|
The more I think about it the less I think Mech in TvP will ever be both viable and balanced. This has nothing to do with Blizzard's sometimes laughable attempts at patching but more to do whit how good a base is in SC 2 and the fact that being on three bases is basically all you need.
If you were to add in stronger tanks the ability to hold three bases for Terran on three bases is almost guaranteed and with mules Terran will easily have the resources to make a large Mech army very quickly. this presents a problem to Protoss as unless P has a very large number of probes in the region of 80+ then taking more than three bases is only good for extra gas really in sacrifice of minerals, that has its problems as that reduces the Protoss max army size which will be worse in a stand up fight than a Terran Mech army if this is true Mech as it should be. Given Mules Terran will have an abundance of minerals and those can be sunk into hellions quite easily and traded out harassing the Protoss forcing investment either into static defense or into replacing lost probes/units, the other alternative is to have less probes stay on three bases and defend them with your army and that means you have to be able to trade with the T late game. Basically given how the game is set up now with 8m 2g bases a buff to tanks and a move towards true mech is going to make terran to strong in the matchup.
Now you could go to 6m 1hyg bases as the norm as suggested in a very good article on this site that I cant find right now but that is too big a departure this close to release and why it could potentially solve some issues in some matchup such as Stephano's 200/200 roach push against P and offer Map Makers more freedom designing maps this would also be a big buff for Terran if tanks were buffed as lower resource bases will benefit Terran as positional play will become much more important and only T has real options to control space in the Tank and the widow mine in HotS.
Its not looking good people even if we do get Mech as it will more than likely end up OP on current maps and get nerfed into oblivion as that's blizzard's way.
|
On January 12 2013 03:55 MarcH wrote:
The more I think about it the less I think Mech in TvP will ever be both viable and balanced. This has nothing to do with Blizzard's sometimes laughable attempts at patching but more to do whit how good a base is in SC 2 and the fact that being on three bases is basically all you need.
If you were to add in stronger tanks the ability to hold three bases for Terran on three bases is almost guaranteed and with mules Terran will easily have the resources to make a large Mech army very quickly. this presents a problem to Protoss as unless P has a very large number of probes in the region of 80+ then taking more than three bases is only good for extra gas really in sacrifice of minerals, that has its problems as that reduces the Protoss max army size which will be worse in a stand up fight than a Terran Mech army if this is true Mech as it should be. Given Mules Terran will have an abundance of minerals and those can be sunk into hellions quite easily and traded out harassing the Protoss forcing investment either into static defense or into replacing lost probes/units, the other alternative is to have less probes stay on three bases and defend them with your army and that means you have to be able to trade with the T late game. Basically given how the game is set up now with 8m 2g bases a buff to tanks and a move towards true mech is going to make terran to strong in the matchup.
Now you could go to 6m 1hyg bases as the norm as suggested in a very good article on this site that I cant find right now but that is too big a departure this close to release and why it could potentially solve some issues in some matchup such as Stephano's 200/200 roach push against P and offer Map Makers more freedom designing maps this would also be a big buff for Terran if tanks were buffed as lower resource bases will benefit Terran as positional play will become much more important and only T has real options to control space in the Tank and the widow mine in HotS.
Its not looking good people even if we do get Mech as it will more than likely end up OP on current maps and get nerfed into oblivion as that's blizzard's way.
Yeh I agree. I think if Blizzard really understood the "economy-problem", then they would have attempted to begin the beta by redesigning everything, instead of these attempt of balancing the game without addressing the underlying issues.
But now it is just too late to fix anything signifcant.
|
On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself.
... so protoss, zerg, and terran can have varied compositions, instead of just protoss and zerg?
|
On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself.
Try play bio late game vs toss. It's so damn frustratating. Like a splitsecond batlte micro mistake and you lose the game. Also there is a problem related to bio vs protoss as it isn't equally balanced across skill levels. Its balanced at top level of play, but for (almost everyone else) it is protoss favored late game. By making mech viable you could reward those who have great positional game sense, and people with 300+ battle micro could still go bio, and noone would really be worse of.
|
On January 12 2013 04:17 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself. Try play bio late game vs toss. It's so damn frustrating. Like a split second battle micro mistake and you lose the game. Also there is a problem related to bio vs protoss as it isn't equally balanced across skill levels. Its balanced at top level of play, but for (almost everyone else) it is protoss favored late game. By making mech viable you could reward those who have great positional game sense, and people with 300+ battle micro could still go bio, and no one would really be worse of.
