This may or may not address anything you want to know, but it's something I posted in the lyyna thread which touches on the difference between bio and mech in my understanding:
On July 31 2012 03:36 Nightmarjoo wrote: I'm not familiar with what he advises, but I'm inclined to suggest improving your fundamentals with bio before trying to learn mech. Bionic play is very mechanical in nature (player-mechanics) With bio it almost doesn't matter if you're doing the right or wrong thing as long as you're doing it fast. Your units are powerful but flimsy, requiring good attention and control to get the most out of them. Succeeding in gaining any level of mastery over bio will inevitably help your core mechanics as a whole. And you can get by in bio just by focusing on having efficient macro and active units.
In sharp contrast mech is much more decision-based than bio is. In tvz mech you'll have 3 techlab facts for a large percent of the game. The difference between making three thors and two thors and one tank with a production cycle could be the difference between losing horribly and winning decisively. When you complete a new CC you have to decide whether you can safely expand with it, giving you a new place to drop mules with the added requirement of more space to defend (more opportunities for your opponent to damage you), make an extra OC out of it for scanning and mule-dropping, or making a defensive PF out of it helping secure what you already have. Expanding when you can't hold that expansion is a huge waste of money, making an extra OC when you have no place to mule is a huge waste of money, and making an extra PF when you're running out of income is going to lose the game. Efficient macro isn't inherently good here if you aren't making the right thing. And often the bulk of your units aren't active, which makes getting the most out of the units which can be active far more imperative.
However, just getting to that point in the game where you have to make a decision, a choice based on your experience and the information you have specific to the game's scenario, requires good mechanics. You can't focus on your mechanics playing mech if you're losing by making poor choices, but you can't survive to learn how to make those decisions without decent mechanics. My standard tvz opening is cc first or 1rax cc into hellion/banshee. I use the hellion/banshee to scout my opponent, limit their creep spread (which effectively gives me time to react to anything), slow their economic and military growth by forcing them to use larvae replacing drones and lings instead of making new things to hurt me with, and to give me a safety net of force and distraction behind which I can secure my 3rd base allowing me to produce what I need to stay in the game. If you don't have the micro, macro, and multi-task to do all those tasks simultaneously, you're just going to lose to a single roach attack. And while you could try to develop those skills playing mech, you're better off doing so with bio imo. Being forced to multi-task like that with repetition and time will improve your multi-task, but only if you get there alive by knowing to make your bunker next to the cc instead of in part of your wall because you scouted his fast gas making a mass ling runby a possibility, and knowing to scan again at 6:30 to rule out the possibility of a roach all-in which would require you to make marauders with the rax-techlab and make the port-techlab with the port itself instead of floating to the rax techlab, etc etc.
I have no idea how viable it is to try to climb the ladder with mech. I started sc2 with the skill and experience playing bw competetively for 6 years yields and have been the equivalent of high masters since the beginning of beta. I played very nearly exclusively bio in sc2 until about last spring (except tvt, which I started meching in after mlg anaheim last year or so). Switching to mech was relatively easy for me once I came to understand the elementary decision making behind each matchup. I can't possibly say how easy or difficult that switch can be for someone at all relatively lacking in experience and skill.
Also with bio you have the huge advantage of being able to copy and mimic what progamers do. When you aren't sure how to handle a situation you can find replay or vod showing you the solution, or giving you a different build altogether to try out to avoid the scenario entirely, etc. With mech you mostly have to make up the answers for yourself since it isn't popular. Thus what games there are out there (and at whatever level) additionally include a great number of idiosyncrasies that you can't always copy for success. So if you choose mech, know that you do so at your own win% peril.
As for benchmarking economy, just compare income to necessary spending. I have games where my economy is just in shambles because I had to sack SCVs early to defend an attack, or to free up supply to adjust my composition safely to be able to stay in-game, etc, while having 10 OCs. You think, 10 orbitals? That's pretty good! But 10 OCs isn't good if I actually need 13 to support the constant production of everything I need, and thus I have no money and everything I choose to make is a potential game-ending hazard if I budgetted for the wrong thing (chose a BC when I needed a thor, etc).
