EPTTvP Mech still not viable? - Page 44
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
GinDo
3327 Posts
| ||
|
Insoleet
France1806 Posts
- A tank doing more damages - But which would take more time to siege up And with the new tools involved in HOTS (vipers and tempest and carriers micro and blink and speedlot...), its obviously a very good buff for the whole game. | ||
|
p1cKLes
United States342 Posts
On December 19 2012 03:50 GinDo wrote: The problem is that tanks just have 2 many weaknesses for a 3 food unit. There expensive, slow, have a min range, and a setup time, and have a little more hp then a maruader. Not to mention the dmg nerf Agreed. I think it all boils down to one unit, the tank. | ||
|
Shox85
Germany33 Posts
| ||
|
RanDomFox
United States84 Posts
no one excluding Sea when he beat Naniwa with mech in game 2 of IPL5 | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
| ||
|
Rabiator
Germany3948 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:03 p1cKLes wrote: Agreed. I think it all boils down to one unit, the tank. I think you are running into the wrong direction here ... because the tank WITH its many weaknesses is one of the best designed (=most interesting) units of the game. Thats why we go on about it so much. Most of the other SC2 units only have advantages and not really any weaknesses; the worst "weakness" is maybe the Immortals sluggishness, but thats about it. So the point rather should be that there are too few units with interesting weaknesses in the game and that Blizzard simply tries to make the game more more MORE dynamic by streamlining everything for a smooth ride while just keeping the tank (and the Carrier) for the old BW enthusiasts to keep them quiet, but with not a lot of intention of actually trying to make them work (because that would interfere with their slick and smooth super units abilities and general game mechanics) ... which is why they didnt change anything yet to make these two units more viable (the microing change to the Carrier only marginally improves them). In BW the core ranged Infantry unit of the Zerg ... the Hydralisk ... dealt explosive damage, thus 100% damage to large units, 75% to medium sized units and only 50% to small ones. Look at the Hydralisk and the Roach in SC2 ... flat damage against everything. Boring and too flexible IMO and thus too good. The Terran Marine of BW had flat damage, BUT it was weak due to the relative weakness of the individual unit and only gained power when it was paired with a decent number of Medics and grouped up in bigger numbers ... which was NOT EASY (but that was kinda the point that it wasnt supposed to be easy to control). Handling any number of units in SC2 is no problem and they even put a button to select all combat units into the game. How far can this game go down the wrong way? http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zerg_Unit_Statistics ---- Dear Blizzard, please balance the POWER of a unit with sufficient DRAWBACKS to make them interesting and the handling of a unit can be one of those drawbacks for massed units! I know you wont change the right things, but here goes anyways ... A pessimist who likes being proved wrong. | ||
|
dUTtrOACh
Canada2339 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:31 Rabiator wrote: I think you are running into the wrong direction here ... because the tank WITH its many weaknesses is one of the best designed (=most interesting) units of the game. Thats why we go on about it so much. Most of the other SC2 units only have advantages and not really any weaknesses; the worst "weakness" is maybe the Immortals sluggishness, but thats about it. So the point rather should be that there are too few units with interesting weaknesses in the game and that Blizzard simply tries to make the game more more MORE dynamic by streamlining everything for a smooth ride while just keeping the tank (and the Carrier) for the old BW enthusiasts to keep them quiet, but with not a lot of intention of actually trying to make them work (because that would interfere with their slick and smooth super units abilities and general game mechanics) ... which is why they didnt change anything yet to make these two units more viable (the microing change to the Carrier only marginally improves them). In BW the core ranged Infantry unit of the Zerg ... the Hydralisk ... dealt explosive damage, thus 100% damage to large units, 75% to medium sized units and only 50% to small ones. Look at the Hydralisk and the Roach in SC2 ... flat damage against everything. Boring and too flexible IMO and thus too good. The Terran Marine of BW had flat damage, BUT it was weak due to the