd laugh and storm them and/or kill with archon/stalker. You couldn't defend your vikings with tanks because carriers are far more mobile. Just making more turrets isn't an answer either because he can just run zlots into them and your tanks will kill them. I don't consider mass tank viable tvp, which is why so many terrans think mech can't work: they're just massing tanks.
I've been going tank/hellion for the past couple of days or so and I've been winning most of my games (usually losing to all ins early on if I fuck up). I like that style because unless they go carriers I can usually get away with splitting the map like that, the only problem I have is when it comes to actually pushing in. Carriers for some reason don't actually seem to much of a problem as since I don't need to mule as much I can get a way with scanning more often to make sure he's not switching in to carriers. When he does I just try and go for thors/vikings after sacking as much supply as I can, but I don't really like giving up my high tank count as that's what keeps me alive from his large amounts of warp ins I've found.
What units would you suggest throwing in instead then?
|
Obviously I suggest playing the way I do. I use my style because I believe it's the best way to play. If there was something better, I'd switch to it. Feel free to keep doing what you're doing, but I believe it'll hold you back eventually. I don't know how seriously you take starcraft, so for all I know you'll never hit that point and don't need to worry about it at all. For example though, by 30-40 minutes in when all you have is a gigantic tank line that can't do anything, I'm maxed with a healthy bc and ghost count that allows me to start whittling away at protoss and probing for mistakes to end the game by.
|
United Kingdom12022 Posts
On August 18 2012 02:04 Nightmarjoo wrote:
Obviously I suggest playing the way I do. I use my style because I believe it's the best way to play. If there was something better, I'd switch to it. Feel free to keep doing what you're doing, but I believe it'll hold you back eventually. I don't know how seriously you take starcraft, so for all I know you'll never hit that point and don't need to worry about it at all. For example though, by 30-40 minutes in when all you have is a gigantic tank line that can't do anything, I'm maxed with a healthy bc and ghost count that allows me to start whittling away at protoss and probing for mistakes to end the game by.
Have you got any of your replays from recent games that go that long? I'd really like to see how/when you transition into BC and I'll admit that game I linked I usually get ghosts but after 1 I kind of forgot about it as I'm playing around with my production hotkeys atm. x_x
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
