DISCLAIMER: Patch 15 fucked siegetanks sideways so this proposal isnt quite as valid anymore but take it with a grain of salt as from before the change.
Okay before any of you start crying about omg it's not broken I was going to upload more replays but I kept getting errors on half of them so watch these two and try not to claw your eyes out.
Okay moving on, terran mech in the lategame once they get full upgrades and sieged up and fully 200/200 with ravens and energy for spells you CAN NOT beat it. Now the thing is there should be no unbeatable strategy there should be no point at which you have to GG without fighting because you can't win. There needs to be a way to break a strategy with good control or good macro and after Sheth wound up suiciding a combined total of almost 20k minerals and 10k gas it's clear that macro isn't the way to go.
Okay anyways I don't want this to be an argument on if terran mech is broken or not but obviously it probably will so I'm going to move on to my possible fix. I think one of the major factors is not the stats on the terran mech as it works quite well against protoss and if there is an actual nerf to mech then it breaks tvp mech viability and a buff to zerg ground breaks zvp. This is the dilemma people facing this have had to think about for quite a while. The solution is actually amazingly simple once I thought of it.
Remove this:
Siege tanks have a smart AI that refuses to overkill targets, it sounds good it seems like a great idea at first because oh tanks wound up wasting a lot of shots vs fast units like speedlings in broodwar. But the problem is without the tanks wasting shots it's not possible for a zerg ground army to get into position to kill anything more than just a few tanks. Again watch the replays if you disagree, I think that if the smart AI is removed so that tanks waste shots a zerg will still take HEAVY losses but if they're in a situation that Sheth was in where he was ridiculously far ahead in macro able to rebuild 200/200 armies in less than a minute it would then be possible to break the mech.
TL;DR remove the smart targetting on siege tanks so that they are forced to waste shots on the first wave of zerg units and maybe a zerg in dominant macro position can break mech without actual balance changes.
edit:
As for zerg being more mobile and having to abuse the immobility of Mech watch this replay MoMaN did an excellent job of abusing Lz and playing mind games sniping expansions and doing a great job of using drops fake drops nydus worm everything people are always saying the zerg has to do to beat mech and he STILL lost...
Going to update this list here in the OP as we get more
On June 03 2010 10:33 EnderW wrote: I will agree that the games of Sheth vs QXC are not optimal depictions of this matchup
A) Sheth didn't play very well in the late game
B) Sheth didn't use all his options well.
But I have seen/played tons of high level games where the players DID play well late game, and DID get corruptors/brood lords w/ 3/3 air and 3/3/3 ground, and still had similar results.
Alright, so... i'll make it easier for you if you wanna go by names, i'll list the zergs that agreed on stream / interview or this thread and other private chats that terran mech is TOO strong, as well as terrans, and people against, just to be a bit less biased, im trying to take into account every top player i've talked to or heard their personal opinion on this matter:
Note: It's Dimaga's Birthday, happy B-day Dmytro! I hope this is a nice gift for you!
WHO DISAGREE THAT MECH IS TOO STRONG LIST:
Zerg:
Terran: LzGaMeR, Louder, Avilo, Strelok, MorroW
Protoss:
if you are a top player or know the position of a top player in this matter and want to be added to either one of the lists plz send me a PM, I just thought this would give the rest of you guys a broader understanding of what most top players think. I was just talking to Dimaga and he will help me to update this list tomorrow with some european names, I asked him for all opinions he can gather and to be as unbiased as possible.
apologies to morrow, moman said we could put him on the top half and apparently that was not the case.
I think it would be a much bigger change then you think, and mech would go to be being awful without any other changs, I would how ever like to see this done, because it increases micro options, I do think the stats would need a buff if they did this, but who knows
I love seeing games where zerg thoroughly outplays the terran in every phase of the game yet the terran can sit on 2-3 bases, wait until hes near maxed, push out, and kill every single zerg unit (maxed army vs maxed army) while not losing any casualties
Its hard to foresee when the terran is going to push out so I suppose I should cut all unit production to leave supply room for corruptors/broodlords like every single person seems to suggest as a response to terran mech..?
The problem is a zerg army could take out a large portion of the terran mech but unless they're in a good position to replenish with great macro then they will lose anyway. But as it stands right now if you watch those replays Sheth isnt even able to get into position for ultras to melee or the roaches to fire. Hydras are even worse as they're squishy as hell. I think changing stats on mech makes things worse so other changes need to be made. And it's either this or add something to zerg so they have a specifically anti mech unit and that's less viable imo so I'm pitching this.
On June 03 2010 09:27 dethrawr wrote: Its the same in SC1, if zerg lets terran get 200/200 mech zerg will usually lose.
I don't think its really imbalanced, zerg needs to start using mech's immobility against them with nydus/doom drop play.
Also your 'fix' would be awful :l
fixed
I have a replay for you hang on where MoMaN completely abused LzGamer with great mind games outmaneuvered him and still lost. I'm tired of this mech is immobile it's not broken cuz even before the game LzGamer said the same thing on the stream and he still won. Let me upload it and I'll edit it in.
Remove the Infestors Frenzy ability, replace it with an ability called "Deeper Burrow", the amount of energy spent is of utmost importance, of course. The Deeper Burrow makes any burrowed unit undetectable for x amounts of seconds.
On June 03 2010 09:33 Orange Goblin wrote: Remove the Infestors Frenzy ability, replace it with an ability called "Deeper Burrow", the amount of energy spent is of utmost importance, of course. The Deeper Burrow makes any burrowed unit undetectable for x amounts of seconds.
This idea is amazingly broken, unbeatable not the way to fix it these need to be subtle changes at this point in the game as anything overt like that will break the game.
The problem isn't really the tanks being too smart, their faster firing rates is what really allows them to be less akin to crucial mistakes once they reach critical mass.
In BW you could time pincer attacks to strike between two volleys, in SC2 the shot cooldown will already be over when you'd send the second wave in to flank them.
ZvT right now pretty much revolves around broodlords/baneling drops because they are the two only units that are able to exploit the rapid splash damage of the tanks, and quite frankly I don't have any thoughts on how to prevent this. Critical mass will always feel imbalanced while playing.
Hmmm, if you removed smart targeting would that nerf it enough though? Sure it would hurt it some, but how much overkill is there actually? Tanks fire faster than they did in broodwar, and besides that, if tanks are sieged in a ball, suppose a roach army is charging them or something. The tanks in the front will fire before the tanks in the back when the roaches get in range, causing the rounds to be staggered, and the tanks to not waste many rounds on overkill anyways. It might work though, but I think they might need another change too.
On June 03 2010 09:38 Newguy wrote: Hmmm, if you removed smart targeting would that nerf it enough though? Sure it would hurt it some, but how much overkill is there actually? Tanks fire faster than they did in broodwar, and besides that, if tanks are sieged in a ball, suppose a roach army is charging them or something. The tanks in the front will fire before the tanks in the back when the roaches get in range, causing the rounds to be staggered, and the tanks to not waste many rounds on overkill anyways. It might work though, but I think they might need another change too.
The thing is that if this was changed zerg could do similar things to what protoss did in starcraft 1 speedlings become viable late in the game to make the tanks waste the first volley on the small fast cheap units. You'd still have to fight it a bit differently but it would open up a way to kill the terran mech ball, it wouldn't be easy but that's good it shouldnt be faceroll lololol I win it should be a subtle change.
just give zerg damn flying zerglings. I'm totally serious. Sure, thors would roflstomp half of them, but with a little micro and a crap ton of them, you could easily swarm them, then land, sort of like vikings. this would circumvent the imbatanks and pwnzerhellionz. this wouldn't really hurt pvz, since it would be hive tech and collussus would own them, since they won't be able to attack in the air and collossus doesn't hurt friendly units.
IMO just make roaches 1.5 or 1 supply again and call it a day, but yeah, the tank que is quite ridiculous, especially if the terran you are playing bothers to micro his tanks so that he can fire a string of shots right into the most dense part of your force.
Im honestly not sure what is worse, the tank queing, the ability of thor to completely shit on anything that flies, or the fact that the only damage absorbing unit we can get before the ultralisk is 2 supply.
The mobility, or lack thereof, of mech is completely offset by the myriad of sensor towers that terran can put up to easily predict everything zerg is doing.
The only time moman worked LZ over was with the fake drop.
It's pretty sad that zerg has to resort to some insane micro and psyops to win over an a moving 1 button clicking mech terran.
a defensive buff to frenzy that gives lings and other units a ton of more durability for x amount of seconds might also help? Just putting it here while downloading replays. yes mech is retarded ;(
On June 03 2010 09:43 dethrawr wrote: So you're saying you want a zerg army to be able to beat a 200/200 of slow moving units that have to spend time sieging to fire their greatest weapon?
Because thats what your change would do.
Okay think about it, 3-3 tanks kill roaches in two shots so large amounts of roaches get melted, ultralisks are still too slow and die easily to focus fire so that they're not viable against tanks but they're quite good against masses of warpgate units for toss so you can't buff ultras anymore. If you nerf tanks it breaks the tvp matchup. Tanks would still kill a 200/200 army in good position but it would be weakened to the point where an instant macro refresh by a zerg that is WAY ahead like in the first two games would be able to run in a second army to finish it off. Because Sheth wasn't able to do enough if any damage to the tank blob to finish it off, and in steppes of war watch it carefully qxc even had HALF his tanks sitting idle in his base. So he was suiciding 200/200 armies on about a 150 supply army by qxc.
On June 03 2010 09:44 Artosis wrote: i was actually going to write a very similar article this morning. might still do it. you are pretty much spot on, though.
anyone who argues with his points doesn't understand what's going on!
I've been tossing this around for a while trying to figure out what it is specifically about what is broken in tvz and this was the best answer I could think of so I'm really glad to hear you agree with it as it lends a lot more credibility.
On June 03 2010 09:33 Orange Goblin wrote: Remove the Infestors Frenzy ability, replace it with an ability called "Deeper Burrow", the amount of energy spent is of utmost importance, of course. The Deeper Burrow makes any burrowed unit undetectable for x amounts of seconds.
This idea is amazingly broken, unbeatable not the way to fix it these need to be subtle changes at this point in the game as anything overt like that will break the game.
How is it unbeatable? It's, of course, imperative for it to be very pricey, and for the duration to be short.
I'm not saying it's not unbeatable, but it's silly to just throw out claims like that without saying why.
Makes me wonder what people would have said if FF wasn't in and was suggested...
I have been having this exact problem. I was under the impression that if Zerg has more bases and tons of cash, they're unbeatable. I thought it was up to the other races to PREVENT Zerg from getting supreme macro. But Terran mech just absolutely roflstomps any army. Thors and vikings and even marines are too damn strong against air, and siege tanks are a sick joke
People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
Well thinking about it more I think that the problem isn't in the balance or interaction of zerg forces and terran mech, its the layout of maps which ultimately end up favoring mech in battles. LT is probably the best map in the pool right now for zerg because they have so many options for army movement, while the rest of the maps really force zerg to engage mech armies in the most ludicrous positions.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
You don't seem to understand whats going on here lategame with mass vikings and ravens with huge amoutns of energy mutas and corruptors are useless seeing as point defense drone will nullify most of the shots of the mutas/coprruptors and he will even be able to HSM your flyers as well if you're in bad position. If you're going air you CANT let him get ravens or you just lose so it becomes a timing attack almost allin to rush corruptor broodlord and if it doesntw rok you lose.
Yea Im having the same problem vs terrans. Tanks are OP.
I had a match where I outmanuvered the terran player in every aspect: economy, upgrades, harass, and he still kills me with mech. When I watched the replay he was at 150 food while I was 200 food maxed and his tanks, Helions, and Thors still raped me.
I think the only solution is mass drop, nydus worm, or broodlords. It seems that when a terran army reaches critical mass the zerg player cannot fight without broodlords. Even on open ground where the zerg player can outflank the terran player, It's still almost impossible to beat a mass terran mech army with ground units alone.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
You're not talking about the same phase of the game as the topic.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
Are you just talking about ZvT?
You could also do things like swarm, dropping on the tanks while moving units in, and a quick switch to muta tech to pick off a bunch of tanks to make that push in easier. You can't accomplish any of that versus modern SC2 mech at that point in the game.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
hmmm.. Troll? or just someone who doesn't take the time to read threads and understand the discussion?
I don't understand everyone's complaints about the implementation of an AI that results in overkill. It is the exact same as Starcraft 1.
You will no longer just win fights as mech by sieging all 20 tanks at once and instagibbing an army. It will depend on superior positioning and being able to spread your tanks. It will come down to superior skill and micro, such as having to micro templar, ghosts, or infestors. It will come down to superior spread and positioning, not purely unit composition.
This wouldn't effect early game hardly at all, as people will learn to spread tanks and they will be the same as tanks in SC1, and that is the way everyone wanted them at the start of beta... so why complain now when they are OP.
Realcun is totally right, and i also think that your idea is good enough, even by massing and timing your attack, tanks still dont waste their shot anymore so zerg has basically not a lot of options and if you add those Raven's guided bombs it's hopeless. It quite funny tho I just spoke about those 2 matchs like 2hours ago in another post =) I like the idea.
Raelcun, I agree with you and have been saying it myself. You can't even use broodlords to make tanks friendly fire and destroy themselves at the moment, and to me... That just isn't right.
Possible changes I've been thinking of that aren't ludicrous are either removing splash damage from the Thor's javelin's, or removing/reducing the bonus to light if they must keep splash damage. It's really not fair to zerg to have the token mutalisk as vulnerable in the air, as their ground is vulnerable to the tanks. This would also help phoenixes/warp prisms as I am quite biased, you know... Looking out for my own interests too!
Of course this would just force the terran into making more vikings or marines, but I feel if zerg players can get that one chance to break the line it would be okay.
