EPT[D] Widow Mines, Tanks, and Space Control - Page 4
| Forum Index > StarCraft 2 HotS |
|
IcED Bk
Canada245 Posts
| ||
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On December 30 2012 14:21 intense555 wrote: Tanks are already really good against zerg, making them better could break the balance of them in TvZ, maybe a buff like siege tanks ignore immortal shields or something of the sort, something that won't affect TvZ as it looks pretty awesome in HoTS so far. If you read the OP, I talked about how giving the tank a huge single target damage and reduced splash would balance the tank against other races while simultaneously giving tanks the ability to hold their own against protoss units better. The splash would be base 40 damage, almost the same as it is now, so it wouldn't affect marines, zerglings, or banelings very differently. Again, it's not even immortals that are the problem with TvP mech; 6-8 tanks, 4-5 fully charged ghosts, and a shitton of hellions wins hands down in almost every fight. The biggest issue is that GETTING there is really painful, so a lategame upgrade that makes tanks more powerful against immortals isn't useful...there needs to be a midgame solution. | ||
|
dere
United States153 Posts
I think either a slight gas reduction for the tank (150/100) or reverting the WoL siege tank nerf would be the best place to start. However, if you wanted to get wild you could possibly add a concussive shell affect to tanks attacks. | ||
|
Elldar
Sweden287 Posts
On January 02 2013 03:12 dere wrote: I agree that there is a problem with the role overlap of siege tank and widow mines. I don't agree about swapping out the attacks. If you make tank's sieged attack single target I don't see a reason to siege them other than technical tank pushes. They already do more dps to a single target unsieged. I think either a slight gas reduction for the tank (150/100) or reverting the WoL siege tank nerf would be the best place to start. However, if you wanted to get wild you could possibly add a concussive shell affect to tanks attacks. Tanks in bw and WoL is actually quite similar if you compare the damage system and how it worked in bw and sc2. So buffing damage is not the way to go imo. The big nerf siege tanks got in sc2 compared to bw is the food, 3 food makes a difference and imo is the core problem with mech in TvP. As for widow mines the supply cost is also too high I do not know about there internal testing but reducing wm and tanks could really evovle TvP and TvT. To op: I think that just reducing the food cost solves the problems and it just overcomplicate things with the attack changes. | ||
|
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On January 03 2013 10:07 Elldar wrote: Tanks in bw and WoL is actually quite similar if you compare the damage system and how it worked in bw and sc2. So buffing damage is not the way to go imo. The big nerf siege tanks got in sc2 compared to bw is the food, 3 food makes a difference and imo is the core problem with mech in TvP. As for widow mines the supply cost is also too high I do not know about there internal testing but reducing wm and tanks could really evovle TvP and TvT. To op: I think that just reducing the food cost solves the problems and it just overcomplicate things with the attack changes. I respectfully disagree. In my opinion, the most difficult problem with the tank is that it is very cost ineffective against protoss units, particularly because zealots and stalkers can close the distance very quickly. AND, as you point out, they are also supply inefficient in that equal supply of immortals or chargelot/stalker can trade mostly evenly. However, fixing the supply still doesn't fix the cost efficiency problem. Therefore, either the damage needs to be tweaked to be stronger against those units OR the cost needs to go down as well as the supply. I chose damage because I actually think it has the least ramifications on the other matchups and the general gameplay of terran. A major single target damage buff wouldn't matter in TvT or TvZ where most units die in 1-2 tank shots anyway. It might make 1-1-1 tank pushes a little stronger, but with MsC and other buffs protoss is receiving in HotS, protoss still has plenty of safe options against it. And mines need a huge drop in supply. Yes. | ||
|
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On January 02 2013 03:12 dere wrote: I agree that there is a problem with the role overlap of siege tank and widow mines. I don't agree about swapping out the attacks. If you make tank's sieged attack single target I don't see a reason to siege them other than technical tank pushes. They already do more dps to a single target unsieged. I think either a slight gas reduction for the tank (150/100) or reverting the WoL siege tank nerf would be the best place to start. However, if you wanted to get wild you could possibly add a concussive shell affect to tanks attacks. There should never be a reason to unsiege tanks other than to move them to another tactical position. With a damage buff to give them more DPS when sieged, there is literally no reason to have unsieged tanks unless you're moving, making SC2 more about positioning and careful movements. A gas reduction + supply reduction MIGHT work, but I think that a damage buff is simpler and more elegant. With a supply reduction and a gas reduction, you run the risk of tanks becoming way too strong in other matchups (primarily TvT comes to mind). In addition, this doesn't really solve the deathball problem as tanks STILL can't fulfill their role. Concussive shells was probably even a bad idea on marauders. I imagine the game would have turned out totally differently if the warhound had been in place of the marauder and concussive shells.... | ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On January 03 2013 