To carry on from this point a Terran going bio TvP has an advantage in the early to mid game with the mobile high damage bio force but as things move into the late game the late game Protoss army with Colossi and Templar can decimate a Bio force very quickly and backed up by Warp gates the advantage lies with Protoss in the late game.
In theory at least if Mech were a viable strategy you would have a situation where the advantage lies with protoss in the early to mid game as they have map control and the units P are getting will trade more efficiently against a Mech force in small numbers but the late game Mech army would be better than the protoss army.
This ads variety to the game and more interesting and varied matches with a mix of styles from a slow pushing positional Mech army against a more mobile but less deadly Protoss death ball where the Protoss is trying to use their mobility to get an advantageous engagement against the Terran and delay the death push from both hitting their front door forcing a fight or attempted base trade to plain slowing down or stopping the push from starting. Then you can also have a highly mobile high DPS bio army trying to pressure the less mobile Protoss army to slow down their Tech and get as many advantages going into the late game as possible to try and swing things their way. Their are also then the option of Bio Mech compositions that will likely be middle ground between the two but will probably be slightly better than P during the mid game but fall off into the late game as upgrades drag the T down unless the Terran heavily invested into all Mech and Bio upgrades during the mid game but that will then weaken the mid game.
|
Thanks for the responses, Qikz, gh0st, Hider and MarcH. That makes a lot of sense.
On January 12 2013 04:14 zhurai wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself. ... so protoss, zerg, and terran can have varied compositions, instead of just protoss and zerg?
Huh? Protoss don't have varied compositions in WOL. SG tech, for instance, is essentially a no-go in PvT.
I'm just sketpical of the belief that all styles and all compositions from all races should be viable in every match-up. I'm doubtful if the game (in fact any RTS game) can support that sort of diversity without paying the price for it in terms of balance and design, and a long and chaotic meta-game (in which a game cannot really develop strategically).
IMO, one of the main attractions of Starcraft has been the constraints in which it operates in terms of tactics and strategies across specific match-ups. If these constraints lead to stagnation, then, yes, I can see that variety and diversity is needed. But, I am wary of variety and diversity just for the sake of it, just because it is expected and because everyone wants it. It seems to me a possibility that in trying to achieve this goal, the game may be damaged beyond repair.
The old adage, be careful what you wish for comes to mind...
Anyway, again, thanks for the responses.
|
On January 12 2013 06:02 aZealot wrote:Thanks for the responses, Qikz, gh0st, Hider and MarcH. That makes a lot of sense. Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:14 zhurai wrote:On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself. ... so protoss, zerg, and terran can have varied compositions, instead of just protoss and zerg? Huh? Protoss don't have varied compositions in WOL. SG tech, for instance, is essentially a no-go in PvT. I'm just sketpical of the belief that all styles and all compositions from all races should be viable in every match-up. I'm doubtful if the game (in fact any RTS game) can support that sort of diversity without paying the price for it in terms of balance and design, and a long and chaotic meta-game (in which a game cannot really develop strategically).
IMO, one of the main attractions of Starcraft has been the constraints in which it operates in terms of tactics and strategies across specific match-ups. If these constraints lead to stagnation, then, yes, I can see that variety and diversity is needed. But, I am wary of variety and diversity just for the sake of it, just because it is expected and because everyone wants it. It seems to me a possibility that in trying to achieve this goal, the game may be damaged beyond repair. The old adage, be careful what you wish for comes to mind... Anyway, again, thanks for the responses.
I think your alone with that claim. I believe people enjoy watching fantastic decision making/multitasking and unit control.
|
I believe NonY made mention of this too, a long while back And maybe even Artosis. So, I may not be the only one. And, I do enjoy decision making/multitasking and unit control as well as the next SC fan. But, these operate within constraints which, for me, makes me appreciate those decisions and those skills all the more. I am derailing the thread though, so I'll stop.
