|
+ Show Spoiler +On April 05 2010 12:28 QibingZero wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:13 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:02 Half wrote:On April 05 2010 11:59 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 11:53 Rothbardian wrote:On April 05 2010 11:49 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 11:45 Rothbardian wrote:On April 05 2010 11:43 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 11:38 Rothbardian wrote:On April 05 2010 11:35 Mora wrote:
[quote]
can you make me a list of all the terran units that are hard-countered by the roach, not including marines? marauders? Every Terran unit except Air/Marauder. If the Zerg is semi-competent he'll throw in a few Hydra and decimate your air. So, basically we are back to square one; Marauder. The Roach is a joke of a unit. in my experience marines/tanks do just fine against roaches. banshees do well vs roaches. vikings with micro do well against roaches. Reapers do not counter roaches (and they shouldn't), but they certainly don't have a hard time avoiding them. Hellions are in the same boat as the reaper. So... roaches counter... marines and scvs? holy fucking broken batman! Marines absolutely blow vs Roach. As do Tanks. It's all about unit interaction. You can have 7 roaches easily for every Tank that can be produced. Not only that, but by the time Terran gets a few tanks, you can get burrow + move, and pin the Terran in his base for a very long time while you take the whole map and get 100+ Roaches. The only counter to Roach is Marauder, period. As for Vikings.....Vikings suck on Ground mode because of cost and speed. Also, good luck getting to Tier 2.5 and surviving without using Marauders, and since you are there, why would you use a unit that gets completely demolished in fights against Roaches? you responded to my saying "i counter roaches just fine without marauders" with "no". what? how do i even respond to that? Like, what alternative do i have other than to say you needed to stop sucking so much shit in sc2 and go learn to play? Yep, I suck. I was only ~2000 (Plat) before reset, and ~1300 atm trying new things out. How about you give me some replays where the Zerg mass roached and you went something other than Marauders and won. mass roaches as in ~20 roaches? or mass roaches as in ~60 roaches? Why does it matter? If you can't beat either of them without marauders doesn't that necessitate it matters because i have several replays of beating 1800~2000 rated zergs who make 20 or so roaches, without using mass marauders (it's not uncommon for me to make 1-2 of them). I've never played a zerg who has massed much more than 20 though: ergo cannot show replays of this. A win in this case ends up meaning less than the battles themselves do. For all we know you could have killed a ton of drones with Hellion harass and then steamrolled with a much larger (albeit less efficient) army. You're so quick to mention all of these ratings and win statistics, but what does it really even mean? You say you never built Marauders against Zerg (which I guess means you don't mass them, but you don't need mass Marauders if the Zerg isn't massing Roaches... I digress) and yet you still had a high win%. What were you doing that is so special that seems to defy nearly everything I've ever experienced or read about TvZ? You also say you never build an Immortal in PvZ and still have a high win%. Doing what? Are you going proxy 2gate every other game? Hiding a few Void Rays? I'm sorry, but win% and rating simply do not imply you have a solid strategy to face these specific units in a straight up battle, especially in a macro game (nor does it mean you actually don't use Marauders/Immortals, we have to take your word for that). It would make this thread a lot more civil if you actually mentioned what strategies you use instead.
I almost never see orb build immortals VS roaches >.> like rarely if ever and he usually comes out on top.
|
i completly agree. i think roaches, immortals, and marauders should be taken out and replaced with different tier 1.5 units that arent complete hard counters to eachother
|
i personally think when they choose the head hauncho of c&c to help them .. blizzard made a mistake.. u see alot of elaments of c&c tossed in kinda flimsy.
with that said ..
imortals counter marauders and roaches very true1.. but they counnter.. tanks.,. thors.., stalkers, colossus , ultras i think buildings to.
imortals are the only one of the units that really works well
marauders work alittle effectivly.. colo have a better chance because of the health and shield/ difference of immortal to the marauder. it also makes the imortal also better at bunker busting and tank busting then a marauder prolly ultras to.