10:49 SC2John wrote: I respectfully disagree. In my opinion, the most difficult problem with the tank is that it is very cost ineffective against protoss units, particularly because zealots and stalkers can close the distance very quickly. AND, as you point out, they are also supply inefficient in that equal supply of immortals or chargelot/stalker can trade mostly evenly. However, fixing the supply still doesn't fix the cost efficiency problem. Therefore, either the damage needs to be tweaked to be stronger against those units OR the cost needs to go down as well as the supply. I chose damage because I actually think it has the least ramifications on the other matchups and the general gameplay of terran. A major single target damage buff wouldn't matter in TvT or TvZ where most units die in 1-2 tank shots anyway. It might make 1-1-1 tank pushes a little stronger, but with MsC and other buffs protoss is receiving in HotS, protoss still has plenty of safe options against it. And mines need a huge drop in supply. Yes. I like both these lines of reasoning, but ultimately I think buffing the supply efficiency is the way to go. The two main problems a tank heavy player faces are immortals and mass air. A damage buff would help with neither. A supply cost decrease would allow you to have more tanks or more support. Also, I support having widow mines be less supply/cost expensive and stats tweaked so they are more expendable. I would like mines to be more of a mech support unit, with better tankiness for supply cost and less range + maybe no ability to hit air. Spider mines in bw worked well with mech not only by destroying melee units before they could reach tanks, but also absorbing fire from enemy ranged units. | ||
|
dirtydurb82
United States178 Posts
| ||
|
bLueSkY)
New Zealand88 Posts
If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? | ||
|
Elldar
Sweden287 Posts
On January 03 2013 15:53 bLueSkY) wrote: I'm seriously confused, people complain about the state of the game atm (being to stale or "NR30") yet they support mech, and even buffing the siege tank wtf? If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? Mech is not boring, imo. And I can't see how a mech player that camps all game ever winning. He will never have a fourth and lose when the meching player mines out. Besides a 200/200 mech army is really weak TvP but that is because a max mech player should have about 10 more tanks or support units. | ||
|
Evangelist
1246 Posts
On January 03 2013 15:53 bLueSkY) wrote: I'm seriously confused, people complain about the state of the game atm (being to stale or "NR30") yet they support mech, and even buffing the siege tank wtf? If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? At the moment the main issue with mech is it gets overrun supply for supply unless you hit 150-200 supply. This is because each mech unit is hugely expensive and risking small numbers of mech units results in inefficient engagements. The way to overcome this is to make tanks stronger without making them particularly more powerful. Both zerg and protoss have methods of punishing a turtling terran - both swarm hosts and oracles fill that role handily. Essentially all they need to do is slow down the mech deathball being built and they will eventually win. What needs to happen now is mech (or more specifically the siege tank) needs to be improved so that siege tanks can take the role they had in BW - spread out space control units which in small numbers offer a significant threat. One possible way of doing this is simply to buff tank damage against non-armoured units. Just revert the original tank nerf and let them one shot marines and zerglings again. Another way is to reduce the supply of the tank. | ||
|
Zahir
United States947 Posts
On January 03 2013 15:53 bLueSkY) wrote: I'm seriously confused, people complain about the state of the game atm (being to stale or "NR30") yet they support mech, and even buffing the siege tank wtf? If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? Camping is what happens when a player is afraid to leave the safety of his choke. With tanks you have a way to generate defensive power that does not involve sitting near your production with your entire army Pre split. You can push your defense forward by tank hopping / tank pushing, in order to take territory, while the enemy attempts to pick off or smash parts of your army that overextend. Your post would make sense if we were talking about buffing planetary fortresses. Tanks are for conquering and claiming territory in a methodical, micro intensive, action packed orgy of seiging and unseiging, spreading out and repositioning to respond to enemy troop movement, rushing to reinforce weak points in the line as the enemy army harasses or full out assaults it. They are certainly not for camping. At least at the higher levels of play. | ||
|
LavaLava
United States235 Posts
On January 02 2013 03:12 dere wrote: I agree that there is a problem with the role overlap of siege tank and widow mines. I don't agree about swapping out the attacks. If you make tank's sieged attack single target I don't see a reason to siege them other than technical tank pushes. They already do more dps to a single target unsieged. I think either a slight gas reduction for the tank (150/100) or reverting the WoL siege tank nerf would be the best place to start. However, if you wanted to get wild you could possibly add a concussive shell affect to tanks attacks. I posted this thread on reddit that breaks down the problem somewhat logically, and comes to the conclusion that the only really good change to Mech (short of a severe game redesign) would be to put the concussive shell effect onto Widow Mine attacks. | ||
|
Yoshi Kirishima
United States10325 Posts