In those QXC vs Sheth replays, and LZ's games I have watched TvZ lately I've noticed sensor towers are what makes it almost impossible to break with burrow play. Do you feel removing this structure to add back in the element of surprise would be an equal fix? It's really not fair in my mind to not have to scout to know when you're being dropped, or when your opponent is burrowed.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
You don't seem to understand whats going on here lategame with mass vikings and ravens with huge amoutns of energy mutas and corruptors are useless seeing as point defense drone will nullify most of the shots of the mutas/coprruptors and he will even be able to HSM your flyers as well if you're in bad position. If you're going air you CANT let him get ravens or you just lose so it becomes a timing attack almost allin to rush corruptor broodlord and if it doesntw rok you lose.
On June 03 2010 09:56 NovaTheFeared wrote:
You're not talking about the same phase of the game as the topic.
It's just like broodwar, if you let a Terran get 18 vessels, how are you going to win? You have to keep that number down with scourge.
I think there are a few things that could be done that would be less extreme than this suggestion.
#1 for me would be the way siege tanks scale. Siege tanks get a whopping +5 per upgrade according to liquipedia. That's insane when compared to the scaling of armor. A siege tank hitting 5 targets will deal 60 more damage total (12 per target) in a 3/3 vs 3/3 fight compared to a 0/0 vs 0/0 fight. So not only do tanks hit a critical mass late game they also scale at a pretty crazy rate. Something like +3/upgrade would probably balance out how ridiculous they can become late game without ruining their effectiveness overall that much.
The second problem, in my mind, is how well and how quickly Terran can turtle up vs air harass. I'd look into seeing what could be done to increase the missle turret build time. I don't know about other zergs, but the problem to me with muta harass is that it's so expected and obvious off one base. An enemy Terran can turret up soooo fast (25s per turret) to support their thor defenses. Also Terran can move out across the map at an alarming rate due to how fast the turrets come down. Slowing down their crawl would give Zerg more time to harass them.
Potentially a third problem might be the Thor build rate. A thor is 6 pop in 60 seconds, the fastest of the massive units. A thor is also the more well rounded of all the massive units with no real weakness due to its range and ability to hit air and ground. It can also be repaired and blah blah blah. Anyways if a Thor built in a little longer, like 65s or 70s it might just open up more time for the Zerg to get some stuff done. The time at which thors come out make factories EXTREMELY efficient population wise. In the time it takes to make 12 food of Thors the terran could only have made 8 of siege tanks, ~5.7 of vikings, or 8 pop of Hellions (without reactor). The point is that for a high pop unit Thors are very time efficient for the amount of pop the take up.
On the zerg side I'd probably consider lowering Nydus worm spawn time to make them a little easier to get off. A Terran paying attention is going to have a really easy time stopping any worms from spawning. If the nydus spawn time was 16 or 18 seconds I think they'd be a little more serious of a threat.
Anyways more so than the specific examples I think we just need some baby steps more than anything. Drastic changes like this are going to either make Terran useless or have wide rippling effects that we don't want.
Have point defense drone not affect corrupters. Since terran mech rapes everything on the ground allow zerg some air control with corrupter broodlord.
I tried 3/3 corrupter vs 3/3 vikings and corrupters win. Without PDD the corrupters win in a straight up battle which is good since they are only AA and vikings have their mode shift and range working for them. You run corrupter brood lord around and force vikings away from tanks where infestors can fungal growth and neural parasite ravens.
edit: last thing. Increase corrupter speed slightly so vikings can't kite them so efficiently.
I DO DECLARE, hopefully you can post the interviews where we interviewed some of the best zergs outside of korea, and some of the better terrans even agree with us. Added to that impressive list that was interviewed during the KOTH event that we hosted ( Machine, Sheth, Dimaga, MoMaN and a few more including my humble opinion) + the fact that Artosis & IdrA agree as well... pretty much the Zerg Elite that are able to agree with us (as they all speak english) are all having the same problems, some people might think that there are ways to beat late mech, and yeah you can... but you have to outplay your opponent HEAVILY, MoMaN vs Lzgamer is a great example of everything going right for zerg and playing SUPER smart and still losing... its a simple fix and it shouldn't break any other matchups for Terran, I was discussing this with gretorp as well early and he agrees with this and even thinks this would make the TvT matchup a lot more fun, as right now marauders are barely viable TvT cause tanks crush everything.
to those of you who think that you have a good winning rec against Mech or that you have trouble with zerg even when using mech, that's just skill difference, in high level games a really good terran will leave you little to no chance of winning mid into lategame and after that, period.
It's not broken, no need to remove something from the AI just to make Zerg players feel better. I remember at the beginning of the beta everyone was like OMFG Tanks suck, now they have 10 hp more and everyone is like OMFG imba.
On June 03 2010 10:03 iG.CatZ wrote: I DO DECLARE, hopefully you can post the interviews where we interviewed some of the best zergs outside of korea, and some of the better terrans even agree with us. Added to that impressive list that was interviewed during the KOTH event that we hosted ( Machine, Sheth, Dimaga, MoMaN and a few more including my humble opinion) + the fact that Artosis & IdrA agree as well... pretty much the Zerg Elite that are able to agree with us (as they all speak english) are all having the same problems, some people might think that there are ways to beat late mech, and yeah you can... but you have to outplay your opponent HEAVILY, MoMaN vs Lzgamer is a great example of everything going right for zerg and playing SUPER smart and still losing... its a simple fix and it shouldn't break any other matchups for Terran, I was discussing this with gretorp as well early and he agrees with this and even thinks this would make the TvT matchup a lot more fun, as right now marauders are barely viable TvT cause tanks crush everything.
On June 03 2010 10:04 Doso wrote: It's not broken, no need to remove something from the AI just to make Zerg players feel better. I remember at the beginning of the beta everyone was like OMFG Tanks suck, now they have 10 hp more and everyone is like OMFG imba.
I'm a terran player and I definitely feel that it's imbalanced right now, firstly, the maps seem a lot smaller than broodwar maps, so flanking is much more difficult, also no darkswarm or plague type spells that can keep zerg in the late game. And thors make mutas useless.
I'm thinking possibly, better map designs, thors cheaper and weaker and no splash (golaith anyone), and a change in that new infestor spell to something more dark swarmy. weakening tanks will make them really bad tvp. Perhaps they could be cheaper and weaker too so the 200/200 army isn't quit so strong.
It's definitely not impossible but it's definitely not 50/50 fair.
On June 03 2010 10:06 koppik wrote: If protoss builds 1000 cannons and maxes carriers, they CANNOT BE BEAT as well.
Really, if Sheth turtled, QXC couldn't attack Sheth either. That would have been a worse scenario, though.
lol what? BW carriers or SC2 carriers? cause SC2 carriers lose to basically everything... that and im pretty sure 400 scourge beat 33 carriers if you're talking BW
4 supply tanks anyone? If I recall the worst part about the match played on LT was that QXC had at least 10 tanks just lounging in bases Sheth could never even get to.
Sensor towers + a mass of fast range 9 vikings totally eliminated any chance of nydus / drop harass. And, in a big glob in the middle were the range 13 sieged tanks to take care of the ground while range 10 thors were able to defend air if vikings needed to go deal with any failed attempts at harassment. Do these range advantages seem over-the-top to anyone else?
I mean, I don't want to base the whole match-up on this one game, as Sheth really didn't seem too motivated to give 100% on breaking through, but QXC really could have been on the toilet for half of the game and still been in great shape when he got back.
On June 03 2010 10:13 Mack wrote: 4 supply tanks anyone? If I recall the worst part about the match played on LT was that QXC had at least 10 tanks just lounging in bases Sheth could never even get to.
Sensor towers + a mass of fast range 9 vikings totally eliminated any chance of nydus / drop harass. And, in a big glob in the middle were the range 13 sieged tanks to take care of the ground while range 10 thors were able to defend air if vikings needed to go deal with any failed attempts at harassment. Do these range advantages seem over-the-top to anyone else?
I mean, I don't want to base the whole match-up on this one game, as Sheth really didn't seem too motivated to give 100% on breaking through, but QXC really could have been on the toilet for half of the game and still been in great shape when he got back.
That was the steppes game actually but yeah you can't drop when there are sensor towers up because vikings will get there to deny it Sheth tried it on Steppes.
I play zerg and I hate mech but I'd rather have them add something cool to hive tech to make zerg more fun to play than nerf terran. I like how blizzard thinks ultras will be the answer and they keep trying to show a square peg into a round hole.
100% disagree with the entire thread, and all the tvz mech whine fest. I was on the stream watching the QXC vs Sheth games facepalming for over 20 minutes that sheth would continously suicide a 200/200 Zerg army into QXC's ramp, rather than actually thinking to build 10 nydus worms - one of them is going to get through.
Interview whoever you want, it does not change the fact Zerg's are playing bad late-game many times versus T mech, and refusing to build nydus canals STILL.
In case you Zerg players forgot, Terran players a few patches ago automatically lost versus Zerg if the game went past 10 minutes or so, because of larva accumulation and 1 supply roaches always meant -> suicide army into Terran army, remax army in 2 seconds, and go again while T is only just barely securing their second live expansion.
What most Zergs seem to be proposing now is for ZvT to return to autowin late game, where it was impossible to play a macro style TvZ because you knew that if you did, you would lose to larva inject.
This thread is just going to promote more whining and "NERF MECH" instead of actually looking for gameplay + strategic solutions. Idra and Artosis are good Zergs but they themselves are not beyond the "it's imba" as well. I remember them complaining severely about the roach nerf, yet they were entirely 100% elation pre-roach nerf where ZvT was autowin late game. How strange!
Instead of making threads trying to fear monger the "omg it's imba, nerf it blizzard," start proposing late game styles and things to do in the game, such as more nydus usage. Obviously Blizzard knows what they are doing and mech is not going to be nerfed, but here is something they can do:
change the map pool!! I agree that mech vs Zerg is very strong on maps like steps of war and incineration zone. Of course, ZvT is STILL do-able there with broodlord/corruptor and everything, but mech is really ez mode on those two maps in particular due to the short distances. Probably mech is easiest to execute on steppes because of no backdoor.
But do you see any good Zergs massing nydus late game after they are maxed? That is the next step of lategame ZvT, yet Zergs still refuse to do it.
And in particular in these games, Sheth had chances. He played great on steppes of war with a HUGE HUGE LEAD, and then suicided over 10k/10k over and over into QXC. He could have thought to build literally 5-10 nydus's and held his ground more.
Sheth also was about to do a drop first game that would have crippled or done a bit of damage and dragged QXC's army back to his main, but Sheth hesitated a moment and it cost him the drop.
There is still more to be explored ZvT is all i'm saying. If there's anything you should be looking at for a legitmate nerf, it should not be the actual units right now, perhaps sensor towers are actually too powerful and their radius of vision should be slightly reduced
On June 03 2010 10:13 Mack wrote: 4 supply tanks anyone? If I recall the worst part about the match played on LT was that QXC had at least 10 tanks just lounging in bases Sheth could never even get to.
Sensor towers + a mass of fast range 9 vikings totally eliminated any chance of nydus / drop harass. And, in a big glob in the middle were the range 13 sieged tanks to take care of the ground while range 10 thors were able to defend air if vikings needed to go deal with any failed attempts at harassment. Do these range advantages seem over-the-top to anyone else?
I mean, I don't want to base the whole match-up on this one game, as Sheth really didn't seem too motivated to give 100% on breaking through, but QXC really could have been on the toilet for half of the game and still been in great shape when he got back.
That was the steppes game actually but yeah you can't drop when there are sensor towers up because vikings will get there to deny it Sheth tried it on Steppes.
He could have dropped. He hesitated and was indecisive. It cost him. And this bullshit of people saying "there's a sensor tower there, I'm not gonna make an effort" is just a very bad mentality to have.
any terran army composition that has a decent amount of tanks (in good position) in it just downright dominates any form of zerg ground forces thrown at it, i do agree that siege mode currently is too strong, however though, until Blizz actually decides to do something about it, imo zerg should probably explore ways to exploit nydus worms and air dominance, air unit wise, terran hasn't got the strongest air to air units to boots, vikings has good range but their damage is lacking compared to zergs air units..
also, the way Cool dealt with Maka's mech style is pretty effective as well on having overlord dropping baneling bombs on top of the terran army.
@avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
Indeed, all these people crying "USE NYDUS WORMS" have obviously not played both sides of this matchup. It's really really sad how many people use such terrible logic to support their points.
On June 03 2010 10:04 Doso wrote: It's not broken, no need to remove something from the AI just to make Zerg players feel better. I remember at the beginning of the beta everyone was like OMFG Tanks suck, now they have 10 hp more and everyone is like OMFG imba.
*face palm* Watch a few games, play as zerg. Tanks shouldn't get a massive nerf, but somethings need to change in tvz games.
its actually 3000/3000 if you want to do them all at the same time, actually shiomo. or do it 1 by 1 and get stopped by any half decent terran that watches his minimap, requirement: 70apm
On June 03 2010 10:16 avilo wrote: But do you see any good Zergs massing nydus late game after they are maxed? That is the next step of lategame ZvT, yet Zergs still refuse to do it.
Holy crap dude. With sensor towers and the weapons range of vikings and siege tanks, how do you ever propose that Z is going to be able to have line of sight and place all those nydus worms?
And that is BEFORE you take into the account the pure cost of all those nydus networks and worms, they are not free.
Also, I havent really tested how multiple nydus networks would work. Are all the units still gathered in one master network, or will you need to manage WHICH network to place the units in?
The no overkill feature of the siege tanks is OP as it stands.
On June 03 2010 10:13 Mack wrote: 4 supply tanks anyone? If I recall the worst part about the match played on LT was that QXC had at least 10 tanks just lounging in bases Sheth could never even get to.
Sensor towers + a mass of fast range 9 vikings totally eliminated any chance of nydus / drop harass. And, in a big glob in the middle were the range 13 sieged tanks to take care of the ground while range 10 thors were able to defend air if vikings needed to go deal with any failed attempts at harassment. Do these range advantages seem over-the-top to anyone else?
I mean, I don't want to base the whole match-up on this one game, as Sheth really didn't seem too motivated to give 100% on breaking through, but QXC really could have been on the toilet for half of the game and still been in great shape when he got back.
That was the steppes game actually but yeah you can't drop when there are sensor towers up because vikings will get there to deny it Sheth tried it on Steppes.
