|
On January 09 2013 06:45 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 06:39 Lyyna wrote:On January 09 2013 06:22 Hider wrote:On January 09 2013 06:18 TheFrankOne wrote:On January 09 2013 05:22 a176 wrote:We are not trying to create a "Factory Only" option for Terrans in this match up that works in every game on every map all the time So they are fine with 'barracks only' bio solution on all maps, but they won't allow 'factory only'. The hell? "We want all Factory to be useful sometimes and all Barracks to be useful sometimes and a mix to also have a place. " So in the next sentence they say they want all of either to be useful "sometimes" they don't seem to like the prevalence of bio either. Sometimes it helps to keep reading. On January 09 2013 05:28 Hider wrote:
Im pretty sure that what he implies is that he still wants immortals to counter pure mech (which shouldn't happen as it just make for boring games). As a counter to that he wants terrans to add a few ghosts to emp the immortals. According to Dustin Browder's simplistic game design philosophy he would probably call this dynamic/micro intensive etc.
"We want all Factory to be useful sometimes" Good read on that implication. Also, way to ignore a high masters player who has more experience playing mech in TvP than 99.9% of people on this forum. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=323003Advice for fighting immortals that explicitly says not to use EMPs against them from the thread: + Show Spoiler +Hellions work perfectly against Immortals. They don't take the increased damage from Immortals (which means they only do ~13 DPS, which makes them an expensive Zealot). Hellions also do 8/9/10/11 damage, so they are almost always completely unaffected by Hardened Shield. If you have 10-13 Hellions, you can take down 2-3 Immortal Shields in one shot with focus fire. WOW. Who needs EMP? Save the EMP's for Archons, and after that I find it's best to ignore them. They really do horrible damage against Mech (for 300 gas), especially with no splash. They are only good for soaking up Siege Tank shots, so make sure your Siege Tanks are focus firing the Immortals and basically anything else first! Maybe you should read the thread your self and then you would realize that I have posted in it previously. Also you will probably realize that Lyyna has never agued that pure mech is viable (in fact he has argued the opposite). Lyyna's style is just super boring from a spectator POV (even though I kinda enjoy playing it), because its basically deathball vs deathball and it has nothing to do with the multitaskbased bw mech. So please don't make offensive comments untill you make sure you fully understand my POV. That factory comment (btw) is easily interpreted as; We want tanks to be usefull in tvp (but they don't want pure mech unfortunately). To exactly tell my advice about ghostless mech, it's just that it's so much harder to play this compared to ghostmech that it's not worth it imo. Ghostmech can easily crush a protoss army, pure mech will have a really harder time, but it can too. Imo the fact my play ends up being deathball vs deathball isn't a consequence of the play itself : multitask/position based play (aka bw tvp mech) is basically non-existant in sc2 overall. if i could, i would tweak my play to play a more bw-ish style (and in fact i already tried to do so) Yeh I kinda agree. I also don't think ghosts-necessity is the biggest cause of deathballs. Rather its more related to the economy-system, and I believe these two things needs to happen before we can get rid of the deathball: 1) Reduce mining efficiency per base. 2) Buff immobile units (to compensate). The latter would include a buff to the tanks. But do you agree with me (or at least can you follow my logic) that it's kinda bad for the game that terrans needs ghosts to be effective against a "core-protoss ground army". Wouldn't it be better for the game if pure mech was viable (against a protoss ground army) so that terrans quicker could take a 4th and turtle less (which would make it easier for the protoss to harass?).
a ghostless army can handle a protoss ground army. the problem is that it can't do so cost-effectively enough versus different compositions, as you have to adapt way more than with a ghost mech army.
