|
On April 06 2010 04:43 Lordpen wrote:
Part of it is how terran upgrades work. They have attack and armor upgrades for Infantry, mech and air.
So being able to focus on one of them makes sense.
This.
Its much more efficient to focus on either infantry, mech or air, meaning that your army will be focused on one of these things, even when you used tanks in a "bio" TvZ army in SC1, you never upgraded tank dmg because it was too insignificant (had to get armory and then pay for the upgrade, plus tanks were usually outphased if you were headed towards SK terran to begin with).
|
The Upgrade system is THE SAME as in SC:BW
Terran has seperate upgrades for bio, mech and air
Protoss has seperate upgrades for ground, air and shields
Zerg has seperate upgrades for ranged, melee and air
So I see definately no point in the argument that Terran bio only is source of the upgrade system, because nothing changed at all regarding this.
|
Korea (South)922 Posts
The reason why mech is so undervalued in SC2 compared to SC1 is the tank. In BW, tank was the answer to all fat units, ultras, dragoon, other tanks, being THE anti-artillery unit, armored units cry in the sight of a tank line, to add the fact that vultures were amazing for anti-light, making the factory what it's worth. In Sc2, ALL the factory units are ant-light ONLY or thor being too expensive, leaving terran with nothing but marauders to deal with shit like roaches and stalkers. Tanks are imo really bad vs roach and even worse vs marauder. They even made it so tanks are effective vs mass light being great vs shit like marines only with mass splash light-slaying damage, but doesn't hellion have that already? It sickens me that vikings are the counter to the colossus, when there's a good ol siege tank that COULD be buildable to smash it with it's great dominant range, but no, this isn't the case, due to the immortal. I'm sick of marauders being answers to all 3 matchups. Revive the tank to do its original job, demolish armored scum.
|
Maybe because mech in BW TvP is horribly imba! People can argue against this all day but the fact (haha) that they removed vultures added immortals and increased tank cost in SC2 says it all. I mean the facts are that in BW TvP there are several things I find absurd.
1. Terran can be down a base and be equal, allowing them to camp and not over extend themselves, then move one the Toss's expos and put him behind.
2. The vulture is like a zealot, if the zealot cost less, built twice as fast, had ranged attack and started with 3 scarab shots and speed.
3. Detection and scouting- the Terran can scan 8 times off two bases while he camps. Meanwhile the obs requires gate,cyber,robo,obs to make the scan is rax, acad, scan ( 50 gas for 1st scan almost 400 gas for 1st obs!)
4. One of the few hard counters to vulture tank is carriers and it's so easily shut down by goliaths, that build in no time, have huge range, are cheap, and get double damage increase for each upgrade. Compared to carriers which build slow and cost a ton just to get the 1st one out and full
5. In battle the Terran can sit on his ass and kill an army twice the size, the protoss has to outnumber, outmaneuver, outmicro and out tech to kill the terran ball. ( Can toss hope to compete vs terran in a tier 2 vs tier 2 fight?)
6. The Terran has turrets, scans, and science vessels for detection compared to cannons and obs.
7. EMP- losing all shields and energy..... ridiculous (and the thing that shoots it detects)
8. Upgrades- Mech needs a factory, add on, and armory for upgrades but to fight this army count how many buildings a toss has to make.... gateway,cyber, forge, robo, obs, adun, (and probably support bay, temp archive as well!)
9. One of the most effective counters to mech is the zeolot (or DT) bomb. This really says it all, the damage on mines and tanks is so high your best way to fight them is to cause friendly fire!
(nony and idra met in the tsl twice, how many times did nony beat him late game? How often does flash loose late game tvp?)
