|
On January 28 2013 10:10 kollin wrote:
No I think we disagree. I'm saying in every other matchup, mech is essentially the same as it was in BW, but not TvP because people build thors which despite being mechanical units do not fit in with the underlying concept of the mech army.
...underlying concept of mech. As in what people think...which is an opinion. Just because it doesn't fit into what you call mech....it's mech. What does that litttttttle adjective under the thor attack and armor levels say...?
MECHANICAL
Stop the trivial "this isn't mech" arguments.
|
Sigh i need to explain something as allot of people i guess are just dumb. My build is meant for a TIMING to hit vs protoss I AM NOT saying build thors all game, nor am i saying don't build tanks. This build ALLOWS you the time to build your 3rd upgrades and most importantly ghost tech. The attack hits very strong and can kill the 3rd or his entire army allot of the time. The first push delays his economy and more importantly and chance of him attacking you any time because he has to rebuild his army and his tech before he does that. Also allot of people saying lol 2 base all in. It can be a 2 base all in if you identify that he is going to die to the push and just reinforce hellions and tanks(fast build times). However you can always just throw couple off cc's, a 2nd armory and start pumping tanks and more fac's. and most importantly get some ghosts out. Remember the point of the thors is to snipe obs and to strike cannon immortals, which tanks can't do. I'm not saying don't build tanks im saying start off with thors then transition later. Hope the clears up any confusion.
|
Thank you for insulting me in the first sentence of your post. That is quite appreciated. I realise what your build is and what you intend it to be. However, it is a 2 base all in, as if you do not do a huge amount of economical damage to your opponent you lose. You cannot reinforce with tanks because the armor upgrade is bad on them, and you don't have siege mode. You cannot reinforce with thors because building 2 a minute will be insta death to a counter attack from Protoss. So what can you reinforce with? Nothing, because you screwed yourself over after all inning and not winning.
In response to iAmJeffrey, mech is a concept not a label and should be treated as a concept and nothing else.
|
Ok sorry kolling if that came across to you but its not only to you its to everyone. Also sorry i said that, that was kinda stupid. Anyway the point you made about potential counter attacks can be true however this timing is so strong that allot of the time they simply don't have the army to counter attack even if they do hold it. And more importantly if identify that he going to counter attack you can research siege and get tanks and make a sim city while you counter attack with hellions and banshees. This will for sure cause huge eco loss for him. if he pulled back good you have the time to stabilize. if he goes in for the kill you can lift your 3rd and just mass repair your super sim city with tanks behind them. even if you loss allot you should ok because of the counter attack damage you caused so much eco loss. And dont forget its very hard for the protoss player to have a army to destroy mine at the 14:30 mark its just physicaly impossible to have eco/tech/army at the same time you can only have 2 of the 3 and in each case you can kill most of his army. Hope that helps and sorry for being kind of defensive
|
So after your attack, you have the money to double expand, add on production an armory a barracks a ghost academy as well as sim city, after you just killed some of your SCV's on 2 bases. That doesn't seem likely. Furthermore, at the 14:30 mark a Protoss can quite easily have a sizeable immortal archon army, which you may not be able to engage if the Protoss isn't dumb and microes correctly.
|
On January 28 2013 10:48 iAmJeffReY wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2013 10:10 kollin wrote:
No I think we disagree. I'm saying in every other matchup, mech is essentially the same as it was in BW, but not TvP because people build thors which despite being mechanical units do not fit in with the underlying concept of the mech army. ...underlying concept of mech. As in what people think...which is an opinion. Just because it doesn't fit into what you call mech....it's mech. What does that litttttttle adjective under the thor attack and armor levels say...? MECHANICAL Stop the trivial "this isn't mech" arguments.
I agree with you. I'm sick and tired of this. MECH has always meant factory units -- even for you BW fans. What is so hard to understand about it? And if you cannot except that -- stop claiming that your opinion is official, because I don't believe Blizzard ever said anything about what is mech and what isn't.
(Now just a quick note: because of the mechanical unit status in SC2, there is a newer but less common meaning that mech = factory/starport, though I don't agree with changing the term that way because you wouldn't call Colossi nor Sentries mech...)
Here's a very simple argument:
Bio in SC1 and SC2 are different.
Mech in SC1 and SC2 are different.
Do you still call bio in SC2 bio? Yes.
Should you call mech in SC2 mech? Yes.
Do bio and mech still fit their rough opposite concepts of "fast, mobile, weak" and "slow, immobile, strong"? Yes.
Are Goliaths Tanks? No.
Are Thors Tanks? No.
Are Goliaths a mech unit? Yes. Are they a tank? No.
Are Thors a mech unit? Yes. Are they a tank? No.
Other random stuff: Bio can be played both like... bio, but it can also be more positional. Look at Bomber's TvZ marine tank for example. He turtles and plays like a mech player. Is this mech? No, it's positional bio play that has similarities to mech.