He could have dropped. He hesitated and was indecisive. It cost him. And this bullshit of people saying "there's a sensor tower there, I'm not gonna make an effort" is just a very bad mentality to have.
Have you played Zerg vs Mech before? Maybe you should see it from the other player's perspective sometimes. Qxc had the ability to sit like 15 tanks in his main, which he had if you actually watch the replay.
The drop would have done 0 damage, and why don't you pay attention to the original arguement, not the trolls all over this thread.
Mainly what Raelcun points out is that tanks do not overkill, which gets rid of the ability of any kind of zealot bombs/drops on tanks. He is simply stating overkill should be implented. How is that some major nerf? Tanks are still almost impossible to break 200/200 in SC1.. and they overkill. How do you fix that in sc2 when the AI is so good?
~~
Also, 10 Nydus Canals? That is only 3000/3000. Real cheap.. and worth it. Especially when you have sensor towers to spot everything.
I don't think this change is feasible, and it has nothing to do with its effectiveness: I don't think blizzard would make a unit's AI worse in the name of balance. There has to be a better way, even if it's gonna affect other matchups and be harder to conceptualize.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
I know hahaha. I laughed out loud at the comment of building 10 nydus worms. Especially since they can all be killed pretty quickly, especially since the Zerg has to wait to see which nydus network to put all of his units in. Hahahahahaha.
The thing about a lot of this discussion is that people aren't thinking about the stuff you don't see. The Mech build offers a TON of flexibility way more so than the zerg. So a lot of these theorycrafted solutions may be cute and work say once, but Terran can quickly adapt to deal with how these threats play out.
I will NOT believe that Terran mech is overpowered until you show a little more diversity in the replays you show in your arguments. I saw all those games live, and I never saw either one of those players try air against it. Both players just kept throwing wave after wave of ground army at them.
At least, show me some replays where a mass broodlord and corrupter army from high level players can't beat TvZ and then I will start listening to your arguments.
Three replays are great, but all three use ground armies to try to beat a seiged up tank army.
On June 03 2010 10:04 Doso wrote: It's not broken, no need to remove something from the AI just to make Zerg players feel better. I remember at the beginning of the beta everyone was like OMFG Tanks suck, now they have 10 hp more and everyone is like OMFG imba.
ehh at least get your facts straight. The reason tanks have become so strong is not because some petty increase in hp. It is because the splash mechanic was changed
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
Indeed, all these people crying "USE NYDUS WORMS" have obviously not played both sides of this matchup. It's really really sad how many people use such terrible logic to support their points.
well, hate the game not the players, it ain't our fault that blizz made terran armies too strong against ground armies, again all that zerg players can do now is to hopefully explore every possible tool they have at their disposal at the moments to break even, its better than just to give up entirely and just flame each other on the forums.
i do sympathize zergs players in TvZ match-ups, but there's nothing we can do now atm until blizz does something about it right?
On June 03 2010 09:43 dethrawr wrote: So you're saying you want a zerg army to be able to beat a 200/200 of slow moving units that have to spend time sieging to fire their greatest weapon?
Because thats what your change would do.
Okay think about it, 3-3 tanks kill roaches in two shots so large amounts of roaches get melted, ultralisks are still too slow and die easily to focus fire so that they're not viable against tanks but they're quite good against masses of warpgate units for toss so you can't buff ultras anymore. If you nerf tanks it breaks the tvp matchup. Tanks would still kill a 200/200 army in good position but it would be weakened to the point where an instant macro refresh by a zerg that is WAY ahead like in the first two games would be able to run in a second army to finish it off. Because Sheth wasn't able to do enough if any damage to the tank blob to finish it off, and in steppes of war watch it carefully qxc even had HALF his tanks sitting idle in his base. So he was suiciding 200/200 armies on about a 150 supply army by qxc.
3/3 roaches can just barely take 2 tank hits can't they? It's 60+15 - 4(roach armor at 3/3) or 71per hit, 142 for 2 and roaches have 145hp. I still 100% agree with your points though.
Now I'm not going to say mech isn't strong, but here are my thoughts:
Well, the first thing I notice is that the first real engagement of the game is Sheth essentially sacrificing his whole army to delay QXC's 3 o'clock base. Yes, they are even in food when this first battle takes place, but if you look at the army tab you see that QXC's army is a much better. He has a 5.4K mins / 2.9K gas in his force versus Sheth's 3.4K min / 1.5K gas force. Sheth had 1.5K gas in the bank. 1500 gas is a lot of high tech units that should have been out on the field. Given the fact that Sheth basically commits all of his roaches to delaying that expansion, trapping his whole army behind sieged tanks, I have to say I'm not surprised in the least that QXC basically suffered no army losses. The rest of the game was fairly straight forward as the gas invested in QXC's army consistently DOUBLED that of Sheth's army even though they were even on bases for most of the game..
It looked to me like he didn't have any sort of plan in dealing with the mech, and was just trying random things. Yes mech is good but I think zergs need more time. Just my 2c.
I will NOT believe that Terran mech is overpowered until you show a little more diversity in the replays you show in your arguments. I saw all those games live, and I never saw either one of those players try air against it. Both players just kept throwing wave after wave of ground army at them.
At least, show me some replays where a mass broodlord and corrupter army from high level players can't beat TvZ and then I will start listening to your arguments.
Three replays are great, but all three use ground armies to try to beat a seiged up tank army.
air would have been suicide when thors reach critical mass and have ravens near them no ammount of air can even get close they just melt befor coming within range.
I will agree that the games of Sheth vs QXC are not optimal depictions of this matchup
A) Sheth didn't play very well in the late game
B) Sheth didn't use all his options well.
But I have seen/played tons of high level games where the players DID play well late game, and DID get corruptors/brood lords w/ 3/3 air and 3/3/3 ground, and still had similar results.
Looking at the replays, I think MoMan made some really big mistakes:
Had his army split into two groups during pretty much the decisive confrontation.
He streamed roaches into tanks a few at a time after that. The roaches autoattacked the autoturret while the few remaining tanks destroyed the streamed in roaches.
He didn't put drones on half of his vespene geysers (not counting the two at his main, which dried out early)
Probably the first one is what lost him the game. His army was actually more efficient--resource-wise--than LZgamer's up to the point he streamed in roaches into tank fire.
Zerg simply needs another air unit that doesn't get raped by thors. Likely air to ground only so the corruptor and muta keep thier role. It should be massable in the sense that muta's are but no bouncing attack and lower damage to bio / light. However, something like 5 + 20 to armored making them higher single target dps to units such as thors and stalkers.
You could argue broodlords fit this role but Vikings rape them so hard and being not only hive tech, not only greater spire tech, but morphed from a corruptor makes them just so incredibly easy to counter. That is 234 "time" from when you start the Hive to your first broodlord. Because there is absolutely ZERO other reason to get a hive, it's obvious that a terran needs to counter boordlords. Not to mention by making broodlords, you become easier targets to Vikings by having LESS corruptors and that just seems fundamentally flawed as well.
It's either something like that, or you have to go back to the drawing board and change 5 other zerg units. As it stands, there is a terran unit that HARD COUNTERS every single zerg unit.
Of course, there is another obvious solution to this problem and that is to simply make the maps bigger.
Anyone who doesn't see TvZ mech as a problem is probably a closed-minded Terran player. Sorry but, with no dark swarm, it really is impossible to approach Terran balls.
What isn't hard countered is mopped up by insane firepower (thors, tanks, banshees, like 2 ghosts if you try to be like "hey, I'll get the shitty guardian replacement because it's my best unit"). The terrible terrible damage of Terran units is fine only if there's a way to approach it on the battlefield.
Kind of silly the way it is now. Zergs shouldn't have to feel like they have to end the game quickly (they can't anyway, all their shit's at t2) no matter what.
Biggest issue in my eyes is actually maps. Maps are way too small and has way to many corridors and no room for the zerg to manover his forces.
Another BS issue is the fact that sensor towers even exist, it makes it so that any drops get completely denied beacuse the T can react with his vikings and just shut down the drop immediatly.
My fix: Larger and more open maps Remove sensor towers.
Please don't look at tanks for the solution, I think they're fine - YOU SHOULD BE PUNISHED for suiciding your army into sieged tanks with no plan. That is not the issue, the issue is that you cannot harass or drop Terran at all so that you're FORCED to suicide your army into siege tanks while walking through narrow corridors making flanking impossible.
On June 03 2010 10:29 Aurdon wrote: I will NOT believe that Terran mech is overpowered until you show a little more diversity in the replays you show in your arguments. I saw all those games live, and I never saw either one of those players try air against it. Both players just kept throwing wave after wave of ground army at them.
At least, show me some replays where a mass broodlord and corrupter army from high level players can't beat TvZ and then I will start listening to your arguments.
Three replays are great, but all three use ground armies to try to beat a seiged up tank army.
lol corruptors against ravens, thors and vikings.
all of which QXC has in the replays; and without corruptors the broodlords will just get smashed.
On June 03 2010 10:38 drewbie.root wrote: it is a fact, mech is 100% broken imba gg zerg cant win lategame, anyone who disagrees is stupid.
Spoken like a champ. Mech is insane broken. Raelcun's solution actually makes sense however... And would make warp prisms useful for something other than warp in harass.
On June 03 2010 10:40 jusayO wrote: ^ Drewbie for President.
Thors suck horribly vs corruptors. If a zerg went 200/200 air with corrputor base, there is no way the viking/raven could compete with that, given the amount of thor/tank on the field. corruptor would kill everything in the sky, broodlords would clean up the rest.
On June 03 2010 10:20 Ruthless wrote: Anyone who says that this isnt broken has never tried playing against it. I can promise that.
It is broken, but the AI change doesn't fix it, it only limits the use of tanks in TvP. Zerg needs a tool or a vulnerability to play with.
Any of these would help it: Tank siege time, sensor tower price/tech, thor splash research/cannon free, corruptor attack animation(PDD free), ultra armor upgrade changed to reduce aoe based dmg, corruption also reducing attack speed, viking acceleration nerf...
On June 03 2010 10:35 Senx wrote: Biggest issue in my eyes is actually maps. Maps are way too small and has way to many corridors and no room for the zerg to manover his forces.
This is a bad way to look at it. While partially true, we shouldn't be forced to have every map have insanely wide open areas. A choked up map should give Terran a slight advantage maybe and be part of the map picking strategy in a series. A choked up map shouldn't be an instant lose for zerg and a complete 'ban' as a map layout.
With BW the game was insanely well balanced that it'd be insane to try and correct map dependencies. With SC2 it's still very early in its career and rather than just accept problems like these we should work towards fixing the racial issues so that we can have a wider variety of balanced maps.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
@raelcun, do the math on late game please. Suiciding 10,000/10,000 resources is less than building 2k/2k worth of nydus worms and then being able to do damage.
Use your head, and get out of the mindset, "omg imba." I know mech can be frustrating to see or play against if you do not like that style, but that does not mean you throw basic math and logic out the window solely to prove your religious point about mech being imba.
On June 03 2010 10:22 shlomo wrote: Lolol @ avilo so 1000/1000 for 10 worms, hoping 1 will get through to spit out units one at a time? rofl.
A likely story bro.
You have not used nydus a lot I bet. You can place multiple worms down with multiple nydus networks. And you can also unload from multiple worms simultaenously.
And also, it cost a bit more than 1000/1000 for 10 worms, but it is cheapter than stubbornly suiciding 10,000/10,000 worth of resources into a siege tanked up ramp.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
Indeed, all these people crying "USE NYDUS WORMS" have obviously not played both sides of this matchup. It's really really sad how many people use such terrible logic to support their points.
I now also play Zerg, so I do in fact play both sides of the match-up. Nydus worms are amazing.
On June 03 2010 10:44 pyr0ma5ta wrote: If you let the Terran get 200/200 full upped, you deserve to lose. The 200/200 mech army is unbeatable in BW too, but it's not imba either.
Saying these kind of statements is telling people that they have to go for allins or timing attacks to beat mech and if you rush to broodlord corruptors you're open to timing attacks.. tell me how this is viable.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
@raelcun, do the math on late game please. Suiciding 10,000/10,000 resources is less than building 2k/2k worth of nydus worms and then being able to do damage.
Use your head, and get out of the mindset, "omg imba." I know mech can be frustrating to see or play against if you do not like that style, but that does not mean you throw basic math and logic out the window solely to prove your religious point about mech being imba.
On June 03 2010 10:22 shlomo wrote: Lolol @ avilo so 1000/1000 for 10 worms, hoping 1 will get through to spit out units one at a time? rofl.
A likely story bro.
You have not used nydus a lot I bet. You can place multiple worms down with multiple nydus networks. And you can also unload from multiple worms simultaenously.
And also, it cost a bit more than 1000/1000 for 10 worms, but it is cheapter than stubbornly suiciding 10,000/10,000 worth of resources into a siege tanked up ramp.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
Indeed, all these people crying "USE NYDUS WORMS" have obviously not played both sides of this matchup. It's really really sad how many people use such terrible logic to support their points.
I now also play Zerg, so I do in fact play both sides of the match-up. Nydus worms are amazing.
Show me a replay of this working bro, if there are tanks sieged in his main you can't fit 10 worms into his main and there are standing forces waiting to kill the worms. qxc had tanks in his main just hanging out anyway this wouldnt work.
The upgrades are extremely cheap and are very powerful, plus you only need to up 1 set. Zerg armor upgrades on the other hand are irrelevant. Even +3 armor has no effect on units like sieges, thors or hellions.
Late game zerg is so weak, even against protoss. They just need to make a high tier unit that's actually decent at busting this - presumably the ultralisk - but that unit just dies too hard to rauders or thors unless micro'd flawlessly with infestor which is pretty tough and expensive to do.
Sieges in general just reach this critical mass where they become extremely powerful. It's not a gradual increase like in sc1 where even large numbers of sieges could be busted if you out macro. Conversely 1-2 sieges is actually pretty weak unlike sc1 where 1-2 was actually decent
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who have never played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
I know hahaha. I laughed out loud at the comment of building 10 nydus worms. Especially since they can all be killed pretty quickly, especially since the Zerg has to wait to see which nydus network to put all of his units in. Hahahahahaha.