Add all this up and you have the reason why mech is gone, and I'm so happy to hear all you mech heads whine for your imba back. Sucks to have to fight toss in a fair fight huh! Have fun with reaper cheese dirtbags. lol
|
|
|
Mech no longer has any anti-air (Goliath) For me, unless I'm on the defense and expecting to be rushed, I won't really build any mech, except a factory to get my starport out.
|
hiho
i play mech vs toss a lot with reaper oppening (at least one and maybe two if he defends poorly) and expand of that pretty safely.
i think if i wouldnt be such a bad player (macro eek) it would be kinda good but the problem for me is that i need a lot of gas for my tank/thor/ghost combo which i mostly cant afford with 2 bases and securing a third base is really tough for me (mostly because i am not good i think) and therefore my unit combo has too many hellions in it without stuff that does the real dmg.
Besides that i ve no real issue with mech... just the vespin cost seems a bit too high and the follow up problems that you get your army way too slow and toss gets the whole map is ...beh 
|
Playing a complimentary role is not very efficient in a long game. Zerg and Protoss can have more complimentary ground units because their upgrades effect all ground attacks or all ground armor (granted zerg do have melee vs range). Terran can only upgrade infantry or vehicles, which means that both factory armies and infantry armies SHOULD be viable on their own.
you just answered your own question >.>
My question is : why is it so desirable for Terran to be completely Bio in ALL MATCHUPS? It's such a limited troop selection and possible gameplay experience. Would people be happy with Protoss being strongest off only Stargates or Robo Facilities, or Zerg to be forced to just build Hydras and Infestors in some matchup?
We want terran mech to be viable so that we dont see mass marauders every single fucking game that a terran plays.
Mech is the glass cannon identity.
Mech catalyzes dynamic unit positioning and tactics.
Mech is big boom booms.
Mech is closest to traditional human warfare.
Mech is the antithesis of 'walk and shoot' infantry balls of all the races.
Mech makes for strong positional and map tension.
People want mech because it's inherently awesome. They want it to be not just barely viable in at least one or two matchups, but to be STRONG and a FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH.
MECH! MECH! MECH!
This... >thread
|
On April 06 2010 23:33 GoDannY wrote:
The Upgrade system is THE SAME as in SC:BW
Terran has seperate upgrades for bio, mech and air
Protoss has seperate upgrades for ground, air and shields
Zerg has seperate upgrades for ranged, melee and air
So I see definately no point in the argument that Terran bio only is source of the upgrade system, because nothing changed at all regarding this.
Terran was indeed bio or Mech just on vs Z was some kinda of combination used and yet tanks were almost never upgraded, this because of the separeted cost of the upgrades... if ppl want more mixed armys this separation has to go... mech alread isn't that good on his own now having to pay extra money for upgrades others than your bio.... now that sucks
|
I'm curious how many people find that it would be acceptable if Terran units are specific to certain match-ups.
For instance, bio is used against Protoss, Mech is used against Zerg, and some funky mix is used in the mirror match depending.
Is that sufficient and interesting/dynamic enough, or should the majority of the units have a place in all 3 match-ups?
There are basically three criteria for if it's good gameplay or not:
1. Is it engaging, strategic and challenging? Basically, is it a great game to play?
2. Is it entertaining for an audience?
3. Is it fun?
That's what I'm judging this stuff by.
|
There should be at least 2 viable army composition for each race. Terran should be able to use 3m or mech, toss should be able to use gateway or robo units, and zerg....well zerg can use whatever they want really.
|
mech are fun?
i played terran, a style based in marauder its boring.
i missed micro action: vultures, tanks and vessel was the more entertaining and intensive mass arrmy in sc1.
|
RPGabe people will want something familiar until they learn how to rape pure Marauder and learn to scout to adjust their unit mix 
We just need to see good games of someone using more than 2-3 types of units... most of people just copy what somone really good does anyways.
|
On April 06 2010 05:04 0neder wrote:
Mech is the glass cannon identity.
Mech catalyzes dynamic unit positioning and tactics.
Mech is big boom booms.
Mech is closest to traditional human warfare.
Mech is the antithesis of 'walk and shoot' infantry balls of all the races.
Mech makes for strong positional and map tension.
People want mech because it's inherently awesome. They want it to be not just barely viable in at least one or two matchups, but to be STRONG and a FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH.
MECH! MECH! MECH!
This.