Alllllllllll that being said, I think mech is wonderful style in each matchup, and that every terran should learn what they can about it to increase terran's strategic diversity as a whole across the world. If it turns out you can improve while learning mech, great! But if you choose this route, you may hit barriers forcing you to pause playing mech to improve your skill with bio.
On August 03 2012 01:53 dynwar7 wrote: Nice thread.
I have a question. Since there is no proper mech guide, as far as I know, is going 1 rax fe into 1-1-1 a good idea? My big confusion of mech is the addons....I dont know when to add what addons....the barrack is ready to make an addon, but what? Should I start TL for the factor for early tank for defending? Maybe yes, but after that, I want a reactor for my 2nd fact for hellions right? Then for my 3rd fact, I want another TL? And lastly when do I get reactor for viking production?
And of course, is there a general guide for mech, so that I can at least understand the gamestyle, positioning, understanding, because people say playing mech may mean less micro/apm however it requires decent understanding, strategies, positioning etc.
Going 1 rax fe into mech is fine but if you scout anything that might involve your opponent pressuring you, then you need a TL factory ASAP. That is why generally you should go for the TL factory first. When you are up to 3 factories you want 1 reactor and 2 tech labs. Unless you scout banshees or a 1/1/1 from your opponent you want to put the reactor on your star port straight away and pump Vikings. If you lose air superiority then it can be very hard to win as a mech player (though definitely possible with thors.
Heres some good mech guides from gfever a pretty good GM Terran.
This may or may not address anything you want to know, but it's something I posted in the lyyna thread which touches on the difference between bio and mech in my understanding:
On July 31 2012 03:36 Nightmarjoo wrote: I'm not familiar with what he advises, but I'm inclined to suggest improving your fundamentals with bio before trying to learn mech. Bionic play is very mechanical in nature (player-mechanics) With bio it almost doesn't matter if you're doing the right or wrong thing as long as you're doing it fast. Your units are powerful but flimsy, requiring good attention and control to get the most out of them. Succeeding in gaining any level of mastery over bio will inevitably help your core mechanics as a whole. And you can get by in bio just by focusing on having efficient macro and active units.
In sharp contrast mech is much more decision-based than bio is. In tvz mech you'll have 3 techlab facts for a large percent of the game. The difference between making three thors and two thors and one tank with a production cycle could be the difference between losing horribly and winning decisively. When you complete a new CC you have to decide whether you can safely expand with it, giving you a new place to drop mules with the added requirement of more space to defend (more opportunities for your opponent to damage you), make an extra OC out of it for scanning and mule-dropping, or making a defensive PF out of it helping secure what you already have. Expanding when you can't hold that expansion is a huge waste of money, making an extra OC when you have no place to mule is a huge waste of money, and making an extra PF when you're running out of income is going to lose the game. Efficient macro isn't inherently good here if you aren't making the right thing. And often the bulk of your units aren't active, which makes getting the most out of the units which can be active far more imperative.
However, just getting to that point in the game where you have to make a decision, a choice based on your experience and the information you have specific to the game's scenario, requires good mechanics. You can't focus on your mechanics playing mech if you're losing by making poor choices, but you can't survive to learn how to make those decisions without decent mechanics. My standard tvz opening is cc first or 1rax cc into hellion/banshee. I use the hellion/banshee to scout my opponent, limit their creep spread (which effectively gives me time to react to anything), slow their economic and military growth by forcing them to use larvae replacing drones and lings instead of making new things to hurt me with, and to give me a safety net of force and distraction behind which I can secure my 3rd base allowing me to produce what I need to stay in the game. If you don't have the micro, macro, and multi-task to do all those tasks simultaneously, you're just going to lose to a single roach attack. And while you could try to develop those skills playing mech, you're better off doing so with bio imo. Being forced to multi-task like that with repetition and time will improve your multi-task, but only if you get there alive by knowing to make your bunker next to the cc instead of in part of your wall because you scouted his fast gas making a mass ling runby a possibility, and knowing to scan again at 6:30 to rule out the possibility of a roach all-in which would require you to make marauders with the rax-techlab and make the port-techlab with the port itself instead of floating to the rax techlab, etc etc.