But yeah, i agree that it would be way better if a ghostless army could handle protoss ground by itself in a staple way, and for that it needs (i'm not going to talk about economy and stuff, because blizz isn't going to change this ever) :
-A goliath , in order to have a "buffer unit" that is OK on the ground and that can fight air , especially endgame armoured capital ships
-a buffed tank, not even a big buff, juste going back to 50 damage would be way enough
-old HSM --'
|
On January 09 2013 07:05 Lyyna wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 06:45 Hider wrote:On January 09 2013 06:39 Lyyna wrote:On January 09 2013 06:22 Hider wrote:On January 09 2013 06:18 TheFrankOne wrote:On January 09 2013 05:22 a176 wrote:We are not trying to create a "Factory Only" option for Terrans in this match up that works in every game on every map all the time So they are fine with 'barracks only' bio solution on all maps, but they won't allow 'factory only'. The hell? "We want all Factory to be useful sometimes and all Barracks to be useful sometimes and a mix to also have a place. " So in the next sentence they say they want all of either to be useful "sometimes" they don't seem to like the prevalence of bio either. Sometimes it helps to keep reading. On January 09 2013 05:28 Hider wrote:
Im pretty sure that what he implies is that he still wants immortals to counter pure mech (which shouldn't happen as it just make for boring games). As a counter to that he wants terrans to add a few ghosts to emp the immortals. According to Dustin Browder's simplistic game design philosophy he would probably call this dynamic/micro intensive etc.
"We want all Factory to be useful sometimes" Good read on that implication. Also, way to ignore a high masters player who has more experience playing mech in TvP than 99.9% of people on this forum. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=323003Advice for fighting immortals that explicitly says not to use EMPs against them from the thread: + Show Spoiler +Hellions work perfectly against Immortals. They don't take the increased damage from Immortals (which means they only do ~13 DPS, which makes them an expensive Zealot). Hellions also do 8/9/10/11 damage, so they are almost always completely unaffected by Hardened Shield. If you have 10-13 Hellions, you can take down 2-3 Immortal Shields in one shot with focus fire. WOW. Who needs EMP? Save the EMP's for Archons, and after that I find it's best to ignore them. They really do horrible damage against Mech (for 300 gas), especially with no splash. They are only good for soaking up Siege Tank shots, so make sure your Siege Tanks are focus firing the Immortals and basically anything else first! Maybe you should read the thread your self and then you would realize that I have posted in it previously. Also you will probably realize that Lyyna has never agued that pure mech is viable (in fact he has argued the opposite). Lyyna's style is just super boring from a spectator POV (even though I kinda enjoy playing it), because its basically deathball vs deathball and it has nothing to do with the multitaskbased bw mech. So please don't make offensive comments untill you make sure you fully understand my POV. That factory comment (btw) is easily interpreted as; We want tanks to be usefull in tvp (but they don't want pure mech unfortunately). To exactly tell my advice about ghostless mech, it's just that it's so much harder to play this compared to ghostmech that it's not worth it imo. Ghostmech can easily crush a protoss army, pure mech will have a really harder time, but it can too. Imo the fact my play ends up being deathball vs deathball isn't a consequence of the play itself : multitask/position based play (aka bw tvp mech) is basically non-existant in sc2 overall. if i could, i would tweak my play to play a more bw-ish style (and in fact i already tried to do so) Yeh I kinda agree. I also don't think ghosts-necessity is the biggest cause of deathballs. Rather its more related to the economy-system, and I believe these two things needs to happen before we can get rid of the deathball: 1) Reduce mining efficiency per base. 2) Buff immobile units (to compensate). The latter would include a buff to the tanks. But do you agree with me (or at least can you follow my logic) that it's kinda bad for the game that terrans needs ghosts to be effective against a "core-protoss ground army". Wouldn't it be better for the game if pure mech was viable (against a protoss ground army) so that terrans quicker could take a 4th and turtle less (which would make it easier for the protoss to harass?). a ghostless army can handle a protoss ground army. the problem is that it can't do so cost-effectively enough versus different compositions, as you have to adapt way more than with a ghost mech army. But yeah, i agree that it would be way better if a ghostless army could handle protoss ground by itself in a staple way, and for that it needs (i'm not going to talk about economy and stuff, because blizz isn't going to change this ever) : -A goliath , in order to have a "buffer unit" that is OK on the ground and that can fight air , especially endgame armoured capital ships -a buffed tank, not even a big buff, juste going back to 50 damage would be way enough -old HSM --'
Assuming they won’t remove the Thor, I hope they buff damage from the new direct damage cannon. With it’s long range, it would be reasonable anti air for single targets. As for the siege tanks, I hope they make them do more damage to harden shield. Immortals get pretty mauled by siege tanks if their shields drop, but it takes 10 shots do bring down the shields, which is unreasonable. If it was 5, 4 or 3 shots, the immortals would still have time to close the ground, but would be on the clock. It would make focus fire better for tanks and make the immortal push more risky, while keeping the unit unchanged for other match ups.