The thing about a lot of this discussion is that people aren't thinking about the stuff you don't see. The Mech build offers a TON of flexibility way more so than the zerg. So a lot of these theorycrafted solutions may be cute and work say once, but Terran can quickly adapt to deal with how these threats play out.
Um, it's posts like yours that make ME lol. You are one of the stubborn crowd that you think you know everything about the game and have decided something is 100% undoubtedly imba when you do not even know how a nydus even works.
Before you talk, try using the thing.
It's a global tunnel network, like tunnels in zero hour. The main nydus network building, you can build multiple of, those are the only ones that matter if you lose all of the main ones, then the network is down.
You put all of your units into any nydus worm or main network building and your units are available from any worm/nydus network on the map. It is global. You can unload from anywhere on the map. It's not a "cute" thing, it's something Zergs are not currently doing or abusing enough.
On June 03 2010 10:33 EnderW wrote: I will agree that the games of Sheth vs QXC are not optimal depictions of this matchup
A) Sheth didn't play very well in the late game
B) Sheth didn't use all his options well.
But I have seen/played tons of high level games where the players DID play well late game, and DID get corruptors/brood lords w/ 3/3 air and 3/3/3 ground, and still had similar results.
Alright, so... i'll make it easier for you if you wanna go by names, i'll list the zergs that agreed on stream / interview or this thread and other private chats that terran mech is TOO strong, as well as terrans, and people against, just to be a bit less biased, im trying to take into account every top player i've talked to or heard their personal opinion on this matter:
Note: It's Dimaga's Birthday, happy B-day Dmytro! I hope this is a nice gift for you!
WHO DISAGREE THAT MECH IS TOO STRONG LIST:
Zerg:
Terran: LzGaMeR, Louder, Avilo
Protoss:
if you are a top player or know the position of a top player in this matter and want to be added to either one of the lists plz send me a PM, I just thought this would give the rest of you guys a broader understanding of what most top players think. I was just talking to Dimaga and he will help me to update this list tomorrow with some european names, I asked him for all opinions he can gather and to be as unbiased as possible.
On June 03 2010 10:44 pyr0ma5ta wrote: If you let the Terran get 200/200 full upped, you deserve to lose. The 200/200 mech army is unbeatable in BW too, but it's not imba either.
Saying these kind of statements is telling people that they have to go for allins or timing attacks to beat mech and if you rush to broodlord corruptors you're open to timing attacks.. tell me how this is viable.
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
@raelcun, do the math on late game please. Suiciding 10,000/10,000 resources is less than building 2k/2k worth of nydus worms and then being able to do damage.
Use your head, and get out of the mindset, "omg imba." I know mech can be frustrating to see or play against if you do not like that style, but that does not mean you throw basic math and logic out the window solely to prove your religious point about mech being imba.
On June 03 2010 10:22 shlomo wrote: Lolol @ avilo so 1000/1000 for 10 worms, hoping 1 will get through to spit out units one at a time? rofl.
A likely story bro.
You have not used nydus a lot I bet. You can place multiple worms down with multiple nydus networks. And you can also unload from multiple worms simultaenously.
And also, it cost a bit more than 1000/1000 for 10 worms, but it is cheapter than stubbornly suiciding 10,000/10,000 worth of resources into a siege tanked up ramp.
On June 03 2010 10:23 EnderW wrote:
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
Indeed, all these people crying "USE NYDUS WORMS" have obviously not played both sides of this matchup. It's really really sad how many people use such terrible logic to support their points.
I now also play Zerg, so I do in fact play both sides of the match-up. Nydus worms are amazing.
Show me a replay of this working bro, if there are tanks sieged in his main you can't fit 10 worms into his main and there are standing forces waiting to kill the worms. qxc had tanks in his main just hanging out anyway this wouldnt work.
Yo, "bro," show me a replay of top Zergs even DOING IT. None have yet developed it into their game. People are so hard headed it's amazing.
You guys that are saying "OMG THAT DOESN'T WORK" have barely even developed it or worked it into your game or seen anyone that has developed it to a good level.
So many people here sound exactly like the naysayers in SC BW when it first was developing, "ARBITERS ARE STUPID, TOO MUCH GAS NO ONE WOULD EVER USE IT FOR MASS RECALLS AROUND THE MAP, are you stupid?! That's way too much gas and not viable!!!!"
"OMG, corsairs?! Lofl they suck!!"
"Protoss fast expand?! LOL you're a noob that'll never work, you're gonna get rolled."
So many people in this thread are being like that. Try it, and develop it b4 you start saying the "that doesn't work."
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
haha, no against 10 mutalisk 1 thor with some marines or 2 thor will be enough. And if the terran see youre doing a ton of mutalisk, he'll himself make a ton of thors/viking. And since thors are also very good against ground there is no risk he will waste any money with that.
@Avilo , provide us a replay of your all so powerful zerg play against a top tier terran player (preferably Drewbie, as he's now President) , in a macro oriented game if you're so confident. Please, we're all dying to see how dumb the rest of the zerg community is.
Also, I find it completely hilarious that rather than talking about how to counter it, or something more logical like many of the maps being too small and sensor towers being too good, you guys start spewing off your "let's list all the top player's opinions (none of whom seem to abuse nydus enough)."
Top players are NOT good balance designers. A lot of top players are biased one way or another most of the time. Did you see all of those Zerg players you listed advocating that ZvT lategame be fixed a few patches ago when TvZ was almost impossible late game? No, they were all pretty content to free win with 1a roache suicide-> remax 200 lategame.
These people crying imba like its some broken matchup in need of drastic changes really serve no purpose.
Another interesting idea could be to have burrowed units immune to splash, expanding upon burrowed subterfuge. With the recent improvements to roach tech, a spread of roaches could nullify an unmicroed siege line.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
haha, no against 10 mutalisk 1 thor with some marines or 2 thor will be enough. And if the terran see youre doing a ton of mutalisk, he'll himself make a ton of thors/viking. And since thors are also very good against ground there is no risk he will waste any money with that.
Isn't that the whole point? make him waste gas on stuff other then tanks?
On June 03 2010 10:21 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: @avilo Do the math on nydus worms please, to build multiple nydus worms at the same time you need ANOTHER nydus network. Each network is 200/200 each worm is 100/100 so each worm in a multiple nydus worm strategy is 300/300 to make 5-10 worms at the same time you're talking 1500/1500 or 3000/3000 you have to be kidding me.
I know hahaha. I laughed out loud at the comment of building 10 nydus worms. Especially since they can all be killed pretty quickly, especially since the Zerg has to wait to see which nydus network to put all of his units in. Hahahahahaha.
The thing about a lot of this discussion is that people aren't thinking about the stuff you don't see. The Mech build offers a TON of flexibility way more so than the zerg. So a lot of these theorycrafted solutions may be cute and work say once, but Terran can quickly adapt to deal with how these threats play out.
Um, it's posts like yours that make ME lol. You are one of the stubborn crowd that you think you know everything about the game and have decided something is 100% undoubtedly imba when you do not even know how a nydus even works.
Before you talk, try using the thing.
It's a global tunnel network, like tunnels in zero hour. The main nydus network building, you can build multiple of, those are the only ones that matter if you lose all of the main ones, then the network is down.
You put all of your units into any nydus worm or main network building and your units are available from any worm/nydus network on the map. It is global. You can unload from anywhere on the map. It's not a "cute" thing, it's something Zergs are not currently doing or abusing enough.
Zerg players probably aren't doing this because if the T player is watching their base/s and has just a few units in the area its ineffective and most top players will probably do that. It doesn't seem to be a totally reliable since its relying on your opponent to make mistakes
Can't believe you guys are actually defending the zerg who decided to play no rush 20 and let T split one of the most T favored maps and get max upgrades for mech, then continuously ran the most terrible unit compositions into the siege line on high ground and let half his drop get killed.
And your solution is to basically...make the game feel like 1998 again and remove tank AI. Wow, this is on the same level as defending bnet 0.2 features.
On June 03 2010 10:58 Despotic wrote: These people crying imba like its some broken matchup in need of drastic changes really serve no purpose.
Another interesting idea could be to have burrowed units immune to splash, expanding upon burrowed subterfuge. With the recent improvements to roach tech, a spread of roaches could nullify an unmicroed siege line.
A minor AI change is not a drastic change thats the entire point of this thread
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
haha, no against 10 mutalisk 1 thor with some marines or 2 thor will be enough. And if the terran see youre doing a ton of mutalisk, he'll himself make a ton of thors/viking. And since thors are also very good against ground there is no risk he will waste any money with that.
Isn't that the whole point? make him waste gas on stuff other then tanks?
Less tanks, stronger lings.
no, firstly youre wasting way more ressource with mustalisk which will be completely useless since he has 2-3 thors and secondly he doesnt waste gaz at all since thor do pretty well against every zerg ground and air units. He will have less tank but more thors and you will definitely have a lot less of ground army
On June 03 2010 10:44 pyr0ma5ta wrote: If you let the Terran get 200/200 full upped, you deserve to lose. The 200/200 mech army is unbeatable in BW too, but it's not imba either.
Saying these kind of statements is telling people that they have to go for allins or timing attacks to beat mech and if you rush to broodlord corruptors you're open to timing attacks.. tell me how this is viable.
Sheth and MoMan never really attacked until they had maxed out. Sheth never attacked QXC until about three minutes after he hit 200/200. So, "timing attack" is a pretty large window I think.
What about slowing the firing rate of tanks in Siege Mode?
we're not trying to break TvP and Tanks in small numbers would still be plenty of viable, even mech would be viable with the fix suggested.. it just would be more 'beatable' if you nerf the speed rate, tanks are gonna be taken out of the game ecuation and that's not what we're trying to do here
On June 03 2010 09:27 dethrawr wrote: Its the same in SC1, if zerg lets terran get 200/200 mech zerg will lose.
I don't think its really imbalanced, zerg needs to start using mech's immobility against them with nydus/doom drop play.
Also your 'fix' would be awful :l
I agree sir. People need to actually get good and stop crying Imba on things they can't beat. For instance, today I saw ret's stream he jus got tunneling for roaches and massed them along with banelings vs mech. Then tunneled his little cute roaches on to Terran's mineral lines. After that it was gg.
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
haha, no against 10 mutalisk 1 thor with some marines or 2 thor will be enough. And if the terran see youre doing a ton of mutalisk, he'll himself make a ton of thors/viking. And since thors are also very good against ground there is no risk he will waste any money with that.
Isn't that the whole point? make him waste gas on stuff other then tanks?
Less tanks, stronger lings.
no, firstly youre wasting way more ressource with mustalisk which will be completely useless since he has 2-3 thors and secondly he doesnt waste gaz at all since thor do pretty well against every zerg ground and air units. He will have less tank but more thors and you will definitely have a lot less of ground army
And how is he going to move out if he has to leave his thors to defend scvs? build 20 turrets early game? If he does, then you will have way more forces.
On June 03 2010 10:56 avilo wrote: Also, I find it completely hilarious that rather than talking about how to counter it, or something more logical like many of the maps being too small and sensor towers being too good, you guys start spewing off your "let's list all the top player's opinions (none of whom seem to abuse nydus enough)."
Top players are NOT good balance designers. A lot of top players are biased one way or another most of the time. Did you see all of those Zerg players you listed advocating that ZvT lategame be fixed a few patches ago when TvZ was almost impossible late game? No, they were all pretty content to free win with 1a roache suicide-> remax 200 lategame.
Actually that is incorrect. General consensus pre-patch 11 was that Terran was weak which would entail some buffing. Distorting the past in order to descredit the idea that good players may know what is up because they disagree with you is not constructive, imo.
Also, look at the players on that list. Do you honestly believe that if nydus worms were the answer idra, artosis or dimaga would not have figured it out by now? To me, that seems highly unlikely.
the fact is, the brute force of terran army late game is strong. nobody disagrees with that, and it's not necessarily bad as we saw that a bit in SC1.
The problem is that the ease of getting there. Turtling is so much stronger because defensive tanks are just way too good, bunkers are at only an opportunity cost, ravens negate so much fire power, and thors make it unable for any air harass.
Once you amass that huge army, you dictate how the game will turn out. If there are solo directions for you to push(steppes of war, lost temple) or not tons of expansions(blistering sands, scrap station), the terran army will win based on the push or attrition respectively.
So theres two main ways to go about this. You either tone down the strength of the end game army and/or increase the zerg's strength,
or
make it harder to create that end game composition that is way too cost efficient.
Making a tank more than 125 gas would seem ludicrous, or making thors more than 200 gas would be too, hence we need to address the dynamics of the strength of terran and zerg armies.
Dialing down tanks again would be the best choice. the zerg should either have 1 food, and terran has concentrated attack damage, or vice versa, but not the extremes. I think taking away tank splash how it is now would make the game better. TvT would be much more playable, pvt wouldn't be such a mystery as turtling really hard as terran wouldn't be as strong, making more exciting matches, and tvz would give roaches a more assertive role.
However, at a theoretical standpoint, it cannot be refuted that terran MECH vs zerg is highly imbalanced and needs to be significantly changed.
I think tanks are underpowered, they should have an alternate fire mode that shoots bullets for close range and air like in halo. They should make missile turrets also attack ground and have +3 armor so Terrans can more easily defend against mutas. In addition give ghost a special ability like...nerve gas that kills any biological unit in range, kinda like the emp except for zergs. In addition have vikings be able to plant aerial mines, that work as spider mines but only affect air units. Oh and have the nuclear bombs dropped by banshees and increase the radius and power of nuclear bombs so that it 1 hit any biological unit. Because common, radiation should be lethal to all biological units...in addition, make nuclear craters radioactive for 273 sec. Meanwhile, no creep can grow on it.
I also think that helions are too week, infernal lighter should come already upgraded. Biological units that get hit are on fire. While on fire, it cannot attack. Units on fire slowly dies. In addition, units that are on fire can spread the flames to adjacent units and structures. I think that will add an interesting aspect to the micro for zergs. Have the helions a larger spread or least attack faster. But that would make it slightly imba, so maybe scratch the last idea. Instead have helions fire do extra dmg buildings. I mean it makes sense cause fire should destroy buildings.