It's just that I am doubtful if all strategic choices for every race in every match-up is necessary for a better game.
|
On January 12 2013 06:02 aZealot wrote:Thanks for the responses, Qikz, gh0st, Hider and MarcH. That makes a lot of sense. Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:14 zhurai wrote:On January 12 2013 02:58 aZealot wrote:
Sorry, just a general question, as I don't play T or HoTS, but this occurred to me the other day:
Is there any reason why TvP mech should be viable? Is the only reason people are adamant about this is because it was how TvP was played in BW? (Ironically, it was the only way.) Assuming Blizzard is trying to contort through too many hoops to make TvP mech "work", perhaps it's better for them to say mech only in TvZ/TvT and leave TvP as mainly Bio, and perhaps, in time Bio-Mech. It would be cool to see mech in TvP, no question. But, I don't know if this is a sufficient reason in itself. ... so protoss, zerg, and terran can have varied compositions, instead of just protoss and zerg? Huh? Protoss don't have varied compositions in WOL. SG tech, for instance, is essentially a no-go in PvT. I'm just sketpical of the belief that all styles and all compositions from all races should be viable in every match-up. I'm doubtful if the game (in fact any RTS game) can support that sort of diversity without paying the price for it in terms of balance and design, and a long and chaotic meta-game (in which a game cannot really develop strategically). IMO, one of the main attractions of Starcraft has been the constraints in which it operates in terms of tactics and strategies across specific match-ups. If these constraints lead to stagnation, then, yes, I can see that variety and diversity is needed. But, I am wary of variety and diversity just for the sake of it, just because it is expected and because everyone wants it. It seems to me a possibility that in trying to achieve this goal, the game may be damaged beyond repair. The old adage, be careful what you wish for comes to mind... Anyway, again, thanks for the responses.
oh ok. I was talking about compositions, sure sky protoss doesn't work atm, but that's because bio is the viable composition (and not biomech except for 1/1/1, 2/2/2 type timings, and not mech, if mech was viable then sky protoss will work out _better_)
stalker collosi
ht zealot archon
(into eventual mix of both)
vs
marine marauder medivac
into marine marauder ghost medivac viking
then again I wasn't talking about specifically TvP/PvT.
|
You are bit safter going mech in the early game now. Midgame is also slightly better due to better hellions and not having to spend resources on siege tank and blue flame upgrade.
Late game is as awful as ever. Protoss air is so strong that there is nothing Terran can do about it.
Mech will never be viable in TvP until Protoss air gets nerfed.
|
On January 12 2013 06:53 MockHamill wrote:
You are bit safter going mech in the early game now. Midgame is also slightly better due to better hellions and not having to spend resources on siege tank and blue flame upgrade.
Late game is as awful as ever. Protoss air is so strong that there is nothing Terran can do about it.
Mech will never be viable in TvP until Protoss air gets nerfed.
I'm not in the beta so I'm not an expert or anything but the only thing from protoss air i can see causing issues is the Tempest due to its ridiculous range as either Thor's anti air with bonus to light can deal with pheonix and a reactor starport at a decent time should be able to get enough vikings out to deal with carriers and voids.
I can see the recent HSM nerf being an issue as they would help vs carriers also and BC's can also be good against P air with yomato and the high rate of fire.
I could well be wrong though and would like to know where if I am.
|
On January 12 2013 06:53 MockHamill wrote:
You are bit safter going mech in the early game now. Midgame is also slightly better due to better hellions and not having to spend resources on siege tank and blue flame upgrade.
Late game is as awful as ever. Protoss air is so strong that there is nothing Terran can do about it.
Mech will never be viable in TvP until Protoss air gets nerfed.
While going mech was rather very vulnerable to all-ins this wasn't the fundamental problem with mech, so I more or less agree with your sentiments, however it's not just Protoss air; players should not be able to cost effectively a-move tank lines while being on even (or sometimes below) footing.
mines make mech viable? i mean really viable? no, they are not
free siege tech is really the changement to make mech viable? NO.
they don't want to make mech viable, they are just trying to make us think so
|
I wish it was viable, I get so bored going Bio every game against protoss. I feel like they have made good steps to making it more viable, the zealot issue has been solved with battle hellions, but in a rather ugly uber hard counter way like the immortal, and the immortal issue hasnt be solved at all.
I think you could make the battle hellions weaker and more soft counter, if you added the goliath, because they both can attack ground and the goliath solves other issues with mech. I never played Broodwar, my first experience with Starcraft was with SC2, so I am not trying to recreate Broodwar, its just really obvious that siege tanks need both antiair and ground support.
Battle hellions on their own will never cut it, because their range is too short; they do no damage to the hard counter immortal, the primary threat. Thors cost too much and take to long to produce. You need cheaper meat shields which can deal weak/moderate damage at range and can also soak up those 100 resources that players put into static turrets in the middle of the map to protect their siege tanks and compensate for the missing unit.