relative weakness of the individual unit and only gained power when it was paired with a decent number of Medics and grouped up in bigger numbers ... which was NOT EASY (but that was kinda the point that it wasnt supposed to be easy to control). Handling any number of units in SC2 is no problem and they even put a button to select all combat units into the game. How far can this game go down the wrong way? http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zerg_Unit_Statistics ---- Dear Blizzard, please balance the POWER of a unit with sufficient DRAWBACKS to make them interesting and the handling of a unit can be one of those drawbacks for massed units! I know you wont change the right things, but here goes anyways ... A pessimist who likes being proved wrong. Couldn't have said it better myself. Too much focus on strengths and too much of a disconnect from Broodwar's unit design is hurting eSports. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16090 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:03 p1cKLes wrote: Agreed. I think it all boils down to one unit, the tank. It actually boils down to two units. The Tank itself in a vacuum while not as powerful as its Brood War counter part would be ok vs Protoss if it wasn't for one glaring problem. Immortals. Ok so, Protoss needed a Siege Breaker unit to help vs Tank lines after seeing the match up from Brood War. Well in HoTS Protoss now has TWO siege breaker units: The Immortal and the Tempest and the Tempest fills that role in a much more interesting less of a face smashing way. There's no longer any need for the Immortal to be as strong vs the Siege Tank as it currently is. The Mothership Core prevents the 1-1-1 from ever having the power it once did and the Tempest provides Protoss a late game answer to Siege Tanks the same way Broodlords do. The Immortal isn't a problem ONLY because it counters Tanks though, Ultralisks do also in much the same way. But Ultralisks can be defeated by one of the Siege Tank's chief running mates: the Thor. That doesn't work in TvP because the Thor hardly fares any better vs the Immortal than the Siege Tank does. You have in the Immortal a ground unit that is effectively so powerful vs both of the core Mech units (both of which cost as much or more than it does) that it completely removes any reason for wanting to build them in the first place. | ||
|
p1cKLes
United States342 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:31 Rabiator wrote: While I do agree, the OP is asking the question is mech still viable? Specifically in TvP. I think the heart of the problem is the Tank closely followed by the Immortal. What the solution looks like, I'm not necessarily saying. Whether it's creating a unique weaknesses to the Immortal or buffing the tank somehow, I'm not sure. The are probably numerous ways to address this.I think you are running into the wrong direction here ... because the tank WITH its many weaknesses is one of the best designed (=most interesting) units of the game. Thats why we go on about it so much. Most of the other SC2 units only have advantages and not really any weaknesses; the worst "weakness" is maybe the Immortals sluggishness, but thats about it. So the point rather should be that there are too few units with interesting weaknesses in the game and that Blizzard simply tries to make the game more more MORE dynamic by streamlining everything for a smooth ride while just keeping the tank (and the Carrier) for the old BW enthusiasts to keep them quiet, but with not a lot of intention of actually trying to make them work (because that would interfere with their slick and smooth super units abilities and general game mechanics) ... which is why they didnt change anything yet to make these two units more viable (the microing change to the Carrier only marginally improves them). In BW the core ranged Infantry unit of the Zerg ... the Hydralisk ... dealt explosive damage, thus 100% damage to large units, 75% to medium sized units and only 50% to small ones. Look at the Hydralisk and the Roach in SC2 ... flat damage against everything. Boring and too flexible IMO and thus too good. The Terran Marine of BW had flat damage, BUT it was weak due to the relative weakness of the individual unit and only gained power when it was paired with a decent number of Medics and grouped up in bigger numbers ... which was NOT EASY (but that was kinda the point that it wasnt supposed to be easy to control). Handling any number of units in SC2 is no problem and they even put a button to select all combat units into the game. How far can this game go down the wrong way? http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft/Zerg_Unit_Statistics ---- Dear Blizzard, please balance the POWER of a unit with sufficient DRAWBACKS to make them interesting and the handling of a unit can be one of those drawbacks for massed units! I know you wont change the right things, but here goes anyways ... A pessimist who likes being proved wrong. If we are looking at the bigger picture and questioning the overall design, then I tend to agree with your answer. I think there are numerous people including QXC and OneGroup who are very much of the same opinion. | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:51 p1cKLes wrote: While I do agree, the OP is asking the question is mech still viable? Specifically in TvP. I think the heart of the problem is the Tank closely followed by the Immortal. What the solution looks like, I'm not necessarily saying. Whether it's creating a unique weaknesses to the Immortal or buffing the tank somehow, I'm not sure. The are probably numerous ways to address this. If we are looking at the bigger picture and questioning the overall design, then I tend to agree with your answer. I think there are numerous people including QXC and OneGroup who are very much of the same opinion. Wrong thread. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:27 RanDomFox wrote: mech is viable vs p. no one has found out the right way yet, and no one really tries. no one excluding Sea when he beat Naniwa with mech in game 2 of IPL5 Mech is viable when the opponent plays like he's never seen mech in his life before. | ||
|
pmp10
3349 Posts
On December 19 2012 04:27 Everlong wrote: Preview off the new patch doesnt touch TvP mech, so I guess we can close this thread lol.. But it did. Weaker widow mine direct damage makes them weaker against stalkers and voidrays. Holding blink all-ins will become even more difficult for meching terran. | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16090 Posts
On December 19 2012 05:14 avilo wrote: Mech is viable when the opponent plays like he's never seen mech in his life before. I've lost count of the number of times Naniwa has just up and died to Hellions in televised matches. Marineking, MVP, Keen, and Sea have all killed him with them or caused enough damage to basically tech however they wanted. | ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
On December 19 2012 00:11 Aquila- wrote: Watch this vod about TvP mech from like 58min - 1h 5min and you will never mech again. Disgusting. http://de.twitch.tv/avilo/b/348622971?t=58m  yeh, depressing. i was serious too btw, no more mech for me. 100% bio TvP HOTS now. Disgusting.On December 19 2012 01:00 Hider wrote: Well that game made it clear that we can't open heavy hellion pressure, and can't tech to to quickly. Avilo simply had battle units to defend. Obviously this is a balance flaw (because pushes like that should never work), but I still think that push could be held by a different opening It definitely could have been held by a different opening...a BIO opening...HEUHEUHEU On December 19 2012 02:07 iS.Axslav wrote: Uh you guys do realize the protoss army was close to twice the army value there right? if he wasn't so far behind he would have held that without a problem. 2 thors + 4 tanks + 7 hellions + 6 marines + raven = 2300 minerals + 1100 gas 23 zealots + 6 archons + 4 immortals + 4 stalkers + sentry + mothership core = 4700 minerals + 1550 gas (think he made archons from dts not sure) That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. On December 19 2012 03:32 UPro-BW wrote: that would never ever ever ever happen in BW. even if the protoss was 40 supply ahead. 1aing up a ramp into fortified terran position with tanks already in siege mode is fucking ridiculous. Exactly. It's even worse when u watch the game and at the end you realize the Terran (me) was 2/1 upgrade while the Protoss was 0/0/0. So much for defender's advantage right? | ||
|
Everlong
Czech Republic1973 Posts
On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote: yeh, depressing. i was serious too btw, no more mech for me. 100% bio TvP HOTS now. Disgusting.Removed from favorites!!! Haha, just kidding, it's depressing. What the fuck am I really going to play WoL for next 2 years? | ||
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