Oh and protoss voidrays are wayyyy too imbalanced, have it's range nerf to 2, and make it slower than the viking by .2112
lol, avilo's been trying to push this crappy nydus thing since the stream on sunday. so far ive seen him get shot down by idra multiple times and now you guys. I think he wants all the pros and mods to hate him (very comical to watch).
Anyways, i think sensor towers play a large role in the strength of mech (as does the smart shot thing). When the terran goes a mech build, the thing to exploit is immobility through harassment and drops and nydus and all that jazz. But with the large range of sensor towers, the terran has plenty of time to spot and intercept any attempt at harassment. so the zerg is left with fail harassment attempts and and army that he can't directly engage.
I also think increasing the tank supply may help the zerg situation, because since roaches got the supply nerf, zerg players have half as big an army to take on the tank ball.
The QXC vs Sheth match was for the LAST PATCH. As for the LZ vs Moman match in this patch, did Moman explore Ultralisks?
Furthermore, it should be like BW where a 200/200 Terran army should beat a 200/200 P and 200/200 Z army because Terran are IMMOBILE in SC2. Zerg have Nydus and the overlords that you HAVE TO build can be used for DROPS - as opposed to Medivacs which are wasted resources for a drop if a Terran goes Mech.
LZ was absolutely right when he said a Zerg player HAS TO UTILIZE MOBILITY to beat a Terran player and ditto for Protoss. When the top Korean pros switch over to SC2, they will ABUSE the mobility of Z and P and at that time, we will all be asking Blizzard to nerf Z and P because pro Korean Z and P players will have a field day with T players.
On June 03 2010 09:14 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Okay before any of you start crying about omg it's not broken I was going to upload more replays but I kept getting errors on half of them so watch these two and try not to claw your eyes out.
Okay moving on, terran mech in the lategame once they get full upgrades and sieged up and fully 200/200 with ravens and energy for spells you CAN NOT beat it. Now the thing is there should be no unbeatable strategy there should be no point at which you have to GG without fighting because you can't win. There needs to be a way to break a strategy with good control or good macro and after Sheth wound up suiciding a combined total of almost 20k minerals and 10k gas it's clear that macro isn't the way to go.
Okay anyways I don't want this to be an argument on if terran mech is broken or not but obviously it probably will so I'm going to move on to my possible fix. I think one of the major factors is not the stats on the terran mech as it works quite well against protoss and if there is an actual nerf to mech then it breaks tvp mech viability and a buff to zerg ground breaks zvp. This is the dilemma people facing this have had to think about for quite a while. The solution is actually amazingly simple once I thought of it.
Siege tanks have a smart AI that refuses to overkill targets, it sounds good it seems like a great idea at first because oh tanks wound up wasting a lot of shots vs fast units like speedlings in broodwar. But the problem is without the tanks wasting shots it's not possible for a zerg ground army to get into position to kill anything more than just a few tanks. Again watch the replays if you disagree, I think that if the smart AI is removed so that tanks waste shots a zerg will still take HEAVY losses but if they're in a situation that Sheth was in where he was ridiculously far ahead in macro able to rebuild 200/200 armies in less than a minute it would then be possible to break the mech.
TL;DR remove the smart targetting on siege tanks so that they are forced to waste shots on the first wave of zerg units and maybe a zerg in dominant macro position can break mech without actual balance changes.
edit:
As for zerg being more mobile and having to abuse the immobility of Mech watch this replay MoMaN did an excellent job of abusing Lz and playing mind games sniping expansions and doing a great job of using drops fake drops nydus worm everything people are always saying the zerg has to do to beat mech and he STILL lost...
Early and mid game is fine for mech its when you get to the 200/200 it with a good mix of raven/thors and viks and turrents/seansor towers around the map is when it becomes imba vs zerg. Best way to fix it is to fix the unit that is made to be good vs tank and shit the ultra right now its broken as hell.
Also the come on the sheth-vs-qxc match everyone knows sheth was not even trying anymore from the start of those matchs watch the 10000 mistakes and fuck up he does. He was playing like a wood legue player sry can't use those for anything lol. T
he Moman guys harsment was fail and late /shrug his first attack / harsment was at 18 min when he was 200/200 and the terran was 180 sry thats not what people are talking about harsment. Moman showede you what not to do cause he used no creep spread taht was good no early drops no early mutas picking at sides no early burrow raochs. but anyways ya
Ultras need to be fix to fix the late game problem at 200/200. Make them highest threat target in game make it so they take no splash dmg only direct hits will hurt them. Thick armor and all. Also make it so that spalsh does not happen off any hits that hit them. Soak tank dmg tanks allways hit them first win. Also help zerg with colos 10 colos get some ultras.
On June 03 2010 11:06 Wayra wrote: I think tanks are underpowered, they should have an alternate fire mode that shoots bullets for close range and air like in halo. They should make missile turrets also attack ground and have +3 armor so Terrans can more easily defend against mutas. In addition give ghost a special ability like...nerve gas that kills any biological unit in range, kinda like the emp except for zergs. In addition have vikings be able to plant aerial mines, that work as spider mines but only affect air units. Oh and have the nuclear bombs dropped by banshees and increase the radius and power of nuclear bombs so that it 1 hit any biological unit. Because common, radiation should be lethal to all biological units...in addition, make nuclear craters radioactive for 273 sec. Meanwhile, no creep can grow on it.
I also think that helions are too week, infernal lighter should come already upgraded. Biological units that get hit are on fire. While on fire, it cannot attack. Units on fire slowly dies. In addition, units that are on fire can spread the flames to adjacent units and structures. I think that will add an interesting aspect to the micro for zergs. Have the helions a larger spread or least attack faster. But that would make it slightly imba, so maybe scratch the last idea. Instead have helions fire do extra dmg buildings. I mean it makes sense cause fire should destroy buildings.
Oh and protoss voidrays are wayyyy too imbalanced, have it's range nerf to 2, and make it slower than the viking by .2112
On June 03 2010 09:51 Zozo wrote: People still seem to think that walking into 15 siege tanks in sc1 was possible, it wasn't, even with the poor AI.
The problem is that the overall tank dmg is higher, and reducing attack speed would pretty much limit TvP and make TvT even longer.
I think every zerg whining just has all his units on group1, and can't be assed to spread his mutas to kill the thors. The solution would be increase siege/unsiege time by one second, then again, as soon as the good players start spreading their mutalisks, mech will return to total trash.
On a obvious side note: For every thor made, less tanks are in the field. 10 spread mutas rape thors. Overseers delay thors. Play.
LOL it's so fun to listen to somebody who never have played zerg at all. PLEASE show me a replay of you killing 3/4 thors with mutas with your AWSOME mutas micro. I just can't wait to see that :D
Cause you can get 4 thors before 10 mutalisks right? You can't pull off 200/200 3/3 7 factories in 10 minutes. Let's not pretend it's NR20
If you watch the games you are going to see how vulnerable lz was while teching.
haha, no against 10 mutalisk 1 thor with some marines or 2 thor will be enough. And if the terran see youre doing a ton of mutalisk, he'll himself make a ton of thors/viking. And since thors are also very good against ground there is no risk he will waste any money with that.
Isn't that the whole point? make him waste gas on stuff other then tanks?
Less tanks, stronger lings.
no, firstly youre wasting way more ressource with mustalisk which will be completely useless since he has 2-3 thors and secondly he doesnt waste gaz at all since thor do pretty well against every zerg ground and air units. He will have less tank but more thors and you will definitely have a lot less of ground army
And how is he going to move out if he has to leave his thors to defend scvs? build 20 turrets early game? If he does, then you will have way more forces.
Lol you just don't get it, you were saying that you can beat thors with mutalish, i just answered that this is NOT THE CASE, i don't say mutalisk can't harass scv, but you can't relay on them to beat his army that's all. Yes you can make mutalisk, it will delay him a bit since he will have to make 2-3 towers and 1 or 2 thors, but that's ALL. Maybe it will buy you some time to get an economical advantage over him but that's pointless since you just can't beat his army.
To all the people who think that all top zerg players suck hardly and they are super skilled and have found the way to beat easily mech terran. Plz play zerg, beat a strong mech terran and give us the replay. If the mech terran doesn't make a lot of mistake, and iwithout some kind a rush/all-in it's just impossible to beat him.
On June 03 2010 10:44 pyr0ma5ta wrote: If you let the Terran get 200/200 full upped, you deserve to lose. The 200/200 mech army is unbeatable in BW too, but it's not imba either.
Saying these kind of statements is telling people that they have to go for allins or timing attacks to beat mech and if you rush to broodlord corruptors you're open to timing attacks.. tell me how this is viable.
Sorry, but you're wrong. There's any number of vulnerable points in mech TvZ. If you're not Nydus Worming and harassing and being everywhere on the map, you deserve to lose to a 200/200 army. If you're losing to max mech, you should play the other side of the matchup, find where it's weak, and find the way to hit there as Zerg. As a Terran player who mechs in every matchup nowadays, I have lost in many ways to Zerg, but never if I am allowed 2 bases and to get a third running. Use tunneling claws, Mutas, lings, Infestors, Nydus's, whatever. Just don't let me sit and pump out of 8 facs with 2 spinning Armory, because if you do, I have no pity for your impending loss.
On June 03 2010 09:27 dethrawr wrote: Its the same in SC1, if zerg lets terran get 200/200 mech zerg will lose.
I don't think its really imbalanced, zerg needs to start using mech's immobility against them with nydus/doom drop play.
Also your 'fix' would be awful :l
I agree sir. People need to actually get good and stop crying Imba on things they can't beat. For instance, today I saw ret's stream he jus got tunneling for roaches and massed them along with banelings vs mech. Then tunneled his little cute roaches on to Terran's mineral lines. After that it was gg.
This is the root problem of ZvT balance discussion. All of these suggested "counters" for mech builds are quirky one-offs that require your opponent to be semi-afk / just plain worse than you at the game. Burrowed roaches, sneaky nydus, sneaky infestors, mineral line drops are not viable counters to mech - they're supplemental tactics to what should be an actual counter.
On June 03 2010 11:09 StarcraftMan wrote: The QXC vs Sheth match was for the LAST PATCH. As for the LZ vs Moman match in this patch, did Moman explore Ultralisks?
Furthermore, it should be like BW where a 200/200 Terran army should beat a 200/200 P and 200/200 Z army because Terran are IMMOBILE in SC2. Zerg have Nydus and the overlords that you HAVE TO build can be used for DROPS - as opposed to Medivacs which are wasted resources for a drop if a Terran goes Mech.
LZ was absolutely right when he said a Zerg player HAS TO UTILIZE MOBILITY to beat a Terran player and ditto for Protoss. When the top Korean pros switch over to SC2, they will ABUSE the mobility of Z and P and at that time, we will all be asking Blizzard to nerf Z and P because pro Korean Z and P players will have a field day with T players.
.
Lol seriously did you see how badly ultralisk died against tanks ? Do you really think 50 hp will make a huge difference ? and stop talking about mobility...
MoMan played he just screwed up a big confrontation, never put drones on the second extractor at his natural (after he destroyed the tank on the ledge) and didn't put drones on the second gas at his third for quite a long time (the minerals were about mined out). It wasn't surprising that he was gas limited on his reinforcements given he was essentially operating on two bases worth of gas.
Again, though, MoMan never attacked once until 18 minutes into the game, and I think that might be the strategic issue. That's about the same timing as Sheth, actually, who didn't really attack until around 18 minutes had passed. And that was great against bio balls, since your maxed army will trade pretty evenly with the ball, and then you can reinforce vastly more quickly than the terran.
Ok there's some faults in your logic so let's start from the top.
On June 03 2010 10:53 avilo wrote: Yo, "bro," show me a replay of top Zergs even DOING IT. None have yet developed it into their game. People are so hard headed it's amazing.
You guys that are saying "OMG THAT DOESN'T WORK" have barely even developed it or worked it into your game or seen anyone that has developed it to a good level.
I assume you mean you amazing Nydus attack. Here's a hint: When you can't find a top pro that will even TRY to do a strat it's more than likely it's because it sucks.
You guys that are saying "OMG THAT DOESN'T WORK" have barely even developed it or worked it into your game or seen anyone that has developed it to a good level.
Again the strat is not viable. Sure 2k/2k is less than 10k/10k. But you're forgetting something: 12k/12k > 10k/10k. O yeah especially when the whole strategy is about as viable as a mass recall is. Seriously Mass Recall might even be more viable than 20 nydus networks.
O yea here's another problem with that strat: This. It will beat your 20 nydus worms 11 times out of 9. O wait...
So many people here sound exactly like the naysayers in SC BW when it first was developing, "ARBITERS ARE STUPID, TOO MUCH GAS NO ONE WOULD EVER USE IT FOR MASS RECALLS AROUND THE MAP, are you stupid?! That's way too much gas and not viable!!!!"
Yes 1999 was a very different time however.
"OMG, corsairs?! Lofl they suck!!"
I really hope you are not insuating that you have made a discovery like Bisu did. Cause you can stop right there.
"Protoss fast expand?! LOL you're a noob that'll never work, you're gonna get rolled."
Really.....
So many people in this thread are being like that. Try it, and develop it b4 you start saying the "that doesn't work."
Remind me why ANYONE should listen to you over any of the baller ass players in this thread saying it's broken.
It's broken.
Sure doing magic tricks with Nydus worms may be fun but there's like 2000 different ways you can get rolled doing that.
can you explain me what i must do before this 18 minuts with my units vs terran tower all his base and got so many tank and thor and viking on siege? Öô waiting
In your game vs LZgamer why didn't you tech switch to mutas slightly before or right when you killed his thors. There was nearly 5mins of time in which he had little anti air (2 turrets, a viking or two) with 5 - 6 mutas, which you could have easily afforded you would have won.
Also in my experience, 50 - 20 Diamond using speedlings early on really helps limit the amount of siege tanks they can afford because they may have to get more rines. That way when you push out with your initial hydras you wont suddenly face 4 fast siege tanks.
