[D] Widow Mines, Tanks, and Space Control - Page 2

On December 21 2012 18:18 Wayem wrote:
Hi,

I'm a P player here, but I am 100% behind the idea of buffing mech and will talk a little bit about TvP. I feel it's for now quite fragile because of that damn immortal...

My ideal game ? A game where the defender has a strong advantage and positionnal play has a lot of importance. You win by strong macro and big multitasking by defending and harassing a lot a lot. So a lot of skirmishes around the map as you slowly overcome your opponent, hurting his macro. SC2 is far from there (yet?).

Therefore, I am advocating big buffs to the tank. Hell, tanks should be scary ! I am not supposed to a-move 6 immortals into them and ruining everything... I should try to play with mech's weakness: immobility, avoiding them to harass expansions where tanks aren't, while expanding crazy myself... and then suffering harass myself with hellions/mines, etc. I don't quite now how to explain this and maybe I sound stupid, but this comes from the heart guys :D

On the other hand... in BW T bio was muredered by the biffy P units. Don't get me wrong, I would be very happy if T can mech or go bio, both being viable. But the fast is that bio now just destroy protoss in mid-game without AOE. So we see a lot of turtling, less harass, etc. and this leads to less interesting games.

The problem is, that nerfing for example the marauder is shutting down T bio. So the "design flaw" is more on the P side... that's why I'd make drastic changes to this race that don't feel... well... that don't feel "protoss" or just well designed. Something like make the stalker damage bonus to light and not vs armor, swap sentry and immortal in robo. Yes, immortals T1.5, but nerfed a lot. Etc, etc. and THEN, we will be able to see a viable mech + viable bio.

CONCLUSION: please please buff the hell out of tanks. Remake P almost from scratch. Thanks.

On December 21 2012 17:30 Kiro21 wrote:
The problem with tank not getting attention it is a very very fragile unit. A few points of damage or life can be a game-breaker because of the unit's role. I guess we will see how it unfolds but I really wish the tank was just more beastly, especially against P. Perhaps another Fusion Core upgrade for them? I don't know.

On December 25 2012 08:54 nomyx wrote:


Indeed, and you have to consider all the counter to tanks in HOTS

Blinding cloud (now affects mech unit, hello 1 range siege tanks)
Abduct

and Tempests

this is in addition to the regular ole counters to tanks. They feel very lack luster compared to their BW counterpart

On December 25 2012 08:55 c0sm0naut wrote:


this is why I think ravens should get the medic ability
i forgot what its called but the one that clears status ailments

an AOE version you can cast over the tanks or something. a nerfed irradiate could be awesome as well. put it on a speed boosted medivac and fly in the brood cloud

On December 25 2012 08:51 c0sm0naut wrote:


signed in today to say this post was great

ive always thought that the way terran vs protoss went in broodwar swas a much better experience for the players
for example, the tanks in WOL aren't as good but sc2 is a lot different. if you play mech in WOL and it goes to like a 2 hour + game where terran kills all of his scvs and make like pure tank viking raven and just WAITS it can be impossible for protoss to break and the game just doesn't feel strategical. on the other hand, in the early game (i consider being 200/200 with 30+ tanks and 2/2 or 3/3, still early game in mech tvp if you are playing it correctly) if you are unsieged in an engavement ever.. its over. you lose. all the meticulous unit positioning, building placement, scouting for the 1-3 base cheeses, etc it doesn't matter because you weren't aware of where his chargelots where for one army movement. what i mean by unsieged, is 100% of your tanks arne't fully sieged and ready to fire when he engages. i have fond that even a few unsieged tanks can be the difference between life and death

everything in sc2 seems to be balanced around protoss like you say. from map design, to stim timings, to production rate, etc. IIRC stim timings were initially nerfed moreso because of tvp than tvz (with creep, speedlings, queens, stim timings are meh, whereas concussive + stim can kill infinite gateway units pretty much)

i haven't watched a recent tvp and really been surprised with how it opened. it's pretty much a 1 gas hellion drop or 1rax fe > 2 more rax or 3 more rax and a coinflip marine push. unfortuntaely in my tvp's on the beta, it has gone this way as well. caduceus is too powerful, and a move in the wrong direction. instead of being an upgrade that gives terrans the ability to play in the late game, i feel like this is basically just going to be used to rinse and recycle MMM armies against protoss and eventually overwhelm them with no intention of lategame play. between tim warm and storm, it seems impossible to deal with late protoss armies now. time warp is going to be extremely powerful, i think it's time the siege tank was viable in tvp, even if bio is needed to support them. mech isn't going to work. it doesn't work in wings of liberty because of the siege tank. why not even try a small buff to theM? great post man