roaches are the least effective of the 3 in th games i played.
|
On April 05 2010 12:37 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:33 Half wrote:On April 05 2010 12:27 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:24 Half wrote:On April 05 2010 12:13 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:02 Half wrote:On April 05 2010 11:59 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 11:53 Rothbardian wrote:On April 05 2010 11:49 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 11:45 Rothbardian wrote:
[quote]
Marines absolutely blow vs Roach. As do Tanks. It's all about unit interaction. You can have 7 roaches easily for every Tank that can be produced. Not only that, but by the time Terran gets a few tanks, you can get burrow + move, and pin the Terran in his base for a very long time while you take the whole map and get 100+ Roaches. The only counter to Roach is Marauder, period.
As for Vikings.....Vikings suck on Ground mode because of cost and speed. Also, good luck getting to Tier 2.5 and surviving without using Marauders, and since you are there, why would you use a unit that gets completely demolished in fights against Roaches?
you responded to my saying "i counter roaches just fine without marauders" with "no". what? how do i even respond to that? Like, what alternative do i have other than to say you needed to stop sucking so much shit in sc2 and go learn to play? Yep, I suck. I was only ~2000 (Plat) before reset, and ~1300 atm trying new things out. How about you give me some replays where the Zerg mass roached and you went something other than Marauders and won. mass roaches as in ~20 roaches? or mass roaches as in ~60 roaches? Why does it matter? If you can't beat either of them without marauders doesn't that necessitate it matters because i have several replays of beating 1800~2000 rated zergs who make 20 or so roaches, without using mass marauders (it's not uncommon for me to make 1-2 of them). I've never played a zerg who has massed much more than 20 though: ergo cannot show replays of this. Well, the reason why they don't make more then 20 supply worth is because they acknowledge they would get screwed hard if you switched marauder. Yeah, the language is a bit strong, a tad bit sensationalist, but imho the underlying message is 100% true and authentic. "Remake" may not be necessary. "Major rebalancing?" Probably. i don't consider -1 armour, -15hp 'major rebalancing'. -50 HP more like it, +4 constant regen so its still a roach, slight dps change, -1 armor, slightly slower. I consider that a major rebalancing. they would be completely useless with those stats. you honestly think they're that overpowered? Thank god the closest you'll ever get to game design is this forum.
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them.
|
I agree that something has to be done about roaches, I would like to see them become weaker units but have an even faster burrow regeneration. This would make them less boring, they would be micro units, and they wouldn't need a direct counter in both other races. You wouldn't have to have mass marauders to deal with them. With this change I could see the marauder becoming higher tech, costing more, and doing even more damage to heavy armored units, making it a more specialized unit instead of being the core of a terran bioball.
This still leaves the problem of immortals vs terran mech. No terran is going mech with immortals being as accessible as they are now. I think a more interesting change than making immortals hard to get would be adding a new terran mech unit that can deal with them and perhaps also making hellions a little stronger against them. Terran mech is really lacking as it is. I would love to see terran having a choice between going all mech, all bio, or a mix of each as could be done in brood war. Tanks, hellions, and thors are all so specialized that you can't use mech alone for anything. It's really a choice between a bioball or banshee cheese. Mech has no place in this game.
|
On April 05 2010 12:35 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:28 QibingZero wrote:
A win in this case ends up meaning less than the battles themselves do. For all we know you could have killed a ton of drones with Hellion harass and then steamrolled with a much larger (albeit less efficient) army. You're so quick to mention all of these ratings and win statistics, but what does it really even mean?
You say you never built Marauders against Zerg (which I guess means you don't mass them, but you don't need mass Marauders if the Zerg isn't massing Roaches... I digress) and yet you still had a high win%. What were you doing that is so special that seems to defy nearly everything I've ever experienced or read about TvZ?
You also say you never build an Immortal in PvZ and still have a high win%. Doing what? Are you going proxy 2gate every other game? Hiding a few Void Rays?