Mech can be played like bio... AKA thor based compositions. It's more mobile than tanks, but it's still immobile, slow, and strong, and although much less positional than a tank, it has positional usage in situations that bio units do not. Does this mean you suddenly call this bio...?
Mech is the entire factory tech tree and any combination of strategy/composition within that tech tree. I don't see what's so hard to understand? Tank heavy mech play isn't the only way to play mech, similar to as how harassing and dropping everywhere isn't the only way to play bio.
|
On January 29 2013 08:12 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +On January 28 2013 10:48 iAmJeffReY wrote:On January 28 2013 10:10 kollin wrote:
No I think we disagree. I'm saying in every other matchup, mech is essentially the same as it was in BW, but not TvP because people build thors which despite being mechanical units do not fit in with the underlying concept of the mech army. ...underlying concept of mech. As in what people think...which is an opinion. Just because it doesn't fit into what you call mech....it's mech. What does that litttttttle adjective under the thor attack and armor levels say...? MECHANICAL Stop the trivial "this isn't mech" arguments. I agree with you. I'm sick and tired of this. MECH has always meant factory units -- even for you BW fans. What is so hard to understand about it? And if you cannot except that -- stop claiming that your opinion is official, because I don't believe Blizzard ever said anything about what is mech and what isn't. (Now just a quick note: because of the mechanical unit status in SC2, there is a newer but less common meaning that mech = factory/starport, though I don't agree with changing the term that way because you wouldn't call Colossi nor Sentries mech...) Here's a very simple argument: Bio in SC1 and SC2 are different. Mech in SC1 and SC2 are different. Do you still call bio in SC2 bio? Yes. Should you call mech in SC2 mech? Yes. Do bio and mech still fit their rough opposite concepts of "fast, mobile, weak" and "slow, immobile, strong"? Yes. Are Goliaths Tanks? No. Are Thors Tanks? No. Are Goliaths a mech unit? Yes. Are they a tank? No. Are Thors a mech unit? Yes. Are they a tank? No.
Mech always meant factory units in BW, a game in which every single factory unit had its own specific role and could be clearly identified from every single other unit in the terran arsenal. Bio in BW and SC2 aren't that different, admittedly you don't have the marauder but apart from that the same concept of marines and then healing units and the ghosts (science vessels in BW) still applies. Goliaths are a mech unit because they require the Charon Boosters upgrade to be good. When you d have it, you have to know how to position your goliaths or you die. You have to know how to position your tanks and your spider mines, or you die. In Starcraft 2, mech has apparently turned into A-move your blob of unmicroeable death into mine and we will see who wins.
EDIT: Out of interest, what positional based tactics can you do with a thor?
|
Also, Bomber's TvZ is centred around hitting timing attacks and then sending wave after wave of units at his opponent until he breaks through. That is not 'mech-like' that is efficiently executing a timing and then using the advantages of bio, fast reinforce time, to keep going with your aggression.
|
What kind of arbitrary requirement or rule is that? That Goliaths are mech and not thors simply because goliaths have an upgrade in the factory tech tree? What if I were to say that I think goliaths aren't mech units because I think requiring an armory is more tech heavy than a goliath needing to upgrade charon booster?
You say bio isn't that different, that's not the point. The point is that it IS different.
Again -- there are different styles for both bio and mech in SC2. And you say mech is unmicroeable, which is untrue. When you exaggerate and leave out so many details, it's impossible to properly discuss anything. I think we can all agree that all units are microeable and that you should always micro them to the best potential if you want to win. Even a bio player who is very ahead can just A-move, does that mean that bio isn't bio anymore because they won the game through A-moving and not dropping and harassing?
About Bomber's TvZ -- it's not EXACTLY like BW tank heavy mech. You cannot be EXACTLY the same -- it's all subjective. I'm not saying he's playing exactly like BW mech, but rather there are qualities that are attributed to either Bio or Mech (or both), and Bomber's play is just one example that mixes qualities from both tech trees. Some qualities of why Bomber's TvZ has aspects similar to mech for example -- it's very turtley and defensive, instead of relying on microing a bunch of units in small numbers. He relies more on t he positioning of the attack, and sieging up, similar to mech, as positioning for mech is more important than the actual battle micro (nothing much you can do besides target fire).
About Thors -- for example, splitting them up against blings or spreading them around to cover your tanks from Mutalisks. Now, for the banelings, I'm being serious -- if you remember Nada vs Nestea on bel'shir beach, Nada clumped up all his units for a brief period and Nestea saw that and killed him with mass banelings, regardless of all the blue flame hellions in front of Nada's Thors. Going back even further, Boxer vs Zenio on Terminus -- he avoided this fate by splitting up his Thors and moving them forward carefully. This was before BL/inefstor was super popular as it is now, and they still used bling/ling/muta often with roach/infestor support.
|
Your arguments have stopped making sense. You don't even know what you are talking about in regards to BW mech and clearly did not read what I wrote, and if you did failed to comprehend it. My first, and rather irrelevant point would be goliaths did need an armory to be built. Next, thors do not require any positioning and you still have not provided an example where they do. Goliaths did because they were a bit squishy and had a weak ground attack.