On June 03 2010 11:19 koppik wrote: MoMan played he just screwed up a big confrontation and never put drones on the extractor at his natural (after the tank destroyed it) and didn't put drones on the second gas at his third for quite a long time (the minerals were about mined out). It wasn't surprising that he was gas limited on his reinforcements given he was essentially operating on two bases worth of gas.
Again, though, MoMan never attacked once until 18 minutes into the game, and I think that might be the strategic issue. That's about the same timing as Sheth, actually, who didn't really attack until around 18 minutes had passed.
so you're suggesting an all in timing attack as the answer? terran is not unbeatable early and early-mid game that's not really the issue at all, but if terran is a good enough player, like LzGaMeR or QXC and just afk and take 3 bases, its really really close to unstoppable, IdrA is switching to P just for PvT, that should open some people's eyes...
there's someone saying "all zerg just switch to T find out the weakpoint and switch back" why do we need to do that, when most Top Terran players agree with us already.
200/200 terran should be able to beat 200/200 zerg
200/200 terran should not be able to kill 10+ waves of 200/200, with minimal losses.
Also, with workers, a maxed army of roaches/ultras/infestors which Sheth used mainly came out to about a 3000~ mineral cost and 1000-2000 gas cost. That is pretty damn low in my books.
This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
Not to mention, seeing as how i watched every one of those games, BOTH sheth and Moman ran 200/200 armies of ground units into a TANK LINE 3 TIMES. 3 TIMES. YES ILL SAY IT AGAIN FOR EFFECT 3 TIMES. (sheth was more like 5 times)
Had either one of the literally switched to make 15 mutas (particularily momans game) they would have crushed those terran builds. LZ never had more than 3 thors on the field and 2-4 vikings, they were almost alwasy out protecting his tanks. With mutas MoMan could have raped LZ's bases/expansions, if he moved his thors back, he could have raped his tanks. Same thing for Sheth.
he buillt 4 Ultra armiers, 4! and they all died against tanks REPEATEDLY. He could have teched to broodlords 3 times over, but instead stayed with Ultras. Zerg has fantastic air units, why Zerg dont seem to want to build them, and want to continually run GROUND UNITS into sieged tanks and crying imbalance is beyond me.
On June 03 2010 11:14 pyr0ma5ta wrote: As a Terran player who mechs in every matchup nowadays, I have lost in many ways to Zerg, but never if I am allowed 2 bases and to get a third running. Use tunneling claws, Mutas, lings, Infestors, Nydus's, whatever. Just don't let me sit and pump out of 8 facs with 2 spinning Armory, because if you do, I have no pity for your impending loss.
Dude, even with 4-5 bases at 200/200 zerg have no reliable way to bet a close to 200/200 T that only have 2 bases.
Tunneling claws are nullified by a single missile turret at your ramp.
Nydus is very difficult if you spread out ANY buildings or units in your base (lets not talk about the sensor towers lol, are you aware that nydus can only be placed if you have vision at the spot?. Main use of nydus is mobility between own bases/islands, you can only do it into an enemy base if the owner screws up majorly.
Infestors? You can maybe stick up some vikings if you are lucky, but the range issues are still there.
Mutas vs Turret and Thors are useless that's the problem i think the best way of my game! in this game, its i must pick my island, make broodlord and take my gaz on the 4th 5th expand! :p But its hard because he can make viking really quick, but another think i must do a spire for switch 8 mutas or soemthing for playing with the timing! :p
But please dont say "before 18min you need to attack" because that is impossible!
lzgamer says moman should have dropped his main after he killed his two expos and moman/zerg should have abused their mobility more. wtf? moman did a fake drop, cut lz's army in half, killed two expos, and he has to defend his base after because a million +3 attack tanks could have killed zerg's entire base and why trade 4 bases for 2? How many drops do you want zerg to do? The problem is with 10 or more siege tanks zerg can't get enough roaches out to kill them and everything melts to siege tanks. I think the only way moman could have won is by transitioning to broodlord/corrupter while doing the roach attack because it's the only thing that can touch upgraded tanks.
On June 03 2010 11:25 Jinsin5 wrote: 200/200 terran should be able to beat 200/200 zerg
200/200 terran should not be able to kill 10+ waves of 200/200, with minimal losses.
I heartily agree with this statement.
I feel that at this point, Zerg does not posses the tools to reliably break late game mech armies. Its not that terran needs a huge nerf, its just they need an adjustment so that this particularly strategy is toned down slightly.
Rael, I feel bad for you as no one ACTUALLY tries to not let their emotional rage step aside on the internet these days, and look at things in a productive way since not many are playing at the level of play where the balance issue is really in question. I know I'm not, but it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.
You can theorycraft all you want people, it doesn't make a difference. As MoMaN (who I <3) said, if terran make mistakes you have a higher chance of winning, but their mistakes are a hell of a lot easier to rectify than zerg players.
Raelcun's proposition is not unreasonable, as it still requires zerg to bring their a game. I don't understand why people are getting so emotional about something that really isn't effecting them.
If someone has an opinion, that holds warrant and is backed up by people involved on all fronts, you should listen and try to be productive so the community can propose a well balanced change or strategy that can actually be viable.
On June 03 2010 11:25 Jinsin5 wrote: 200/200 terran should be able to beat 200/200 zerg
200/200 terran should not be able to kill 10+ waves of 200/200, with minimal losses.
I heartily agree with this statement.
I feel that at this point, Zerg does not posses the tools to reliably break late game mech armies. Its not that terran needs a huge nerf, its just they need an adjustment so that this particularly strategy is toned down slightly.
On June 03 2010 11:27 Darpa wrote: This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
Not to mention, seeing as how i watched every one of those games, BOTH sheth and Moman ran 200/200 armies of ground units into a TANK LINE 3 TIMES. 3 TIMES. YES ILL SAY IT AGAIN FOR EFFECT 3 TIMES. (sheth was more like 5 times)
Had either one of the literally switched to make 15 mutas (particularily momans game) they would have crushed those terran builds. LZ never had more than 3 thors on the field and 2-4 vikings, they were almost alwasy out protecting his tanks. With mutas MoMan could have raped LZ's bases/expansions, if he moved his thors back, he could have raped his tanks. Same thing for Sheth.
he buillt 4 Ultra armiers, 4! and they all died against tanks REPEATEDLY. He could have teched to broodlords 3 times over, but instead stayed with Ultras. Zerg has fantastic air units, why Zerg dont seem to want to build them, and want to continually run GROUND UNITS into sieged tanks and crying imbalance is beyond me.
You're right, the answer is to make mutas and attack mineral lines. Ignore the unkillable T army a-moving into your base to end the game. You showed those scv what's what.
I believe you guys didnt realize that u need vision to use the nydus worm and yet with vikings and sensor towers .. tell me how exactly do you wanna proceed with your 10 worms in his main ?
It's so easy to say something like "Oh he should have done this or that.. he didn't play well enough.." but seriously, by letting 10-15 tanks in his main and the rest of his army at his expo and tossing some guided bomb with ravens when ultras come isn't what i call actually Trying !
You can clearly see in the video that Qxc's apm was down for a while and i remember Realcun showing it on the stream. It's not right that Zerg players have to try harder to win compared to Terrans at the same level of play, clearly not.
Don't say that zerg players are not used to end-game mech or something like that cause it doesn't have anything to do with this espescially at top level because we are talking about players that know how to play their race.
Oh and tell me, why are you talking about SLOW Terran MOBILITY when it really doesn't matter at that point if you can just sit a bunch of tank in your base and attack with the other part of your army ?
On June 03 2010 11:22 MoMaN- wrote: can you explain me what i must do before this 18 minuts with my units vs terran tower all his base and got so many tank and thor and viking on siege? Öô waiting
He didn't have towers all over his base until 17 minutes in.
I mean, roaches do increasingly worse--per roach--as more time goes on and he gets more tanks. So, I think you want to attack as soon as possible and keep attacking. No idea past there. But I feel like the zerg waiting until he hits 200/200--and then banking some money--before ever attacking is the best case scenario for the mech player.
It's kind of the exact opposite of how it would be for a bioball terran vs zerg. Best case scenario for the zerg is that the terran waits until he's maxed before ever attacking. Winning as the terran in that scenario is pretty much impossible.
But I think tanks are pretty ridiculous...They are affecting TvT too, the reason no other strat but Tank/Vike works in TvT is because no ground unit can stand up to tanks.
I disagree about the AI thing. If you have to make "AI" dumber in an RTS, than the unit is probably just overpowered. They just need to lower the damage on the siege tanks---Maybe even lower the damage dramatically and then take away the friendly fire/min range aspect of it to make it usable in more situations but less powerful in those situations.
If I were to muse as a developer, I would lower their damage to 30 but take away friendly fire, min range and maybe knock off some gas cost. They would essential become amazing "mass" killers, like Collos or Storm but they would become poorer against higher tier, higher HP units.
Then again, like I said, I'm an RTS noobie, so meh but I think its a huge problem when a unit is so good at AE, that even "tank" units, like roaches/marauders/thors get "melted" as if they were t1.
I've made this suggestion on blizzard's sc2 form a while back that could potentially solve the terran mech dilemma fro zerg without imbalancing the game. (Note: I got pretty much no feed back (1 reply) on the bliz forum.)
It is a modification to the corruptor's corruption skill to dissable targeted unit from attacking.
Preface: The current corruption skill: Increase targeted unit's damage in take by 20% for 30s; at cost of 100 energy from range 6 with instant cast.
While used when corruptors are already on the field for some other reason this skill in unremarkable as it only provides a marginal advantage even in the situations it was designed for (targeting expensive high hp enemy units).
Further more it doesn't add to game dynamic in any particular fashion and the effect of the skill is so unimpressive in that even ideal use of it will not have game changing effects.
Currently zerg does not have a cost effective method of directly engaging terran mech forces when once in position (I'm asserting this as there have been many discussions regarding this topic already). Now, this is NOT a balance issue as there are work around strategies that allow zerg players to win by avoid such confrontations (which have been discussed already and have been found to be sufficient). However, it IS an issue with game dynamics as its does put sever limitations on viable strategies.
Suggestion: Change corruptor corruption skill to: Disable targeted unit's ability to attack for 3 game second; at cost of 150 energy from range 6 with instant cast. (it has been noted that the disable time may need to be revised up to 5 game seconds but this would require actual game testing)
Reason: This skill CAN have game changing effects if used correctly, while still allowing the opponent the option to mitigate its effects by disengaging (corrupted units will still be able to move, just not attack).
By disabling key units in conjunction with zerg units' high mobility this will give the zerg race an effective strategy to engage forces that they currently have great difficult against.
Since corruptors are fairly expensive it will not be the case that zerg would get huge advantage out of this skill as corruptors can't be massed without sacrificing army strength.
Finally while effective against its targeted strategy (opponent massing large number of expensive immobile units) all races have units that can be used in response to a zerg building a large number of corruptors for this skill making it so that it will not imbalance the game.
On June 03 2010 11:35 Lithose wrote: I disagree about the AI thing. If you have to make "AI" dumber in an RTS, than the unit is probably just overpowered. They just need to lower the damage on the siege tanks---Maybe even lower the damage dramatically and then take away the friendly fire/min range aspect of it to make it usable in more situations but less powerful in those situations.
They wouldn't be siege tanks without min range and friendly fire.
On June 03 2010 11:37 Darpa wrote: Explain to me a situation in broodwar were a 200/200 army of hydras/ultras would beat a 200/200 fully upgraded tank line? Because i cant think of one. .
20 hydra against 7 tanks would probably mean 3 tanks dead, without me having any math to back that.
The issue is that Thors are pretty much the only Hardcounter in the game, maybe along with Infestors against Mothership, which is irrelevent. You're a scenario where 2 Thors invalidate any amount of Mutalisks, and as soon as Terran gets Thors up, combined with freakin 24 damage missle turrets, Mutalisks are no long valid unit choices.
Mechs main vulnerability is it's mobility. Currently, the means for zerg to exploit this are too limited. Specifically, because of the Viking and the Thor. A single thor at a base renders muta harass impossible.
You literally need upwards to fifteen mutalisks to kill a single thor supported by SCV's. 1500/1500 investment, and many of them will die. With 2 missle turrets, it becomes impossible.
Please please do not nerf tanks blizzard. Why are you guys advocating that? What about "Omg positional play is dead"? Starcraft is defined by superpowerful units with the ability to change any match in huge ways.
The issue isn't that some units are superpowerful, but the direction in which this node of power points the game towards. Siege Tanks discourage Attack-A attacks, to the point of making an Attack A on a well fortified terran position with any equal army composition literally suicide. This is a good thing. Siege Tanks encourage taking map control to punish turtling. Siege tanks encourage non-all in harrassment. Siege Tanks encourage active play during macro. While siege tank standoffs are disdained, before that period, a fortification of siege tanks encourages constant expansion and harrassment instead of passive macro and army building. They encourage teching.
None of these are bad at all.
In fact, due to the fact that the roach sucks balls, Siege tanks literally encourage only one negative effect, the possibility of a deadlocked post-macro late game standoff. Even the units the encourage are units that should be encouraged, without invalidating any unit other then banelings, a unit by balance, designed to be invalidated, due to it's system of binary returns. (Terrible Terrible damage or none at all). They encourage Roaches and Ultralisks, both underused, while I've yet to see a ZvT play out without use of Lings and hydras despite tanks.
They don't even encourage overuse and bland armies, they have severe weaknesses that need to be addressed with a varied army.
The issue here is the Thor. The Thor is also a extremely powerful unit, a node that will shift the dynamic of gameplay. But it shifts the game in only negative ways as far as it's air attack goes. It renders the Mutalisk invalid, a basic zerg unit that severely hurts the diversity of the matchup when it is taken out, especially when zerg already so desperately need more units.
The Mutalisk would be among the most annoying units for mech play. The antithetical of the tank, it power is inordinately low, but makes up for it with sheer mobility. Essentially, the unit is designed to counter standard mech play (not hardcounter, just counter). But the Thor provides such a passive, long ranged attack that it invalidates this mobility. In essence, it shifts the game away from all the things a siege tank encourages. This simultaneously creates an imbalance for zerg, designed to exploit mechs immobility, while making the game more boring and less diverse.