I'm sorry, but win% and rating simply do not imply you have a solid strategy to face these specific units in a straight up battle, especially in a macro game (nor does it mean you actually don't use Marauders/Immortals, we have to take your word for that). It would make this thread a lot more civil if you actually mentioned what strategies you use instead. i only mentioned my win% and rating because when i say 'i disagree that these units are necessary', and people tell me i'm wrong, a paradox ensues where i have reached that rating doing exactly as i said i did. i mentioned stalkers being a good counter to roaches more times than i've mentioned my pvz win percentage. I've never proxy gated (though i certainly have nothing against doing so). I've busted out a fast voidray in a few games, it's true. I switch up what i do quite frequently, but i've found Terran air units particular fun. 2 viking opening into upgraded marines/tanks has worked fairly solidly for me. Most of the replays i would show would be exactly that. Upgraded marines/tanks do just fine vs roaches.
Would you agree or disagree that using Immortals would be more effective vs Roach heavy armies than just Stalkers, though? I can't imagine you have all that much success with pure Stalker, especially given the number advantage the Roaches will have.
It's the same with Terran - wouldn't you say adding more Marauders into your army would give you a better chance? Pure Marine/Tank is just asking for Banelings rolling in a couple seconds into a battle and ruining you completely. Mixing Marauders in not only makes you a lot more effective against the Roaches, but limits the amount of damage the Banelings will do to your army as well.
On April 05 2010 12:43 Dacendoran wrote:
I almost never see orb build immortals VS roaches >.> like rarely if ever and he usually comes out on top.
Maybe this is why he's so upset all the time. =P
|
very interesting read, and i agree with angra:On April 05 2010 10:59 Angra wrote:
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if removing roaches, marauders and immortals from the game made it 10x more interesting and fun to play/watch.
i hate roach, marauder, imortal battles. for peat sakes. if one guy pulls any of those three, another has to follow or some masive air to ground forces. i have seen more games. with people who have gone immortal and phinix then i care to say or count. a few zerg players have followed suit and gone roach and muta. in short, players see that the best way to win is use the over powered ground unit and an air to air capable unit to slauter. the build is not diverse as some people say. you reach teir 1.5 and it's one build and one build only you see in every replay. what maters is your macro, no more.
|
On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them.
i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun?
Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them.
|
On April 05 2010 12:50 QibingZero wrote:
Would you agree or disagree that using Immortals would be more effective vs Roach heavy armies than just Stalkers, though? I can't imagine you have all that much success with pure Stalker, especially given the number advantage the Roaches will have.
to be honest, my pvz games have almost all boiled down to stalker vs roach, and stalker rapes roach so hard that the game doesn't get past the 8 minute mark. in the few games that gotten past this point (some people are smart enough to make lings), then i usually have a nice army composition, though i prefer collosus over immortals.
So yes, if we're talking about mid game, i do agree that mixed army compositions are better than 1-unit-mass armies.
It's the same with Terran - wouldn't you say adding more Marauders into your army would give you a better chance? Pure Marine/Tank is just asking for Banelings rolling in a couple seconds into a battle and ruining you completely. Mixing Marauders in not only makes you a lot more effective against the Roaches, but limits the amount of damage the Banelings will do to your army as well.
marauders are a different story! I think marauders need a close looking at. they're much more broken than roaches.
in my tvz games where i was not making them it was because i was too stupid to realize how good they were. i've had plenty of problems with banelings - you are correct. never had a problem with roaches though!
|
Op is really well written, I tip my hat to you good sir. I also agree that the Roach is a shitty unit in general, and its not very nice to watch
|
OP's makes a subtle and well considered point I think...
And consider, even if he's wrong, doesn't the fact that all the roach's interesting abilities have been removed cause you some concern? What is left of the unit exactly? It broadcasts a certain amount of dps in a certain radius and has X health.
|
wow...
this has been the fist post toexplain why sc2 is on the whole more boring and less thought- heavy than sc1
very good read
|
On April 05 2010 12:57 USn wrote:
OP's makes a subtle and well considered point I think...