I don't think Blizzard wants to add it though, primarily because it overlaps with the viking and thor role. Personally, I think that type of reasoning is wrong at this stage of the games development, it forces hard counter's to be the only considered options, resulting in things like the warhound.
|
The only big remaining problem with mech is protoss air lategame - tempests and VR. Tempests kit too well versus thors/vikings, and the VRs dps is really too good.
Mech really need a massable long range anti-air (yeah, a goliath. or the first version of the warhound). Thors are too slow/cost too much, Vikings are just horrible (bad maniability, get destroyed so fast by VRs)
The other problem is that people want to avoid thorball play, and tanks need to get buffed in order to do so ( back to 2 supply or 50 damage)
|
On January 16 2013 07:41 Lyyna wrote:
The only big remaining problem with mech is protoss air lategame - tempests and VR. Tempests kit too well versus thors/vikings, and the VRs dps is really too good.
Mech really need a massable long range anti-air (yeah, a goliath. or the first version of the warhound). Thors are too slow/cost too much, Vikings are just horrible (bad maniability, get destroyed so fast by VRs)
The other problem is that people want to avoid thorball play, and tanks need to get buffed in order to do so ( back to 2 supply or 50 damage)
I've been playing Mech every game TvP since the medivac nerf and I've noticed how important it is to recognize if the protoss is going ground or air based. There is no way in hell that a pure ground mech army can win vs an air-based protoss army. It's not possible. I think that the best option is to either give Terran a better long-range AA like you said or make it easier to transition from mech play to sky terran.
|
If Protoss goes air in the current version of HOTS, no race can beat it. It's not the problem of Terran mech. It's the problem of Skytoss.
Skytoss is the new BL/Infestor. There is no answer to this build in the late-game.
In WOL it's "kill zerg before BL" and in HOTS it's "kill protoss before tempest"
It's just Blizzard hasn't realized this.
|
On January 12 2013 04:17 Hider wrote:
Try play bio late game vs toss. It's so damn frustratating. Like a splitsecond batlte micro mistake and you lose the game. Also there is a problem related to bio vs protoss as it isn't equally balanced across skill levels. Its balanced at top level of play, but for (almost everyone else) it is protoss favored late game. By making mech viable you could reward those who have great positional game sense, and people with 300+ battle micro could still go bio, and noone would really be worse of.
Yeah, this also works the other way. Fail to split your templar adequately even once? Two EMPs leave you without storms and you instantly lose, as Terran can easily raze all your expansions before replacement templar can charge. Same goes if your observers get sniped or are even slightly out of position. Ghosts cloak up, walk in, and kill everything.
|
Just the other day, Im finding hellions/thorts/air support MUCH more durable than say any composition involving tanks..
And with the air tech switch P does, its quite difficult to really mech in TvP especially with thors being the AA backbone of the ground army. Although I like the idea of HEP and its been useful at time.. they are still way to clunky for a lack of a better term and too slow to build incase you were caught off guard with an air switch. What I feel like is that if thors were halved into a smaller cheaper unit yet retaining its range, itd just might help in the AA department while getting rid of this clunkiness.
|
On January 16 2013 08:47 Xequecal wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 04:17 Hider wrote:
Try play bio late game vs toss. It's so damn frustratating. Like a splitsecond batlte micro mistake and you lose the game. Also there is a problem related to bio vs protoss as it isn't equally balanced across skill levels. Its balanced at top level of play, but for (almost everyone else) it is protoss favored late game. By making mech viable you could reward those who have great positional game sense, and people with 300+ battle micro could still go bio, and noone would really be worse of. Yeah, this also works the other way. Fail to split your templar adequately even once? Two EMPs leave you without storms and you instantly lose, as Terran can easily raze all your expansions before replacement templar can charge. Same goes if your observers get sniped or are even slightly out of position. Ghosts cloak up, walk in, and kill everything.
Thing is many players find it hard to micro ghosts (even pros) while preparing for the inevitable engagement with its MMM force + vikings. Late game means you got cols as well as HTs, meaning the AOE threat is still there even if you take out some of the HTs. Its just easier to handle the Protoss deathball especially when the only form of AOE their concerned is EMP. This along with the insurance in the form of mass warp gate reinforcements when you might lose an engagement (unless the T has had a macro/eco lead entering the late game) is what makes late game difficult.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