And the more viable options the better. Diverse game-play yields more enjoyment for the player and the spectator.
|
Mech is a sad state of affairs right now. At a high level, bio is being use almost exclusivly for main mary composition along with air support. Hellion is being used for harass, Thor is seen very seldom in more games, and Tanks just don't cut it in SC2.
I expect in the next patches that tanks will see a buff which will make mech a more viable alternative.
Alot of these problems come from the whole immortal hard counter issue.
|
I don't think it's an obsession with wanting to go PURE mech. It more the concept that current unit design pretty much sandbags you into going bio in many match ups.
Protoss have "Stargate" issues, where their air is pretty much pointless.
Terrans have "Factory" issues, where their factory units are not realy being produce in sufficient numbers.
What I would like to see is for each unit to have it's defined role and place. Zerg masses hydras?!? you mass tanks. He masses Lings you go for Hellions or Marines. He goes muta? You go for thors, marines or possibly vikings. He goes roaches, you go Marauders.
What this would do is create a metagame environment, where say I think you'll go mass marines so I tech up to Colossi, but you instead go Banshees, or Thor/Siege tanks. Sure you'll build other units, but you're emphasis at this time would be on getting those certain units and other thing to support them. So in essence your unorthodox but still viable strategy catches me off guard and give you the advantage until I can compensate.
What this type of environment needs is multiple viable builds for each match up.
Personally the idea of going ONLY mech is stupid, Protoss don't build only Immortals, Observers, Warp-prisms and colossi. They'd lose versus pretty much anything.
I do however feel that 2 Bio + 2 Mech + 2 Air upgrades makes terrans feel they shouldn't mix those unit types.
Protoss going Robo+Gateway essentially upgrade Ground Weapons and Armor. The armor upgrade is realy only half as effective since toss units have shield, but the weapons upgrade applys to all units. So net effect: 1.5 upgrades for all units.
Zerg going Roaches --> Hydras with some zerglings as needed, can just upgrade Ranged Weapons + Armor. Their lings wouldn't get the ranged weapon bonus, but the armor buff applys to all 3 unit types. So net effect: 2 upgrades for Roach/Hydras and 1 for Zerglings == 1.5 overall
Terrans going MM+Tank/Hellion who upgrade Bio Weapons + Armor find 2 of their units with NO upgrades at all. 2 upgrades for Bio and 0 for Mech = 1 upgrade overall. (Granted there will be more MM than Mech).
|
Terran has seperate upgrades for bio, mech and air
Protoss has seperate upgrades for ground, air and shields
Zerg has seperate upgrades for ranged, melee and air
Terran has 2 of each for a total of 6.
Protoss has 2 of Ground + 2 Air + Shields (at 2x cost) for a total of 5 (6 based on cost)
Zerg has 2 Melee, 2 Ranged and 1 Ground Armor (1.5 cost) for a total of 5. (5.5 based on cost).
|
On April 07 2010 03:55 Daerthalus wrote:Show nested quote +
Terran has seperate upgrades for bio, mech and air
Protoss has seperate upgrades for ground, air and shields
Zerg has seperate upgrades for ranged, melee and air
Terran has 2 of each for a total of 6. Protoss has 2 of Ground + 2 Air + Shields (at 2x cost) for a total of 5 (6 based on cost) Zerg has 2 Melee, 2 Ranged and 1 Ground Armor (1.5 cost) for a total of 5. (5.5 based on cost).
yeah but making an all-air army isn't viable at all, so you shouldn't be counting the air upgrades; and attack/armor are the most critical of upgrades, so you should be looking at it like this:
Terran has 4 sets of upgrades for ground attack/armor: 2 for infantry, 2 for vehicles
Protoss has 2 sets of upgrades for ground attack/armor.
Zerg has 2 sets of upgrades for ground attack, and 1 set of upgrades for ground armor.
Terran is clearly the worst in terms of ground unit upgrades. Due to gas scarcity, it is nearly impossible for terran to do a mix of bio/mech and keep up with upgrades against toss/zerg. Therefore, people want mech to be strong enough to stand on its own, so that you can choose to go mech or bio and be able to stay even on upgrades.