You say bio isn't that different, that's not the point. The point is that it IS different
I'm not quite sure what you mean here, I counteracted what you said and you seem to respond b saying 'No that's wrong' without using evidence or reasoning to back up that claim.
If we take what you say as true, that an army comprised of only thors is a mech army, then it is unmicroeable, apart from Strike Cannons which are useless against everything other than immortals anyway. The standard tank hellion style of mech does not require a great deal of micro, yes some, but not much as it is more about positioning more than anything else. Finally, what makes bio what it is is not that you have to micro in a fight. It is that you have to be the aggressor most of the time, the one who is dodging in and out poking holes in your opponent until you can break through, using quick reinforce time to help you do that.
|
Whatever, this argument is not worth it, you have your opinion I have mine. Good night.
|
Yes, but an armory in SC1 and SC2 are different -- for example, in SC2 it is more expensive. And all the other differences in the game. What I was saying with that little part is that you can't compare the game 1:1.
My point regarding bio being different, is not saying you are wrong. Also you did not counter my point at all. You said it's not very different, which means it IS different. Therefore you are in agreement with me, and the rest of my logic (for now) is true.
Basically that argument was saying that you cannot (objectively) say that mass thors are not mech since they are factory units. It's like a double standard, saying that "bio is different, but barracks heavy comps are still bio in SC2" while you're making mass thors an exception.
My evidence or reasoning? That was in the rest of my argument.
Again maybe it's just because I was editing my post, I have provided examples where Thors have been micro'd. Also there is no way you can claim that Thors, a unit that is controllable by a player, is not microeable. And if you are exaggerating, that really doesn't help discussions.
I am not defining bio solely by the micro in fights. However, the emphasis (due to limit of time) for bio is placed more heavily on the micro in fights, while the emphasis for mech is more on the positioning. For example, siege tanks sieged late or in the wrong spot can be really really hurtful, while it's not so bad with bio. Exactly as you say, tank hellion style is more about positioning.
Might I also add that bio did not even work lategame in SC1? Therefore, tvp bio in SC2 is quite different from tvp bio in SC1. Do you still consider tvp bio in SC2 to be bio?
|
Yes it did work late game SK Terran in TvZ. I am actually exhausted so that's the only thing I can be bothered to say ^^
|
I said TvP not TvZ haha, but ok goodnight z66
After reading some of the earlier comments:
For immortal busts, can't you simply defend with mass repair + 5 bunkers and focus down immortals with banshees?
Regarding 6 gate, I thought it was commonly believed that a expand (gasless or with gas) can defend with 2 thors + bunkers in time? Because back then MVP would always do some sort of 111 expand or expand into 111 into 222 build TvP. Also if he's doing a super early all-in 6 gate you can tell by his probe count, and should be able to adjust by going either tanks or thors or just making a loot of bunkers, etc.
(might need to adapt and get thors out before banshees or cut hellions, etc.)
|
Ok final, final comment. I promise. TvP bio was never viable unless as some weird one base all in that hasnt worked for years anyway.
|
I appreciate you all for debating this in here. I learned a lot just by reading your comments. Thank you all.
For me. I don't think it matters what mech play means. But I like new type of strategies that are different from the current meta game. I personally like Marine+Tank composition vs protoss. Add some banshees into that now and then. I especially like the Siege tank + marine push from 2 base.
From what I have read. The only thing I like thors for is the strike cannon against immortals. It actually kills the immortal with +1 armor (it also kills a colossus with +1 armor). I found that quite interesting.
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
What happens if you just feedback thors?
You don't seem to be understanding what people mean by no tanks btw, they are talking about the tank being the basis of mech, the basis of your composition is Thor banshee and whilst yes it is mechanical, It doesn't fulfill the concept of mech play. It would better be summed up by factory play.
Not to detract from the build, I'm sure it works, but it's not true mech in what most people believe.
|
I don't understand why people care about if it is called mech or whatever you want to call it. It doesn't matter. The build is still the same.
Feedback removes energy and damages the thors.
|
Could this build defend all in's? or rather, what would happen if you scout 2 gas? how would you try and defend stuff that might come out of 2 gas (blink stalkers, void ray's etc)
|
United Kingdom14103 Posts
On January 29 2013 23:11 KAB00000000M wrote:
I don't understand why people care about if it is called mech or whatever you want to call it. It doesn't matter. The build is still the same.
Feedback removes energy and damages the thors.
I know what feedback does, I'm interested in what happens if you go up against someone who got ht instead of colossi first. They would be able to feedback both thors and banshees.
The reason people care about it being mech or not is because people came here expecting a mech build, which this, by traditional ideas of mech, is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