I have no idea how viable it is to try to climb the ladder with mech. I started sc2 with the skill and experience playing bw competetively for 6 years yields and have been the equivalent of high masters since the beginning of beta. I played very nearly exclusively bio in sc2 until about last spring (except tvt, which I started meching in after mlg anaheim last year or so). Switching to mech was relatively easy for me once I came to understand the elementary decision making behind each matchup. I can't possibly say how easy or difficult that switch can be for someone at all relatively lacking in experience and skill.
Also with bio you have the huge advantage of being able to copy and mimic what progamers do. When you aren't sure how to handle a situation you can find replay or vod showing you the solution, or giving you a different build altogether to try out to avoid the scenario entirely, etc. With mech you mostly have to make up the answers for yourself since it isn't popular. Thus what games there are out there (and at whatever level) additionally include a great number of idiosyncrasies that you can't always copy for success. So if you choose mech, know that you do so at your own win% peril.
As for benchmarking economy, just compare income to necessary spending. I have games where my economy is just in shambles because I had to sack SCVs early to defend an attack, or to free up supply to adjust my composition safely to be able to stay in-game, etc, while having 10 OCs. You think, 10 orbitals? That's pretty good! But 10 OCs isn't good if I actually need 13 to support the constant production of everything I need, and thus I have no money and everything I choose to make is a potential game-ending hazard if I budgetted for the wrong thing (chose a BC when I needed a thor, etc).
Alllllllllll that being said, I think mech is wonderful style in each matchup, and that every terran should learn what they can about it to increase terran's strategic diversity as a whole across the world. If it turns out you can improve while learning mech, great! But if you choose this route, you may hit barriers forcing you to pause playing mech to improve your skill with bio.
Wow that's a really good piece of advice. I remember messaging it to toastie but then he got banned T_T
http://drop.sc/packs/1269 Ok here're some more replays. It contains all of my wins in my current replay folder (which started sometime in June). Something like 133 terran games according to sc2gears. I didn't sort it at all, but it should be something like 95% mech. I don't claim that any of these games are necessarily good (or gm), but 99% are vs high masters or gm opponents. Some should be games that I've already uploaded, but whatever. Some are short, some are insanely long. Probably half of it is ladder, rest are customs, tournament, and/or clanwar matches.
The tvp games probably vary the most across time. Maybe stick to watching the more recent tvps to get an idea of what I think is viable for conventional play. The tvzs and tvts should be pretty similar across time.
On August 03 2012 02:55 Nightmarjoo wrote: http://drop.sc/packs/1269 Ok here're some more replays. It contains all of my wins in my current replay folder (which started sometime in June). Something like 133 terran games according to sc2gears. I didn't sort it at all, but it should be something like 95% mech. I don't claim that any of these games are necessarily good (or gm), but 99% are vs high masters or gm opponents. Some should be games that I've already uploaded, but whatever. Some are short, some are insanely long. Probably half of it is ladder, rest are customs and/or tournament matches.
The tvp games probably vary the most across time. Maybe stick to watching the more recent tvps to get an idea of what I think is viable for conventional play. The tvzs and tvts should be pretty similar across time.
If I get made OP these will definitely get included, thanks! :D
This may or may not address anything you want to know, but it's something I posted in the lyyna thread which touches on the difference between bio and mech in my understanding:
On July 31 2012 03:36 Nightmarjoo wrote: I'm not familiar with what he advises, but I'm inclined to suggest improving your fundamentals with bio before trying to learn mech. Bionic play is very mechanical in nature (player-mechanics) With bio it almost doesn't matter if you're doing the right or wrong thing as long as you're doing it fast. Your units are powerful but flimsy, requiring good attention and control to get the most out of them. Succeeding in gaining any level of mastery over bio will inevitably help your core mechanics as a whole. And you can get by in bio just by focusing on having efficient macro and active units.