On January 03 2013 15:53 bLueSkY) wrote: I'm seriously confused, people complain about the state of the game atm (being to stale or "NR30") yet they support mech, and even buffing the siege tank wtf? If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? No, because right now mech is only about as strong as protoss in a straight up fight, sometimes slightly more, but not significantly more. The reason why it won't turn into deathball vs deathball is because it is pretty much that right now (referring to WoL). However, Protoss has many harass options and different ways to engage into a mech force, but thing is they don't even need them because mech isn't that strong. By making mech stronger, the mech player will be able to actually split his army up into more than 1 area, and the protoss will actually have to find holes in the mech players' weakness and maybe eventually try to break through his defense with his full army or near full army (occasionally perhaps a mothership recall), which may or may not be a fitting climax. | ||
|
LavaLava
United States235 Posts
On January 03 2013 15:53 bLueSkY) wrote: I'm seriously confused, people complain about the state of the game atm (being to stale or "NR30") yet they support mech, and even buffing the siege tank wtf? If you buff mech, this will lead to more boring games of just sitting back and maxing to 200/200 and deathball fights. Why would you WANT that? This game is inherently boring as it is, don't make it worse. Buffing the siege tank alone is also an odd idea. Do you want people camping for the entire game? The only reason mech is NR30 is that it only works at all when it's maxed out. If you could make it better at lower unit counts, I know that Terrans would be more than happy to push out in the mid game. | ||
|
dere
United States153 Posts
On January 04 2013 00:58 LavaLava wrote: I posted this thread on reddit that breaks down the problem somewhat logically, and comes to the conclusion that the only really good change to Mech (short of a severe game redesign) would be to put the concussive shell effect onto Widow Mine attacks. Putting the concussive shell effect onto the window mine (and reduce damage) would work as well as long as it was a splash effect. I like this idea. | ||
|
EsportsJohn
United States4883 Posts
On January 03 2013 23:59 Evangelist wrote: At the moment the main issue with mech is it gets overrun supply for supply unless you hit 150-200 supply. This is because each mech unit is hugely expensive and risking small numbers of mech units results in inefficient engagements. The way to overcome this is to make tanks stronger without making them particularly more powerful. Both zerg and protoss have methods of punishing a turtling terran - both swarm hosts and oracles fill that role handily. Essentially all they need to do is slow down the mech deathball being built and they will eventually win. What needs to happen now is mech (or more specifically the siege tank) needs to be improved so that siege tanks can take the role they had in BW - spread out space control units which in small numbers offer a significant threat. One possible way of doing this is simply to buff tank damage against non-armoured units. Just revert the original tank nerf and let them one shot marines and zerglings again. Another way is to reduce the supply of the tank. This is a very good point. I think if you look at the numbers here, though, it makes more sense to buff damage than supply cost. The reason is that even if you reduce the supply of the tank so that you have a 150 food army as strong as a 170 supply army, you've still been turtling the whole game and trying not to die. All it does is make your lategame army strong, not solve the midgame problems, which is tanks in small numbers vs. the numerous options protoss has. On January 04 2013 00:58 LavaLava wrote: I posted this thread on reddit that breaks down the problem somewhat logically, and comes to the conclusion that the only really good change to Mech (short of a severe game redesign) would be to put the concussive shell effect onto Widow Mine attacks. I'm not sure how much I agree with this. I'll try to run through some of my thoughts: 1) marauder shells and mine shells would overlap, there's no getting around it. Whether or not that's a bad thing or non-applicable due to separate tech paths, I'm not sure. My only thought is that if mines have a larger slow splash, wouldn't it be easier to just make mass marine/ghost + a few mines in TvP? Or vice versa, if the mines have the same slow splash, wouldn't it just be easier to make marauders? And as such, does that really affect mech all that much? 2) If mines are placed far away from siege tanks in positions to slow down incoming units, won't they just all be sacrificial to friendly fire? Right now, it's more common to see 2-3 mines sitting on top of a tank to clean up units that get close. In these cases, slowing down units that are within the "safe zone" of the tank is not really useful. 3) The problem is broken down too simplistically for me to really believe that concussive shells on widow mines is the ONLY way to make mech work. You could be right, but I'm just not sure. Honestly, some tweaks to supply and cost efficiency of mech would go a long way...only THEN would a really think about special abilities necessary in order to make it work. | ||
|
dere
United States153 Posts
On January 04 2013 06:23 SC2John wrote: You could be right, but I'm just not sure. Honestly, some tweaks to supply and cost efficiency of mech would go a long way...only THEN would a really think about special abilities necessary in order to make it work. I agree that the quickest and easiest things to try are to tinker with supply/cost/damage of the mech units. Reverting the wol tank nerf is the number one easiest thing to try imo. | ||
|
HeeroFX
United States2704 Posts
| ||
|
thepuppyassassin
900 Posts
| ||
| ||