On December 27 2012 00:44 VPVanek wrote:
Terran really is going to need some kind of buff in the future, may it be mech, or bio.
Right now as a Terran player, I feel as if I never can get an "advantage" over my protoss counterpart.

Midgame? MSC negates most midgame pressure with the purify ability.
So I think this "advantage" terran had, is now gone mid game against P.

I don't know how it stands with mech.

On December 26 2012 23:59 Novacute wrote:
First of all, great post. This should be posted on Bnet forums to raise awareness of the core problems mech inherently has, especially with the current state of siege tank. The most prominent cause of this is the pitiful siege tank damage which is the root of terran's weakness in defense and often why it is better to deathball them for maximum effectivness. This is also related to another interesting post someone wrote which stated that 'tanks are clumped for the reason to maximise output', which again, discourages space control, since the unit themselves or a few of them offer far too little damage output to really invest in as defense. This is obviously weakened further by blinding cloud which greatly improves the trade inefficiency for tank heavy compositions. With that in mind, buffs are mandatory to encourage better positional play and at the same time help meching users achieve parity in their ability to trade versus the new anti-tank host units like the viper and buffed ultra.

With comments relating to the removal of immortals, i believe it's too far fetched, since Protoss would literally crumbled vs any reach pressure or the infamous Stephano roach max. As it currently stands Protoss needs a very strong anti-armoured unit to defend against a critical mass of roaches, while VRs are good at this task, having 1 viable tech route would just force stargate play every game vs Zerg. Buffing gateway units may not be the right way to go since the warp in mechanic would make TvP unplayable, and as such, they should focus on fixing Terran units instead, since there are obvious weaknesses such as the Tank for one.

On December 25 2012 08:55 c0sm0naut wrote:


this is why I think ravens should get the medic ability
i forgot what its called but the one that clears status ailments

an AOE version you can cast over the tanks or something. a nerfed irradiate could be awesome as well. put it on a speed boosted medivac and fly in the brood cloud

On December 27 2012 15:17 ledarsi wrote:
The basic reason why Terran is weak late game is that their tech tree is so impoverished. There are essentially only three Terran tech structures- the Barracks, the Factory, and the Starport (and the Fusion Core for BCs as an extension). This means it is possible to get the highest tech Terran units very early in the game compared to Zerg and Protoss. The possibility of rushing them thus limits their strength when rushed, and in their effectiveness with limited numbers. And because their effectiveness is limited, they are not that useful to build in large numbers. Both the speed and low cost of Terran tech structures (due to how few of them there are) means terran high tech units have to be less strong than Zerg and Protoss high tech units, which take longer and cost more in terms of tech to acquire.

Additionally, the linearity of the Terran tech tree detracts from their late game strength. With the exception of the Ghost Academy all Terran tech expenditures are required to unlock the next tech requirement. This means you cannot spend resources selectively to only unlock a particular tech option. You are spending more to unlock a variety of options, and the strength of each is reduced by the flexibility of choosing others, or using them in concert. For example, the 1-1-1.

Ideally Blizzard would consider rethinking the structure of the Terran tech tree to require Terrans spend more resources, and slow down the rate at which you can get high tech terran units, and buff them. They should also add more tech facilities, such as the Academy or Science Facility, which will cause Terrans to spend more resources on specific tech choices, and which are scoutable, and which unlock target researches a Terran might wish to use to upgrade specific units.

Then, straight up buffing mech and starport units will make them viable. Because they will be out later, and cost more to build, and they can justify being stronger without rushing being too good.