|
On January 09 2013 06:18 TheFrankOne wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 05:22 a176 wrote:We are not trying to create a "Factory Only" option for Terrans in this match up that works in every game on every map all the time So they are fine with 'barracks only' bio solution on all maps, but they won't allow 'factory only'. The hell? "We want all Factory to be useful sometimes and all Barracks to be useful sometimes and a mix to also have a place. " So in the next sentence they say they want all of either to be useful "sometimes" they don't seem to like the prevalence of bio either. Sometimes it helps to keep reading.
the point was that bio is already perfectly viable on all maps. therefor mech should be as well.
|
On January 09 2013 07:37 a176 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 06:18 TheFrankOne wrote:On January 09 2013 05:22 a176 wrote:We are not trying to create a "Factory Only" option for Terrans in this match up that works in every game on every map all the time So they are fine with 'barracks only' bio solution on all maps, but they won't allow 'factory only'. The hell? "We want all Factory to be useful sometimes and all Barracks to be useful sometimes and a mix to also have a place. " So in the next sentence they say they want all of either to be useful "sometimes" they don't seem to like the prevalence of bio either. Sometimes it helps to keep reading. the point was that bio is already perfectly viable on all maps. therefor mech should be as well.
Nah Dustin Browder prefers bio over these stupid tank siege wars.
BW is a great game - go play it.
|
On January 09 2013 05:58 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 05:53 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2013 05:42 The_Darkness wrote:On January 09 2013 05:26 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2013 05:08 Hider wrote:
And Dustin Browder does it again --> demonstrates a terrible understanding of game design. He apparantly doesn't realize that as long as ghosts becomes a neccesity to do mech then this will require too much defensive turtling from the terran for the game to ever come interesting.
Pure mech needs to be viable against pure toss ground. The game will never be interesting before that. Ah, the classic design post, taking personal opinion and raising it to a level where the skills of the people making the game are called into question. It is clear that some people will always take issue with everything blizzard says. Edit: grammer is key. If only you (and DB) were students of good game and unit design like the estimable Hider, then perhaps we wouldn't see such ignorant posts from you! You're not even able to predict the precise ways in which the next patch will fail, lol! Not only will the next patch (the content of which we do not know, of course) be an epic failure at promoting mech in tvp, but it will also serve to drive home the unavoidable truth that DB and Blizzard do not understand good unit or game design. And to think we were complaining earlier how a small group of posters fill every thread with negative posts about "game design". And now someone is focusing on a single line posted by DB and complaining it is terrible game design. You keep making these posts, yet still haven't tried to come up with an argument for why I am wrong? If you can't follow my logic, that is fine, but then don't make these kind of posts.
Here is a nice argument for you: medivacs are required to make bio viable, they require similar things to acquire as a ghost does for a meching player. Bio doesn't turtle, therefore mech doesn't need to either, at least not because of the ghost
|
United Kingdom12024 Posts
On January 09 2013 07:44 DBS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 05:58 Hider wrote:On January 09 2013 05:53 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2013 05:42 The_Darkness wrote:On January 09 2013 05:26 Plansix wrote:On January 09 2013 05:08 Hider wrote:
And Dustin Browder does it again --> demonstrates a terrible understanding of game design. He apparantly doesn't realize that as long as ghosts becomes a neccesity to do mech then this will require too much defensive turtling from the terran for the game to ever come interesting.