It's ability is also bullshit. Not only did it invalidate mutalisks, but it invalidates ultralisks to the point where it necessitated the creation of a new ability just to counter another ability. If that isn't bad design idk what is.
On June 03 2010 11:37 Darpa wrote: Explain to me a situation in broodwar were a 200/200 army of hydras/ultras would beat a 200/200 fully upgraded tank line? Because i cant think of one. .
20 hydra against 7 tanks would probably mean 3 tanks dead, without me having any math to back that.
Umm, ok? that was not what i was talking about. Not to mention LZ lost tons of tanks. He literally had only 8-10 tanks (out of maybe 20) after he pushed those 6oclock expansions of MoMan.
If those Broodwar tanks were fully upgraded as I said above, you might lose 1 or 2 tanks as those hydras moved against a sieged line.
I don't see why one specific unit AI needs to be "dumbed." Else wise, why not "dumb" down the other units AI? Remove auto surround, remove auto-mine, split, etc? These are there to keep the game at a certain level and equality.
I think we should think more about working around the situation with what is present. Yes, the win % is probably higher at the moment for TvZ mech, but a like many new strats/plays it presents a new challenge. When we take mech TvZ in bw for example, it was quite strong in its early stages as well. Then as more games, and people like Day[9] came up with ways to play against it.
When we play or look at games, and see two armies collide and one wins by a long shot, it doesn't mean it is over powered. We have to look carefully at the unit composition and control by both players. BW example: if the mech army consisted of mostly goliaths then obviously heavily mutalisk based army would lose to it. When the army is made up of majorly tanks, then obviously a heavy or pure ground army would have big trouble vs it (excluding dark swarms, fungal etc). This was a key aspect of fighting mech in BW, re-adjusting your army composition so it will maximize the damage done.
Next, we have to look at strategies. Have all the strategies been tested? In the OP a replay of mom vs lz is posted, and a "variance" of tactics are used. I think we have to question why is the player so split in between his strategic play? His attacks and tactics obviously cannot be maximized if he tries to do a bit of everything. We are also excluding the factor that his opponent ultimately outplayed him. If you can post examples of each individual tactic being optimized to its fullest and still lose to the other strat, then yes there is a problem.
Once again, people need to analyze mech's weaknesses and compare it to its strength. Like its low mobility and turtle ability. Considering mech is heavily gas priced, terran army composition is delicately balanced between how many of each unit it needs. Denying terran from further expoing outside their natural limits their economy to their one big force. Given this time it allows for zerg to expand and build their economy > than the terrans. Also, assuming zerg does a good job stopping terran from expanding. If terran is capable to defend all sort of harassment from zerg, and then terran moves out it presents opportunity for the zerg to do several things. Zerg can backdoor into their natural or main and take out key buildings. Or they can flank the moving army with tanks unseiged. Sure, zerg army may lose the fight, but I think we undermine how fast the zerg can replenish its army. As long as you take out and exchange a decent amount of terrans army, with your greater economy and macro you should be able to repeat this and take the rest of it out. This also allows the zerg the chance to hard counter the leftover terran units.
The game is still at its very early stages, and we should allow for more room for it to grow before suggesting a plethora of changes. I think we have to ask ourselves if we can really ask for changes from the current game pool and more so to face a specific strategy. Is it really unbeatable? Unbeatable to me is when anyone can apply this strategy and win consistently with it. Can a player from a different level league use this strategy and consistently win versus someone in a higher league? Players skill level are all over the spectrum.
I don't have much time to go over more points, but I feel a lot of balance issues concerning certain game play or strategies are being misrepresented. Let's enjoy the rest of beta and wait for the release when there will be a bigger audience of players. Competitiveness is what keeps the game going, and I think someone will figure something soon enough. If there is something weird or unnatural about a unit, blizzard will make the changes. Hence, they have all the statistics anyhow.
On June 03 2010 11:27 Darpa wrote: This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
This is not even arguable. They are better in sc2. If this is a troll then you aren't being funny
Explain to me a situation in broodwar were a 200/200 army of hydras/ultras would beat a 200/200 fully upgraded tank line? Because i cant think of one.
Also, mutas can attack and kill buildings quickly if they are A. more than 10 and B. upgraded, which they should be late game.
how difficult is it to understand than in BW when the terran players goes mass tank the zerg player just has to mass mutalisk / zerglings which isnt viable anymore in SC2 (I let you find the reason by yourself this has allready been discussed a thousands of times) ?
On June 03 2010 11:27 Darpa wrote: This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
Not to mention, seeing as how i watched every one of those games, BOTH sheth and Moman ran 200/200 armies of ground units into a TANK LINE 3 TIMES. 3 TIMES. YES ILL SAY IT AGAIN FOR EFFECT 3 TIMES. (sheth was more like 5 times)
Had either one of the literally switched to make 15 mutas (particularily momans game) they would have crushed those terran builds. LZ never had more than 3 thors on the field and 2-4 vikings, they were almost alwasy out protecting his tanks. With mutas MoMan could have raped LZ's bases/expansions, if he moved his thors back, he could have raped his tanks. Same thing for Sheth.
he buillt 4 Ultra armiers, 4! and they all died against tanks REPEATEDLY. He could have teched to broodlords 3 times over, but instead stayed with Ultras. Zerg has fantastic air units, why Zerg dont seem to want to build them, and want to continually run GROUND UNITS into sieged tanks and crying imbalance is beyond me.
You're right, the answer is to make mutas and attack mineral lines. Ignore the unkillable T army a-moving into your base to end the game. You showed those scv what's what.
LOL!!!!!!!
also......... are people actually suggesting that sheth should have made broodlord / corruptor vs qxc? i mean, he had 20 vikings + 15 ravens ready and waiting. I agree that broodlord / corruptor is really good but, say the zerg used every possible supply on corruptor broodlord. Say 60 supply is put towards drones/queens, and the zerg has absolutely 0 ground forces ( which is crazy and would never happen but anyways ) then he could make 70 corruptors, which MIGHT beat 20 vikings + 15 ravens, except that 10 PDD's and mass seeker missile, + the insane vikings range would completely decimate them, ok so it could be at best a trade of armies, even though yours cost 2x more than the t's army. But you would still need broodlords in there, to take out turrets and thors / marines / tanks. So say you add 10 broodlords, that is 40 supply gone that you cant use in the air fight =[ And you would get raped a LOT harder.
Honestly as a T player, I almost never have any problems dealing with broodlords, you can mass vikings so easily, in the late game i have a starport with reactor + 2 more with techlabs, pretty much as a standard when im on 2-3 base, and broodlords just take SOOOOOO LONG to get, and they are SOOOOOOOO slow moving, that i can easily have enough vikings to take them out before they do any damage.
Oh yeah, and nydus worms, that is the dumbest idea ever, go away avilo please
On June 03 2010 11:27 Darpa wrote: This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
This is not even arguable. They are better in sc2. If this is a troll then you aren't being funny
Explain to me a situation in broodwar were a 200/200 army of hydras/ultras would beat a 200/200 fully upgraded tank line? Because i cant think of one.
That is not what he is even talking about! First of all, tanks are better in SC2 this is FACT, they do not overkill, if you still disagree, watch the video in the OP, if you still disagree, you should really back off your point, because i can assure you, you are wrong.
Regarding the second point, most people in this thread will agree. However, a 200/200 zerg army in broodwar, accompanied by dark swarm would deal a TON more damage than a ultra/hydra/infestor army in SC2. If you look at my previous post you will see how many units Sheth had to go through just to even get a few kills off, he used a pretty standard army too! If sheth even went mutas/broodlords/corruptors, the outcome would've been the same. Thors will decimate the mutas, not to mention backup from the HSM, and Vikings tearing apart broodlords with their +armored damage.
On June 03 2010 11:27 Darpa wrote: This is kinda funny. Tanks are no better than they were in broodwar.
This is not even arguable. They are better in sc2. If this is a troll then you aren't being funny
Explain to me a situation in broodwar were a 200/200 army of hydras/ultras would beat a 200/200 fully upgraded tank line? Because i cant think of one.
Also, mutas can attack and kill buildings quickly if they are A. more than 10 and B. upgraded, which they should be late game.
what? When did I ever say a 200/200 hydra ultra army would beat a maxed tank line?
Because that is exactly what happened in those games that everyone is up in arms about, And I am suggesting the EXACT same thing would have happened in Broodwar.
Alright I watched the moman vs. lz game yesterday on the stream, and at the time I was agreeing with the commentators saying that moman outplayed his opponent and still lost. However after watching the replay I don't believe he really outplayed lz. He had SO many gas geysers in the second half of the game that weren't even mining, and lz had very minimal anti air in his army during his final push into 6. I honestly think a broodlord/muta switch would have dominated lz, which would have been simple if moman had been mining gas as he should have been (and built a spire at some point)
On June 03 2010 11:47 lu_cid wrote: Alright I watched the moman vs. lz game yesterday on the stream, and at the time I was agreeing with the commentators saying that moman outplayed his opponent and still lost. However after watching the replay I don't believe he really outplayed lz. He had SO many gas geysers in the second half of the game that weren't even mining, and lz had very minimal anti air in his army during his final push into 6. I honestly think a broodlord/muta switch would have dominated lz, which would have been simple if moman had been mining gas as he should have been (and built a spire at some point)
This is entirely the point I was trying to make, Thank you
I've watched these replays and I've also watched the 17173 world cup streams. The 17173 world cup wasn't full of chumps either. We're talking the best korean, asian, and european players from all over the world. Comparing the two, there is a drastic difference. In the 17173 world cup, zergs DOMINATED the tournament (it was an all zerg final) even against mech terrans. The difference was those zergs didn't sit around twiddling their thumbs for 20 minutes doing nothing but macro to 200 supply. They actually attacked throughout the game. Also, they built a lot more mutalisks EVEN against an opponent pumping thors.
Sure, letting a terran get to 200 supply full of tanks, thors, vikings, and ravens is going to just rape zerg ground armies - and that issue needs to be addressed somehow. But more aggressive zergs like Cool (aka Fruit Seller) and Sen destroy mech terrans well before it even gets to that point. So you really can't just do a global nerf. If the early and mid game are made weaker for the terran the top korean and chinese zergs will dominate terrans even more. Late late game needs to be addressed though.
The issue is that Thors are pretty much the only Hardcounter in the game, maybe along with Infestors against Mothership, which is irrelevent. You're a scenario where 2 Thors invalidate any amount of Mutalisks, and as soon as Terran gets Thors up, combined with freakin 24 damage missle turrets, Mutalisks are no long valid unit choices.
Mechs main vulnerability is it's mobility. Currently, the means for zerg to exploit this are too limited. Specifically, because of the Viking and the Thor. A single thor at a base renders muta harass impossible.
You literally need upwards to fifteen mutalisks to kill a single thor supported by SCV's. 1500/1500 investment, and many of them will die. With 2 missle turrets, it becomes impossible.
i like this guy's idea ;D maybe just take away thor's splash dmg, and see what happens
nah drew if you do that then muta go from not-viable to almost imbalanced and shuts down mech completely as you'd need marines to play against it limiting terran's options.
On June 03 2010 11:54 iG.CatZ wrote: nah drew if you do that then muta go from not-viable to almost imbalanced and shuts down mech completely as you'd need marines to play against it limiting terran's options.
What do you think of something such as a multishot. Maybe the thor should shoot at a max of 2-3 targets.
On June 03 2010 11:54 iG.CatZ wrote: nah drew if you do that then muta go from not-viable to almost imbalanced and shuts down mech completely as you'd need marines to play against it limiting terran's options.
What do you think of something such as a multishot. Maybe the thor should shoot at a max of 2-3 targets.
On June 03 2010 11:49 tubs wrote:In the 17173 world cup, zergs DOMINATED the tournament (it was an all zerg final) even against mech terrans. The difference was those zergs didn't sit around twiddling their thumbs for 20 minutes doing nothing but macro to 200 supply. They actually attacked throughout the game. Also, they built a lot more mutalisks EVEN against an opponent pumping thors.
Exactly. The real issue here is that "20 minute no rush" was pretty much ideal to deal with MMM, but it's the worst idea to deal with mech. So zerg's comfortable with dealing with MMM have to use a totally different strategy against mech.
Also, add that 7 out of 8 of the Ro8 in the ASM#2 were zerg. The one lone(r) terran got knocked out in that round.
On June 03 2010 11:53 Lefnui wrote: I'm glad that you compiled a list of opinions. Far too often people fail to realize that most of the stronger players agree that Terran Mech is imba.
You mean most of the stronger European/American players. There's very little knowledge of Asian players' opinions on the subject (perhaps Artosis/Idra can shed some light), and 6 of the 8 Korean players in the Ro16 of the 17173.com World Cup were Zergs.
On June 03 2010 11:54 iG.CatZ wrote: nah drew if you do that then muta go from not-viable to almost imbalanced and shuts down mech completely as you'd need marines to play against it limiting terran's options.
What do you think of something such as a multishot. Maybe the thor should shoot at a max of 2-3 targets.
Would that include a a change to full pure dmg also? I think it could work, but could lead TvT even harder towards tank/viking.
On June 03 2010 11:29 MoMaN- wrote: Mutas vs Turret and Thors are useless that's the problem i think the best way of my game! in this game, its i must pick my island, make broodlord and take my gaz on the 4th 5th expand! :p But its hard because he can make viking really quick, but another think i must do a spire for switch 8 mutas or soemthing for playing with the timing! :p
But please dont say "before 18min you need to attack" because that is impossible!
LZ expanded at 10 minutes. He had 4 marines in a bunker for AA, 0 turrets. You had Lair, hydra den, 8 hydras, ranged upgrade coming, and 600 banked gas. Now, what if those 8 hydras were 8 mutas? Sure LZ could have scouted it and built some thors or vikings, but at the cost of tanks.
I do think mech needs to be toned down, or zerg needs a better counter, but the LZ game isn't a great display. QXC had a more balanced composition and growth.