Now I personally don't see this as a problem; I think you can get the right mix of units as terran and that will make up for lack of weapon/armor upgrades, therefore you don't always "need" to keep up in weapon/armor upgrades, meaning that a mix of bio/mech is just as strong as pure bio or pure mech, even in late-game.
|
On April 06 2010 23:55 Reborn8u wrote:
Maybe because mech in BW TvP is horribly imba! People can argue against this all day but the fact (haha) that they removed vultures added immortals and increased tank cost in SC2 says it all. I mean the facts are that in BW TvP there are several things I find absurd.
1. Terran can be down a base and be equal, allowing them to camp and not over extend themselves, then move one the Toss's expos and put him behind.
2. The vulture is like a zealot, if the zealot cost less, built twice as fast, had ranged attack and started with 3 scarab shots and speed.
3. Detection and scouting- the Terran can scan 8 times off two bases while he camps. Meanwhile the obs requires gate,cyber,robo,obs to make the scan is rax, acad, scan ( 50 gas for 1st scan almost 400 gas for 1st obs!)
4. One of the few hard counters to vulture tank is carriers and it's so easily shut down by goliaths, that build in no time, have huge range, are cheap, and get double damage increase for each upgrade. Compared to carriers which build slow and cost a ton just to get the 1st one out and full
5. In battle the Terran can sit on his ass and kill an army twice the size, the protoss has to outnumber, outmaneuver, outmicro and out tech to kill the terran ball. ( Can toss hope to compete vs terran in a tier 2 vs tier 2 fight?)
6. The Terran has turrets, scans, and science vessels for detection compared to cannons and obs.
7. EMP- losing all shields and energy..... ridiculous (and the thing that shoots it detects)
8. Upgrades- Mech needs a factory, add on, and armory for upgrades but to fight this army count how many buildings a toss has to make.... gateway,cyber, forge, robo, obs, adun, (and probably support bay, temp archive as well!)
9. One of the most effective counters to mech is the zeolot (or DT) bomb. This really says it all, the damage on mines and tanks is so high your best way to fight them is to cause friendly fire!
(nony and idra met in the tsl twice, how many times did nony beat him late game? How often does flash loose late game tvp?)
Add all this up and you have the reason why mech is gone, and I'm so happy to hear all you mech heads whine for your imba back. Sucks to have to fight toss in a fair fight huh! Have fun with reaper cheese dirtbags. lol
I really dislike your tone. In any case, most examples you gave are just specific SC1 Terran strengths without taking into account the intricacies, or framework of a full game of SC1. You ignore that a critical mass of carriers with an attack upgrade are ridiculously strong, especially when exploiting building placement, terrain and mobility. Terran's are more cost efficient and can thrive on having less expo's, because in most matchups their mobility is severely limited. Scans can be wasted, or baited by lone DT's, and stretched out in general - an observer provides cheap, constant scouting and detection (You list the gateway, cyber core as if you weren't going to get them in the first place). EMP comes from a very expensive, non-cloaked detector, and the EMP itself is ridiculously slow, with a small AoE, which is usually reserved for temps or arbiters. Also, you list every Protoss building under the sun in a typical TvP matchup - I'm glad you go dragoons with reavers, shuttles and templars, but that's a choice you make to stretch yourself out like that. For the most part as protoss, in order to get a huge army you just need a bunch of gateways, which cost no gas - but they have more tech buildings and some units are more gas intensive, it balances out. You also ignore all the protoss strengths (Arbiters for Christ's sake). Again, you need to consider the big picture instead of sniping various perceived imbalances
|
I just want my tanks to be usefull in any matchup and not require constant babying for them to be usefull (have to target with them every shot or they choose a probe/drone/scv cuz its the least threatening unit)................... hellions r fine thors r fine, I just wish I had sc1 tanks :-o)
also mech is AWSOME BIG BOOM MANY FUN
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