Pure mech needs to be viable against pure toss ground. The game will never be interesting before that. Ah, the classic design post, taking personal opinion and raising it to a level where the skills of the people making the game are called into question. It is clear that some people will always take issue with everything blizzard says. Edit: grammer is key. If only you (and DB) were students of good game and unit design like the estimable Hider, then perhaps we wouldn't see such ignorant posts from you! You're not even able to predict the precise ways in which the next patch will fail, lol! Not only will the next patch (the content of which we do not know, of course) be an epic failure at promoting mech in tvp, but it will also serve to drive home the unavoidable truth that DB and Blizzard do not understand good unit or game design. And to think we were complaining earlier how a small group of posters fill every thread with negative posts about "game design". And now someone is focusing on a single line posted by DB and complaining it is terrible game design. You keep making these posts, yet still haven't tried to come up with an argument for why I am wrong? If you can't follow my logic, that is fine, but then don't make these kind of posts. Here is a nice argument for you: medivacs are required to make bio viable, they require similar things to acquire as a ghost does for a meching player. Bio doesn't turtle, therefore mech doesn't need to either, at least not because of the ghost
Mech needs to turtle as a mech army is useless against toss without either a massive advantage or ghosts.
Ghosts cannot be reactored either unlike medivacs,.
|
heres my idea for TvP mech
gives thors a "haywire" mode which causes them to lose their normal attack (and lose their anti-air attack) but opens up missile pods that fire the haywire missiles as the thors new normal attack
the haywire missiles will launch 5 attacks of 10 damage from 9range and its attackspeed will be modified to give it the same DPS as normal mode but instead using haywire missiles for the attack
the haywire missiles will deal ability-damage meaning it goes through armor, but at the same time this isnt too overpowered because the haywire attacks will also not benefit from attack upgrades either
the haywire missiles will be coded to have a flight-time and behave like stalker attacks. If anyone knows how stalkers attack, stalkers actually "shoot" their missile and it leads to extreme cases of over-kill. Siege tanks and marines are coded to basically never over-kill, however stalker shots have flight time so there is lots of over-kill. This means the thor haywire attack will be weaker as you stack tons of thors but strong if you just stay at around 6 thors to deplete immortal shields
because haywire thors will no longer need +attack upgrades to deal full haywire damage to protoss, this means thors will become a viable option for a terran that is going MMM because thors will come out of the gate dealing full haywire DPS to ground mech (stalkers/sentries/immortal/collossi) with zero mech attack upgrades against +3 armor protoss armies.
thors will be given a 10 second transformation time between modes. This makes is so thor rushes wont be as powerful against protoss because if you put them in haywire mode to counter immortals they are still weak to zealot/voidray and cannot switch modes fast enough to deal with the voidrays. haywire missiles CANNOT target zealots so the thors will naturally be weak to zealots but they will soft-counter immortals and beat collossi.
or possibly make thors haywire mode some 100/100 upgrade to make thor rushes slower
|
I agree with DB( as I always have) that Terran shouldn't be able to go pure factory and destroy everything. I hated it in BW(no wonder Terrans are caught up in that mentality) and I'm glad they're not repeating that bullshit for SC2. Thumbs up.
Really? Is it so difficult to make facts as your primary production buildings and make a barracks and a few starports for ravens, banshees,and such? You're only spending upgrades on just the factory units.
|
On January 09 2013 07:53 Phoenix2003 wrote:
I agree with DB( as I always have) that Terran shouldn't be able to go pure factory and destroy everything. I hated it in BW(no wonder Terrans are caught up in that mentality) and I'm glad they're not repeating that bullshit for SC2. Thumbs up.
Really? Is it so difficult to make facts as your primary production buildings and make a barracks and a few starports for ravens and such?
yes. also what DB (apparently wants) is that you should be able to build ghosts and factory units and destroy everything (besides air). Not sure why you believe that is much better.
|
On January 09 2013 07:53 Phoenix2003 wrote:
I agree with DB( as I always have) that Terran shouldn't be able to go pure factory and destroy everything. I hated it in BW(no wonder Terrans are caught up in that mentality) and I'm glad they're not repeating that bullshit for SC2. Thumbs up.
Really? Is it so difficult to make facts as your primary production buildings and make a barracks and a few starports for ravens, banshees,and such? You're only spending upgrades on just the factory units.