And consider, even if he's wrong, doesn't the fact that all the roach's interesting abilities have been removed cause you some concern? What is left of the unit exactly? It broadcasts a certain amount of dps in a certain radius and has X health.
sort of like... 75% of the units in sc1? lol
ie:
zealot
dragoon
hydralisk
zergling
marine (unless stim disqualifies it)
scouts
mutas
etc.
|
On April 05 2010 12:53 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them. i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun? Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them.
I would say fun units are ones that have to be microed to be effective, like reavers, high templars, marine/medic, vultures, mutas, and defilers from sc1.
Hydras have to be microed to dodge storms while you can just attackmove roaches and they never die.
|
On April 05 2010 13:02 ZergZergling wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:53 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them. i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun? Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them. I would say fun units are ones that have to be microed to be effective, like reavers, high templars, marine/medic, vultures, mutas, and defilers from sc1. Hydras have to be microed to dodge storms while you can just attackmove roaches and they never die.
so wouldn't tuning them in a way that they would die more easily make them more fun? *blink*
|
How would I stop a zealot rush without roaches? Or hellion rush? Can't block my ramp with buildings like T or P, certainly not with zerglings. I could make two queens right away, or get spine crawlers, but thats just kind of silly. The roach is an entirely necessary unit. I feel like the roach has been made into this scapegoat for no reason. This game has lots of balance tweaks to go, and lots of strategy to be discovered. Removing units is only going to make the game LESS balanced.
|
Very interesting OP. I think you're right both that the roach has strayed far from its original concept and become very uninteresting, and that it's the root cause of a lot of the other problems with the game.
|
On April 05 2010 12:53 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them. i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun? Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them.
let's compare roaches to hydras from SC1
90% of the time you will make hydras en masse vs protoss.
Hydras are fast are a safe unit that are useful in just about every situation ZvP. VS a evenly skilled Protoss player you will need to outmicro his ground army to win. You must dodge storms, and snipe reavers. You can turn weakened hydras into lurkers. Controlling 50+ hydras correctly was HARD (with limited control), and extremely rewarding when done properly. They arent the FUNNEST unit in the game (a title reserved for mutalisks) but they are fun, at least in my opinion.
Roaches are slow. They have a lot of health. Reavers no longer exist and thus cannot kill roaches in 1 hit. Storm does not kill roaches in 1 hit either. Coupled with how slow roaches are and how short storm lasts, it's not NEARLY as pressing an issue to dodge storms in SC2 with roaches as it was in SC1 with hydras. Basically controlling roaches in SC2 is like controlling a big hydra ball in SC1 after you successfully sniped all the templar on the map (which was the fun part).
They tried to spice them up with burrow and healing mechanics but it's just really not that interesting or useful in battle (especially when you have like 40 roaches lol).
A lot of the things that make roaches boring also make Hydras much more boring in SC2 than they were in SC1 (namely they are slower and dont really need to be micro'd at all, especially when you can control your entire army at once).
If you look at the main meat of each of the races' typical basic armies: MMM vs roach/hydra vs zeal/sentry/stalker, Zerg requires the absolute least micro. MMM you have medivac control which opens up cute micro option, you have stim and since at least marines are pretty fast you have options for dodging spells and sniping units much better. Protoss has the most micro with stalkers having blink and being fast with good range and ofc sentries being THE micro unit of the race. Zerg is basically just a-moving a giant ball which is in 1 control group.