In sharp contrast mech is much more decision-based than bio is. In tvz mech you'll have 3 techlab facts for a large percent of the game. The difference between making three thors and two thors and one tank with a production cycle could be the difference between losing horribly and winning decisively. When you complete a new CC you have to decide whether you can safely expand with it, giving you a new place to drop mules with the added requirement of more space to defend (more opportunities for your opponent to damage you), make an extra OC out of it for scanning and mule-dropping, or making a defensive PF out of it helping secure what you already have. Expanding when you can't hold that expansion is a huge waste of money, making an extra OC when you have no place to mule is a huge waste of money, and making an extra PF when you're running out of income is going to lose the game. Efficient macro isn't inherently good here if you aren't making the right thing. And often the bulk of your units aren't active, which makes getting the most out of the units which can be active far more imperative.
However, just getting to that point in the game where you have to make a decision, a choice based on your experience and the information you have specific to the game's scenario, requires good mechanics. You can't focus on your mechanics playing mech if you're losing by making poor choices, but you can't survive to learn how to make those decisions without decent mechanics. My standard tvz opening is cc first or 1rax cc into hellion/banshee. I use the hellion/banshee to scout my opponent, limit their creep spread (which effectively gives me time to react to anything), slow their economic and military growth by forcing them to use larvae replacing drones and lings instead of making new things to hurt me with, and to give me a safety net of force and distraction behind which I can secure my 3rd base allowing me to produce what I need to stay in the game. If you don't have the micro, macro, and multi-task to do all those tasks simultaneously, you're just going to lose to a single roach attack. And while you could try to develop those skills playing mech, you're better off doing so with bio imo. Being forced to multi-task like that with repetition and time will improve your multi-task, but only if you get there alive by knowing to make your bunker next to the cc instead of in part of your wall because you scouted his fast gas making a mass ling runby a possibility, and knowing to scan again at 6:30 to rule out the possibility of a roach all-in which would require you to make marauders with the rax-techlab and make the port-techlab with the port itself instead of floating to the rax techlab, etc etc.
I have no idea how viable it is to try to climb the ladder with mech. I started sc2 with the skill and experience playing bw competetively for 6 years yields and have been the equivalent of high masters since the beginning of beta. I played very nearly exclusively bio in sc2 until about last spring (except tvt, which I started meching in after mlg anaheim last year or so). Switching to mech was relatively easy for me once I came to understand the elementary decision making behind each matchup. I can't possibly say how easy or difficult that switch can be for someone at all relatively lacking in experience and skill.
Also with bio you have the huge advantage of being able to copy and mimic what progamers do. When you aren't sure how to handle a situation you can find replay or vod showing you the solution, or giving you a different build altogether to try out to avoid the scenario entirely, etc. With mech you mostly have to make up the answers for yourself since it isn't popular. Thus what games there are out there (and at whatever level) additionally include a great number of idiosyncrasies that you can't always copy for success. So if you choose mech, know that you do so at your own win% peril.
As for benchmarking economy, just compare income to necessary spending. I have games where my economy is just in shambles because I had to sack SCVs early to defend an attack, or to free up supply to adjust my composition safely to be able to stay in-game, etc, while having 10 OCs. You think, 10 orbitals? That's pretty good! But 10 OCs isn't good if I actually need 13 to support the constant production of everything I need, and thus I have no money and everything I choose to make is a potential game-ending hazard if I budgetted for the wrong thing (chose a BC when I needed a thor, etc).
Alllllllllll that being said, I think mech is wonderful style in each matchup, and that every terran should learn what they can about it to increase terran's strategic diversity as a whole across the world. If it turns out you can improve while learning mech, great! But if you choose this route, you may hit barriers forcing you to pause playing mech to improve your skill with bio.
Nicie guide , thank you.
You made a point regarding being offensive with mech or not, should I ? Or just play it safe and focus on defense in early game? The reason I ask is because I love banshees, so of course I will be doing 1 rax into 1/1/1 cloakshee. if I can pin the enemy in their base, then there is no need for such early tanks, right? On the other hand if I cannot utilize the banshees well, I better tl my fact and get siege ASAP?