I agree with you so much
Actually, in WoL, the best way to play mech is to add banshees and to be ready to transition on ravens. Only factory often dies in stupid ways (BL rush, muta, mass infested terrans...) and that's a cool fact.
|
I actually think that Blizzard should do 4 things.
1. Rework the Thor to be a more late game unit. The HEP is great but more look into the Thor is needed.
2. The Siege Tank also needs a buff not in supply/cost but in damage and armor.
3. In relations to the Siege Tank, another tank should be added into HOTS. If you look at TvT in Dustin's own words TvT: Outside of reaper wars, I think the matchup is generally similiar to WoL with few minor differences like bio drops becoming abit too nasty. If Blizzard looks at implementing another type of tank I think it would bring fresh life into not only TvT but also TvP. Options are endless. A faster tank with a higher DPS versus Light would make early game much more interesting in TvT and TvZ. In addition, another idea is having a tank with say haywire missles ready to be deployed in the case that you need cheap anti air quick. The possibilities are infinite.
4. As for Widow Mines it feels like a very clunky unit. Work definitely has to be done. It feels very iffy with the Siege Tank.
Thanks for reading !
|
On January 09 2013 07:59 Insoleet wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 07:53 Phoenix2003 wrote:
I agree with DB( as I always have) that Terran shouldn't be able to go pure factory and destroy everything. I hated it in BW(no wonder Terrans are caught up in that mentality) and I'm glad they're not repeating that bullshit for SC2. Thumbs up.
Really? Is it so difficult to make facts as your primary production buildings and make a barracks and a few starports for ravens, banshees,and such? You're only spending upgrades on just the factory units. I agree with you so much Actually, in WoL, the best way to play mech is to add banshees and to be ready to transition on ravens. Only factory often dies in stupid ways (BL rush, muta, mass infested terrans...) and that's a cool fact.
I strong disagree that mech is weaker than Protoss in a 1v1 scenario, what Mech is weak at is mobility. No sane protoss opponent will attack into a positioned mech army because they will get slaughtered already in WoL balance status. So Whats increased Tank damage gonna do?
Also both Zerg and Protoss die to all kind of bullshit while going for their ultimate t2/t3 armies, why should terran be any different? Terran has already the best defense in the game. This would only make Terran become slowly mine out and build up your ultimate deathball army.
Why are Ghosts supposed to be some kind of burden? It is the best unit to build in every PvT. Also it goes quite well with Mech because it costs more minerals than gas.
|
Because bringing back the Warhound with extra damage vs mechanical is too damn difficult.
It's hilarious to me that they ever release it with a base 23 dmg vs all units rather than mechanical when it was specifically touted about as "anti-mech" unit.
^ Might be a bit off topic. Hell if nothing else, at least try it. The Warhound was scraped so early on they never even gave it a chance meanwhile Widow-Mines and Tempests get changes at least every-other patch.
|
On January 09 2013 08:19 freetgy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 07:59 Insoleet wrote:On January 09 2013 07:53 Phoenix2003 wrote:
I agree with DB( as I always have) that Terran shouldn't be able to go pure factory and destroy everything. I hated it in BW(no wonder Terrans are caught up in that mentality) and I'm glad they're not repeating that bullshit for SC2. Thumbs up.
Really? Is it so difficult to make facts as your primary production buildings and make a barracks and a few starports for ravens, banshees,and such? You're only spending upgrades on just the factory units. I agree with you so much Actually, in WoL, the best way to play mech is to add banshees and to be ready to transition on ravens. Only factory often dies in stupid ways (BL rush, muta, mass infested terrans...) and that's a cool fact. I strong disagree that mech is weaker than Protoss in a 1v1 scenario, what Mech is weak at is mobility. No sane protoss opponent will attack into a positioned mech army because they will get slaughtered already in WoL balance status. So Whats increased Tank damage gonna do? Also both Zerg and Protoss die to all kind of bullshit while going for their ultimate t2/t3 armies, why should terran be any different? Terran has already the best defense in the game. This would only make Terran become slowly mine out and build up your ultimate deathball army. Why are Ghosts supposed to be some kind of burden? It is the best unit to build in every PvT. Also it goes quite well with Mech because it costs more minerals than gas.