|
On April 05 2010 13:11 Ideas wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 12:53 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them. i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun? Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them. let's compare roaches to hydras from SC1 90% of the time you will make hydras en masse vs protoss. Hydras are fast are a safe unit that are useful in just about every situation ZvP. VS a evenly skilled Protoss player you will need to outmicro his ground army to win. You must dodge storms, and snipe reavers. You can turn weakened hydras into lurkers. Controlling 50+ hydras correctly was HARD (with limited control), and extremely rewarding when done properly. They arent the FUNNEST unit in the game (a title reserved for mutalisks) but they are fun, at least in my opinion. Roaches are slow. They have a lot of health. Reavers no longer exist and thus cannot kill roaches in 1 hit. Storm does not kill roaches in 1 hit either. Coupled with how slow roaches are and how short storm lasts, it's not NEARLY as pressing an issue to dodge storms in SC2 with roaches as it was in SC1 with hydras. Basically controlling roaches in SC2 is like controlling a big hydra ball in SC1 after you successfully sniped all the templar on the map (which was the fun part). They tried to spice them up with burrow and healing mechanics but it's just really not that interesting or useful in battle (especially when you have like 40 roaches lol). A lot of the things that make roaches boring also make Hydras much more boring in SC2 than they were in SC1 (namely they are slower and dont really need to be micro'd at all, especially when you can control your entire army at once). If you look at the main meat of each of the races' typical basic armies: MMM vs roach/hydra vs zeal/sentry/stalker, Zerg requires the absolute least micro. MMM you have medivac control which opens up cute micro option, you have stim and since at least marines are pretty fast you have options for dodging spells and sniping units much better. Protoss has the most micro with stalkers having blink and being fast with good range and ofc sentries being THE micro unit of the race. Zerg is basically just a-moving a giant ball which is in 1 control group.
ah! excellent!
thanks
|
On April 05 2010 13:14 Mora wrote:Show nested quote +On April 05 2010 13:11 Ideas wrote:On April 05 2010 12:53 Mora wrote:On April 05 2010 12:48 ZergZergling wrote:
I think you're missing the point a lot of people have made that whether or not roaches are overpowered they are a boring unit and sc2 is less fun to play/watch because of them. i've seen this said a lot - that roaches are not fun. what makes them not fun? Why are hydras more fun than roaches? Or marines more than marauders? Aside from these units being too good i don't understand what is 'not fun' about them. let's compare roaches to hydras from SC1 90% of the time you will make hydras en masse vs protoss. Hydras are fast are a safe unit that are useful in just about every situation ZvP. VS a evenly skilled Protoss player you will need to outmicro his ground army to win. You must dodge storms, and snipe reavers. You can turn weakened hydras into lurkers. Controlling 50+ hydras correctly was HARD (with limited control), and extremely rewarding when done properly. They arent the FUNNEST unit in the game (a title reserved for mutalisks) but they are fun, at least in my opinion. Roaches are slow. They have a lot of health. Reavers no longer exist and thus cannot kill roaches in 1 hit. Storm does not kill roaches in 1 hit either. Coupled with how slow roaches are and how short storm lasts, it's not NEARLY as pressing an issue to dodge storms in SC2 with roaches as it was in SC1 with hydras. Basically controlling roaches in SC2 is like controlling a big hydra ball in SC1 after you successfully sniped all the templar on the map (which was the fun part). They tried to spice them up with burrow and healing mechanics but it's just really not that interesting or useful in battle (especially when you have like 40 roaches lol). A lot of the things that make roaches boring also make Hydras much more boring in SC2 than they were in SC1 (namely they are slower and dont really need to be micro'd at all, especially when you can control your entire army at once). If you look at the main meat of each of the races' typical basic armies: MMM vs roach/hydra vs zeal/sentry/stalker, Zerg requires the absolute least micro. MMM you have medivac control which opens up cute micro option, you have stim and since at least marines are pretty fast you have options for dodging spells and sniping units much better. Protoss has the most micro with stalkers having blink and being fast with good range and ofc sentries being THE micro unit of the race. Zerg is basically just a-moving a giant ball which is in 1 control group. ah! excellent! thanks
and as BW Zerg player, it fucking kills me that I have to play protoss to have any fun in SC2 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