On December 19 2012 03:49 starimk wrote: In BW, protoss had a variety of options when facing mech. They could force the terran to turtle by denying expansions. They could stage a flank attack and engage from multiple angles. They could use shuttles to conduct zealot bombs. They could use Arbiters to place tanks in stasis, or Corsairs to disable the tanks with Disruption Web. None of these options involved A-moving directly into a fortified siege line (while having even supply), which is what we saw in Avilo's game. In BW mech never had to worry about Immortals or Protoss air, except perhaps in the form of Arbiters and Carriers. There was more depth and strategy involved in setting up the engagements and positioning, something that is sorely missed in this incarnation of Starcraft. Couldn't have said it better myself. I hope Blizzard is reading the recent pages of this thread. | ||
|
DemigodcelpH
1138 Posts
On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote: yeh, depressing. i was serious too btw, no more mech for me. 100% bio TvP HOTS now. Disgusting.It definitely could have been held by a different opening...a BIO opening...HEUHEUHEU That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. Exactly. It's even worse when u watch the game and at the end you realize the Terran (me) was 2/1 upgrade while the Protoss was 0/0/0. So much for defender's advantage right? Has anyone considered doing a formal writeup thread on the tank, why it's bad, how it's not serving it's role, and how this is indirectly hurting the game (in that lack of proper zone control makes uninteresting matches and takes out depth for both players)? I think that making the tank an actual threat will go a long way toward fixing mech in both TvP and TvZ. I play random now, but a writeup on the tank needs to get out before beta ends. On December 19 2012 04:50 Vindicare605 wrote: It actually boils down to two units. The Tank itself in a vacuum while not as powerful as its Brood War counter part would be ok vs Protoss if it wasn't for one glaring problem. Immortals. Ok so, Protoss needed a Siege Breaker unit to help vs Tank lines after seeing the match up from Brood War. Well in HoTS Protoss now has TWO siege breaker units: The Immortal and the Tempest and the Tempest fills that role in a much more interesting less of a face smashing way. There's no longer any need for the Immortal to be as strong vs the Siege Tank as it currently is. The Mothership Core prevents the 1-1-1 from ever having the power it once did and the Tempest provides Protoss a late game answer to Siege Tanks the same way Broodlords do. The Immortal isn't a problem ONLY because it counters Tanks though, Ultralisks do also in much the same way. But Ultralisks can be defeated by one of the Siege Tank's chief running mates: the Thor. That doesn't work in TvP because the Thor hardly fares any better vs the Immortal than the Siege Tank does. You have in the Immortal a ground unit that is effectively so powerful vs both of the core Mech units (both of which cost as much or more than it does) that it completely removes any reason for wanting to build them in the first place. Also a very good writeup. I had never considered the Immortal and Tempest overlap. | ||
|
one-one-one
Sweden551 Posts
On December 19 2012 05:24 avilo wrote: yeh, depressing. i was serious too btw, no more mech for me. 100% bio TvP HOTS now. Disgusting.It definitely could have been held by a different opening...a BIO opening...HEUHEUHEU That would be fine logic except you forgot: Terran is 2/1, pre-sieged, on his half of the map, with the addition of every single one of his mining SCVS blocking. Protoss is 0/0/0, walking up a tight choke, into a supply depot ramp, into a bunker, into a PDD, into siege tank fire, with 1A and zero micro, and had already lost 10+ probes from hellion harrass. This should not be possible. Exactly. It's even worse when u watch the game and at the end you realize the Terran (me) was 2/1 upgrade while the Protoss was 0/0/0. So much for defender's advantage right? Yeah. That would be something for his show "Rules of Engagement"  | ||
|
Vindicare605
United States16090 Posts
On December 19 2012 05:41 DemigodcelpH wrote: Couldn't have said it better myself. I hope Blizzard is reading the recent pages of this thread. The thing is too, those strategies from BW are still just as effective in SC2 (with the exception of Reaver drops ) as they are in SC1 if not more so because of the effectiveness of Warp Gate as a multi-pronged attacking tool.You can defeat Mech by exploiting its immobility with Blink Stalkers, Zealots DTs and High Templar. You don't even NEED to be able to a-move against it in order to beat it. But yet despite that, Protoss has multiple ways of not only beating but CRUSHING mech armies in straight up engagements that there's no real need to ever explore the old BW strategies. They require more finesse and multi-tasking than you ever actually need to beat a Mech army when you can just crush it by exploiting the hard counters available to it in SC2. | ||
| ||