On December 27 2012 19:48 ledarsi wrote:
SC2John, you are correct about Terran production being expensive. But Terran easily has the fastest and cheapest tech. If you want to rush any particular item in the entire Terran arsenal, it can be obtained faster than almost anything available to Protoss or Zerg.

Suppose you want to get a Banshee, as opposed to a flock of Mutalisks.

Let us begin the counting at the point where the basic unit's facility is produced. Technically Terran must construct a Supply Depot first and this builds in parallel for zerg. However the Spawning Pool is also 50 minerals more expensive, and typically Zerg will construct a hatchery first, so an exact comparison is somewhat academic.

Barracks (65s), Factory (60s), Starport (50s) = 175 seconds = 2 minutes, 55 seconds.

Spawning Pool (65s), Lair (80s), Spire (100s) = 245 seconds = 4 minutes, 5 seconds.

Even if you include the depot production time of 30 seconds, it still only adds up to 3 minutes 25 seconds- a whole 40 seconds before spire. Furthermore, spire is a dead-end. Infestation Pit leads on to Hive. Terran has, with this 2 minute 55 second build sequence, become able to produce literally anything in their tech tree except Ghosts and BCs. It is unsurprising that a rush of this form is effective- because if ANYTHING in the entire Terran tech tree is effective at rushing it becomes available, with the exceptions of Ghosts and BCs.

My point is that if the Terran possessed a unit of Broodlord, Infestor, or Colossus grade, then it would become available far quicker, and cheaper, than those units are available for Zerg and Protoss. Terran units are strong, don't get me wrong. But a Banshee is strong at the time it hits the field. If it were impossible to get a banshee until 2 minutes after they can presently be made, the Banshee in its present state would not be very useful. The fact that they can be acquired so quickly and so cheaply means they must be stoppable at the time they can be created. They must be weaker than a unit that only needs to be stoppable as it hits the field multiple minutes later, and after greater tech expense.

Case in point- Reaper nerfs from ages long past. The Reaper was only problematic because of how early it could be created. The unit itself was actually not very strong, except because of how early it was available it could do damage without the enemy being able to effectively deal with it. Locking it behind an Academy would have solved the problem, but instead they nerfed the unit into the ground.

And this entire discussion is to say nothing of cost per supply, which makes units like Infestors so strong, as they allow Zerg to spend a huge amount of resources to create a strong army that exists all at once, rather than having supply-inefficient units that must be maxed, sent in to die and inflict casualties on the enemy, and be replenished to repeat the process. Pretty much every Terran unit is rather cheap per supply. Even Thors are only 50 minerals and 33 gas per supply. Terran's most expensive units are Ravens and Reapers, and are not terribly useful in a straight up fight.

In my opinion, Terran higher tech structures should be increased in build time and/or cost, and perhaps require additional facilities with costs and build times of their own to construct some of their units. And then buff those units. Units like the Siege Tank, Thor, Banshee, and Raven are good candidates for gaining an additional tech structure, or for increasing the base cost of their production facility. I also think the Academy structure in BW served an important function as a dead-end research tech structure that hides Medics unless resources are spent to get stronger bio. A player going right for mech does not need to build it right away, but will not have powerful infantry.

On December 28 2012 10:57 a176 wrote:
someone help me out here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbULSxalNFQ

On December 28 2012 12:05 Sabu113 wrote:
I think a lot of talk about counters is a bit short sighted in this thread. Counters go beyond unit compositions but relate to styles of play.

BW mech was a cost efficient group that needed a lot of care and attention. This group took a lot of time to get momentum and was very vulnerable to being chipped away. That's why it was reasonable- necessary for protoss to always be one base ahead. Eventually they would have chipped enough to buy enough time to get many bases to throw tech and economy at the terran. Alternatively, the terran defended well and with a lot of care to get good position choked the protoss to certain doom.

Bio; A high damage uber mobile composition necessarily shouldn't have the same space holding capabilities as mech. If Bio-mech constricts the ability of the opposing player to expand then the opposing player must have a more powerful "counter" composition for there to be parity.