EDIT: ALso what is your advice to avoid stalemate tank wars that goes 1 hour? Assuming its mech vs mech, how do you avoid this?
1rax cc into banshee isn't safe; it's a gamble. 1/1/1 banshee contain is fine if that's what you're talking about, but you need tanks at home for their inevitable drop. On that site is another guide I wrote on a gas first cloaked banshee build (which isn't an all-in) If you have to choose one or the other, stick to being defensive with core army and harass with hellion/banshee/nuke. Obviously the correct answer is somewhere in between. You need to build up your tank count. The only time you don't need fast tanks after expoing is vs 1rax cc, where it's ok to just make hellions for a bit while you add facts for map control.
If you're meching there's no need for a tank stalemate. Those only happen bio vs bio. You have air control and can push forward with either just good tank positioning or by using a banshee.
If the thread is remade, please include all the playxp replays I've listed. I don't know why toastie didn't put them in, it's not that hard to figure out how to download the replays (and I even explained it in a post o.o).
Ok guys Rich kindly gave me ownership of the thread. I can't edit it properly right this minute because I'm on my phone but I will do it as soon as I get to a proper computer.
On August 03 2012 15:06 Nightmarjoo wrote: They're over a year old...
I can see why he didn't include them then. But even with nerfs like emp or BFH, the gorapadong build is still used and, with so few mech replays, (especially TvP) why not include it? I don't think it would hurt to put it into an "older" section like Toastie did. You can still learn a lot, even if the maps are different and the metagame has changed (as the strategy can be and is still used on maps with similar features by GSL players and is executed with barely any differences). You can learn positioning, unit counters, what not to do as protoss, etc. etc. The important part is that you can learn from them; you don't need to copy when looking at a replay. It's a mech resources thread, so those who want to only study new replays can do that if they wish. Otherwise, would we really remove from the OP? Maybe it could be useful for anyone in the future who wants to look back. It would be easy to just copy and paste the links into an "old" subcategory, as Toastie did. By looking at the replay files, you can tell how old they are and if you want to watch them before loading them up.
So 1 rax fe into banshee is not safe? I thought that by using that banshee, I can harass AND scout if the enemy is going for early aggression. If they are, then I go quick tank, if not , then pump more banshees?
On August 03 2012 18:50 dynwar7 wrote: So 1 rax fe into banshee is not safe? I thought that by using that banshee, I can harass AND scout if the enemy is going for early aggression. If they are, then I go quick tank, if not , then pump more banshees?
What is your opener for mech in TvT, night?
1 rax fe into banshee TvT isn't a good idea. If he is going for anything faintly aggressive (marine hellion drop would be a good example here) ,then you could well lose straight up. It's better to go for something like banshee expand or reactor hellion expand, because it's a lot safer.
On August 03 2012 18:50 dynwar7 wrote: So 1 rax fe into banshee is not safe? I thought that by using that banshee, I can harass AND scout if the enemy is going for early aggression. If they are, then I go quick tank, if not , then pump more banshees?
What is your opener for mech in TvT, night?
1 rax fe into banshee TvT isn't a good idea. If he is going for anything faintly aggressive (marine hellion drop would be a good example here) ,then you could well lose straight up. It's better to go for something like banshee expand or reactor hellion expand, because it's a lot safer.
Agreed, especially on the korean server they often 1 base (like 111). I watched rainbow's stream a lot and he almost always opened 111. Even his opponents (many notable GSL players) would open 111 as well. They play very aggressively and know how to kill you. I like to 1 rax fe into siege tanks + vikings asap (so basically 1 rax expand into 111). It's flexible and can defend the common kinds of builds, but you can still lose (they may be better at micro than you, you may mess up, or the map is good for the opponent's 1 base strategy, etc.)
Could you please change my stream link to http://fr.twitch.tv/lyyna? Actually the stream the op found is a very very old one used only for some tests, and as i'm starting to stream again . . ^^(first one soon btw)
EPT