Protoss player can definitely charge into a terran seiged up and come out on top perfectly fine. Seige or unseige, protoss player will come out on top if they have enough archon and immortals. Sadly, you dont even need that much immortal or archon to achieve this. This is why more terran are favoring massing thors and hellbat because tank sucks. Even then, immortal still do pretty damn good against thors.
Now I know Avilo has a little bad of reputation but he had a video of him having 4 tanks in his natural and 1 on the high, all behind a wall AND a bunker and the protoss just 1-A in with a few immortal and archon chargelot army. Did I mention he had 1-2 and killed quiet a few probe with hellion runby. He even pulled all his scv to defend this knowing that if he defend this push he would be ahead but he lost over 50 SCV and barely put a dent in a 0-0-0 protoss all-in. You can find the video in the Mech is Not viable thread if you dig deep enough. There was quiet a few discussion on it. Some peopel were saying that he threw away too much hellion but there is no way in hell should a protoss be able to break a wall with a bunker, hellbat, and 4 tanks and 1 tanks on the high ground and over 50 SCV.
|
Russian Federation4235 Posts
There's a short but efficient RTS design principle: "mobility should always come at a price". Half the game's problems are already coming from the violations of this principle (warp gates and dont even get me started on the medivac which might not be evident at the moment but I promise will become a worse and worse problem later on), and it also has a direct consequence: "air units should never be core units". Every time this principle is broken, the game suffers. This phenomenon is directly responsible for the ZvZ matchup in BW (which is mutalisk micro wars 90% of the time) and Blizzard makes this mistake again and again. Air units should be casters, harassers or timing-window effective general purpose units, but you should be able to build a more-or-less viable late-game army that is 100% ground. Having an air unit as a core anti-air option is a very bad thing. Especially if the enemy's air options are balanced around an air unit with 9 range. I hated the air mode of the viking with a passion from day one, and hated it even more when I realized that the sole reason for it's existence is a hastily-scrapped answer to the colossus.
The problem is that solving this problem correctly requires a level of confidence and readiness for change far surpassed by what Blizzard has shown to be ready to undertake. Too many changes have to be made (reworking colossi, reworking vikings, reworking units currently countered by vikings and finally adding another AA option for the terran) for the game to not fall apart like a tower made of playing cards.
|
There should be an option:
Replace widow mine with new mech unit
|
On January 09 2013 05:55 Sissors wrote:Show nested quote +On January 09 2013 05:49 freetgy wrote:On January 09 2013 05:08 Hider wrote:
And Dustin Browder does it again --> demonstrates a terrible understanding of game design. He apparantly doesn't realize that as long as ghosts becomes a neccesity to do mech then this will require too much defensive turtling from the terran for the game to ever come interesting.
Welcome to WoL PvT for Protoss -.- Mech is already very strong, the only question is how much easier should it be able to get? Mech is hard to get, very weak to air, lacks any kind of mobility, and is at worst incredible against a frontal assault from toss. You see barely mech in WoL, then they heavily nerf it in HotS, so I think it is safe to assume without serious boosts you wont see it in HotS.
Fixed that for you.
Mech is brutal as shit in WoL, it's worse in HotS though (as in totally not viable in my opinion). Protoss cannot approach a well-composed mech army without being completely destroyed. Of course they don't need to as they have blink-stalkers which can do enough damage that a couple of 200/200 zealot-archon armies will clear out most of the Terran.
|
Can someone explain to me why the siege tank is so blatantly the favorite for receiving change? Is it just lackluster as a unit, or is the matchup that forces this kind of necessity? Because I can't see why a new unit wouldn't function just as well and be more interesting at the same time.
I feel bad that terran got a little screwed out of a new unit 
|
On January 09 2013 08:56 NonameAI wrote:
There should be an option:
Replace widow mine with new mech unit
But then they'd be admitting their pet project sucked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