What is up with all the complaints about thors? Didn't Sen destroy 4 thors w/ nothing but mutas?
On June 03 2010 11:54 iG.CatZ wrote: nah drew if you do that then muta go from not-viable to almost imbalanced and shuts down mech completely as you'd need marines to play against it limiting terran's options.
What do you think of something such as a multishot. Maybe the thor should shoot at a max of 2-3 targets.
Would that include a a change to full pure dmg also? I think it could work, but could lead TvT even harder towards tank/viking.
I'm really not sure. Just as a general concept. Their dps could stay the same, as it would still be a large amount of damage.
On June 03 2010 11:49 tubs wrote: I've watched these replays and I've also watched the 17173 world cup streams. The 17173 world cup wasn't full of chumps either. We're talking the best korean, asian, and european players from all over the world. Comparing the two, there is a drastic difference. In the 17173 world cup, zergs DOMINATED the tournament (it was an all zerg final) even against mech terrans. The difference was those zergs didn't sit around twiddling their thumbs for 20 minutes doing nothing but macro to 200 supply. They actually attacked throughout the game. Also, they built a lot more mutalisks EVEN against an opponent pumping thors.
Sure, letting a terran get to 200 supply full of tanks, thors, vikings, and ravens is going to just rape zerg ground armies - and that issue needs to be addressed somehow. But more aggressive zergs like Cool (aka Fruit Seller) and Sen destroy mech terrans well before it even gets to that point. So you really can't just do a global nerf. If the early and mid game are made weaker for the terran the top korean and chinese zergs will dominate terrans even more. Late late game needs to be addressed though.
Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
And in the spirit of the thread's title, "How to fix TvZ Mech" (without screwing up the other matchups, you have to keep in mind the thing about TvP as well:
Terran, when going mech, is strong/unstoppable late game against protoss. Same theory- if they turtle up and take their time, they can slowly beat you down while you can't even get close. And it doesn't help that EMP makes it even easier for them to do that.
I've been complaining about this for about a month now...
Alright, so how to fix it:
The main problem stems from the tank and the viking. Simply put, siege mode gives bonus damage, makes upgrades way too strong, does not overkill, while the reduced firing rate literally is not a penalty at all since terran's response is just to get more and more tanks (since the critical mass is so much stronger in SC2 than SC1) as they have no reason to fight earlier on.
Also, the viking is too strong anti-air, has too high range that no other air unit can match (or ground to air for that matter), and is too inexpensive. I think a nerf is in order for both units, or at least a strengthening of the responses of the other races since we don't have stasis/dark swarm to force things back into our favor.
My suggestions:
Tank: have the unsieged damage increase, but have the sieged damage decrease in comparison. I know, it sounds counter-intuitive, but besides changing the mechanics of the game or buffing the other two races, this seems easiest. The tank is fine when not in siege mode, and probably should get a buff too. However, in siege mode, the insane range is just ridiculous, and the way the units clump up in this game make them even stronger.
Viking: decrease their firing range. Simply put, the corruptor and the phoenix can't do anything since the viking can just sit above the terran player's turrets and/or thors laughing while the other races' ground-to-air can't approach due to tanks. Sure, corruptors have the devourer ability and the phoenix can lift units up so it seems like they are stronger in comparison to vikings that have assault mode which does no significant damage.
However, the phoenix is too fragile late game, especially with EMP, to get into close range and use that ability, and zerg has no follow up DPS that can actually approach the terran ball to make use of the corruptor ability. Simply put, they are nice to have mid game but once it gets late game, where balance is most essential, they do absolutely squat. These units either need a range buff, an HP buff, a damage buff, or honestly anything else that will let them be useful at that point of the game (which conveniently, is what Blizzard likes- every unit to have a purpose, except the archon).
On June 03 2010 11:53 Lefnui wrote: I'm glad that you compiled a list of opinions. Far too often people fail to realize that most of the stronger players agree that Terran Mech is imba.
You mean most of the stronger European/American players. There's very little knowledge of Asian players' opinions on the subject (perhaps Artosis/Idra can shed some light), and 6 of the 8 Korean players in the Ro16 of the 17173.com World Cup were Zergs.
17173 cup was before the roach nerf and thor buff as far as i remember. Moreover most terran player played bio at this time.
On June 03 2010 11:51 drewbie.root wrote: i like this guy's idea ;D maybe just take away thor's splash dmg, and see what happens
I've advocated making the Thor into a limited AntiAir Tank. Thats basically what it is right now, but it's in tank mode ALL THE TIME. I'd advocate giving it a costly ability (~100 mana) that causes it to play it's current weapons warm up ability, then blow the living shit out of any air units in a ~6 range radius with mass Valkyrie style missles. I've literally had 12 mutalisks die just from accidentally getting 7-8 range away from two thors.
It's normal attack would do bonus damage versus structures, to kind of emulate its demolition capabilities. It's stunning attack would be removed, because it's an ability that is only useful against thors and other ultralisks. One is pointless, the other is completely counterproductive. Does the ultralisk really need an ability specifically made to counter it and only it?
(I play random, and used to enjoy Terran the most. Now I like Zerg...games way more fun when you're race's standard play is currently highly problematic so you have to play out of the box to win)
On June 03 2010 11:53 Lefnui wrote: I'm glad that you compiled a list of opinions. Far too often people fail to realize that most of the stronger players agree that Terran Mech is imba.
You mean most of the stronger European/American players. There's very little knowledge of Asian players' opinions on the subject (perhaps Artosis/Idra can shed some light), and 6 of the 8 Korean players in the Ro16 of the 17173.com World Cup were Zergs.
17173 cup was before the roach nerf and thor buff as far as i remember. Moreover most terran player played bio at this time.
Patch 12 (Roach nerf) went live May 13. The playoffs for the World Cup began on the 19th.
siege tanks are very powerful, but they really are best for defense.. I will get some mutas and harass and make T turtle up nice and good. Then I grab a few expos and do my very best at containing him to 2 bases, mostly by harassing with mutas and a nydus worm. I think it is race to get broodlords before he moves out to kill you. Zerg ground units is pretty much useless against tanks =/
On June 03 2010 09:37 r33k wrote: The problem isn't really the tanks being too smart, their faster firing rates is what really allows them to be less akin to crucial mistakes once they reach critical mass.
In BW you could time pincer attacks to strike between two volleys, in SC2 the shot cooldown will already be over when you'd send the second wave in to flank them.
ZvT right now pretty much revolves around broodlords/baneling drops because they are the two only units that are able to exploit the rapid splash damage of the tanks, and quite frankly I don't have any thoughts on how to prevent this. Critical mass will always feel imbalanced while playing.
I think the biggest problem in the critical mass stage is that units in sc2 seem to be so much bigger then sc1 units and the area in the center of the map seems to be so much more compact. I think that if the maps were changed to have larger center areas flanking would be easier.
I think changing the AI on the tanks would make going mech vs protoss far more difficult. The 1/1/1 terran build I see is becoming much more popular vs toss. Because if you decide to rush for a MM ball and the toss goes for early void rays or dt you can get screwed so hard.
I'm not gone say that tank mech is op or not. Definately at critical mass the terrans have a great advantage. But the zerg player needs to keep the presure up on the terrans expansions ect. There is a limit to how much mech you can build off of one base (possibly your natural too) if your mech army suffers damage before the mass stage.
Against Toss the main armored units that your tanks will be shooting are: stalkers, immortals(that have lost their shields), and collosus. This leaves the following ground units temp, dt, probes, and lots. A toss player with mass lots usually encouages the terran to get burner hellions so their tanks to spend alot of time shooting them. Sentries are weak and templar hopefully will get sniped by your tanks or emped. DT shouldnt be a problem for the rest of your army as long as you get detection.
My suggestion is if zvt is that broken on critical mass to make the following 2 changes. Change the siege tank's damage from 60 to something like 30damage +30 armored or 40+20 armored or something like that. Also change the ultralisk to where it ignores +vs armored stuff. Which possibly help in pvz as well. It shouldn't change tvp too much as the tank will still be doing full damage to the things it usually shoots at. Against the zerg it will still kill lings fast as either 30(s) or 40(s) will kill them. Roaches being considered armored will take it full force. Hydras having low health and slow should still get melted away pretty fast. However the ultralisk running in first would be taking a measly 30-40 damage which would allow them to tank for the rest of your units.
Possibly a similar change to the thor's ground attack as well so it still kills armored units just as fast but against light not so much.
Thor has a smart cast ability also just like the tank. Vikings have a multi cast that is likely smart cast as well. To be fair practically every unit in the game has a smart cast ability. I don't believe a tank nerf will do too much to break the synergy of a mech-bio ball. Since most, if not all the units, have a form a smart cast and they multi-cast. At least the OP is going in the right direction though with requesting a change to make units more micro dependant.
I am a crap player over-all, but this fix seems a little off to me. I dislike lowering the AI for any reason on a practical level. Why not make it easier for Zerg to exploit the immobility of the Mech army? Nerf sensor tower range seems like it could have some effect since drops and Nydus Canals would be more viable. I am just a crap Silver League player though, so I won't pretend to know if that would have any larger consequences, or if it would be enough.
On June 03 2010 12:03 Antimage wrote:Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
Shouldn't we wait until a terran actually makes a build that's really shown to be unstoppable before worrying about the possibility of it? I guess TheLittleOne's TvZ build was thought to be "invincible" for a little while, before he lost to Sen and IdrA.
I mean, I think IdrA's examples for mech imbalance were Sen vs. TLO and Check vs Rainbow. The zerg won both of those match-ups, though, so they aren't the greatest examples.
On June 03 2010 12:03 Antimage wrote:Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
Shouldn't we wait until a terran actually makes a build that's really shown to be unstoppable before worrying about the possibility of it? I guess TheLittleOne's TvZ build was thought to be "invincible" for a little while, before lost to Sen and IdrA.
I mean, I think IdrA's examples for mech imbalance were Sen vs. TLO and Check vs Rainbow. The zerg won both of those match-ups, though, so they aren't the greatest examples.
idra's example was stupid because he said those terrans should never take a game off those zergs but TLO took the first game off sen with a bunker rush, didnt even use mech. Just eing idra made a bad example doesnt change the fact ZvT is imba
On June 03 2010 12:03 Antimage wrote:Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
Shouldn't we wait until a terran actually makes a build that's really shown to be unstoppable before worrying about the possibility of it? I guess TheLittleOne's TvZ build was thought to be "invincible" for a little while, before he lost to Sen and IdrA.
I mean, I think IdrA's examples for mech imbalance were Sen vs. TLO and Check vs Rainbow. The zerg won both of those match-ups, though, so they aren't the greatest examples.
i used those examples because there havent been many high level public games with terrans using pure mech yet, in those 2 examples terrans executed mech poorly vs zergs who were way better than them and still won games, but if you just look at the gameplay itself its pretty apparent there are problems.
I don't understand why people freak out about how a timing window being the only opportunity to win against the opponent is bad. If a build has a huge flaw, abuse it >.>
The replays showed a Zerg player letting a Terran player max out their armies. What happens when you attack before then?
If I see a replay where EVERYTHING is tried by the Zerg player (and all perfectly executed), and cannot beat a Terran player, I'll concede that Mech is imba. Until then, I'm going to assume that people like to turtle a bit too much (or what have you).
Also, if it is indeed a problem, wouldn't buffing Zerg units be a much better fix than saying "lolol Siege Tanks sux nao"? They were terrible before the splash fix; what makes you think that killing their AI will make them not imba, but still usable?
After watching those replays I thought on commenting a couple of things that IMO are the reason why Terran mech feels so strong, and to a point it actually is (I play Terran btw, nothing great ofc, so not really disagreeing with people that commented already like Gretorp etc).
1) The biggest disadvantage of the mech army (immobility) is really not that great when you have 10 sensor towers to monitor where all of the attacks are coming and act accordingly. I think they got overlooked during the beta. Also all 3 attacking units you usually have in the mix (tanks, thors, vikings) have this huuuge attack range which sometimes is abused. Maybe you should be able to build only a couple of them or have them with a lower radius than now, but certainly not have them cover the entire freaking map.
2) Tank supply count could/should be increased by 1 maybe? Especially after the roach change. In both replays, QXC had what, 6-7 tanks just chilling in his base? Maybe 2-3 to defend a worm or something is ok but that many is just wrong.
3) Infestors can't really do anything in mech tvz since they die instantly to tanks in addition to being vastly outranged and that really narrows down the options a zerg player has when engaging in a battle. It almost feels that suiciding entire armies is the only way to go.
All that said, I still I think it is early to have absolute judgements because, really, who knows what strategies or changes lie ahead.
On June 03 2010 12:03 Antimage wrote:Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
Shouldn't we wait until a terran actually makes a build that's really shown to be unstoppable before worrying about the possibility of it? I guess TheLittleOne's TvZ build was thought to be "invincible" for a little while, before he lost to Sen and IdrA.
I mean, I think IdrA's examples for mech imbalance were Sen vs. TLO and Check vs Rainbow. The zerg won both of those match-ups, though, so they aren't the greatest examples.
i used those examples because there havent been many high level public games with terrans using pure mech yet, in those 2 examples terrans executed mech poorly vs zergs who were way better than them and still won games, but if you just look at the gameplay itself its pretty apparent there are problems.
What was poor about the mech play for TLO and Rainbow? And is Rainbow really much worse than Check? Rainbow was #2 on the Asian ladder pre-patch 12, right, and he has a significant Broodwar background. Besides, it's definitely possible for a better player to drop a couple games in a Bo7 to an inferior player, even if it was perfectly balanced.
On June 03 2010 12:04 Trok67 wrote: 17173 cup was before the roach nerf and thor buff as far as i remember. Moreover most terran player played bio at this time.
Uh no. You're completely wrong. The tournament just finished recently, it was after the roach nerf. And most (literally all) of the asian terrans play 1/1/1 build (ie: mech or avilo's opening). It's only the US/EU terrans that stuck to MMM for so long.
On June 03 2010 12:03 Antimage wrote: Those terrans didn't realize how strong mech was, and didn't turtle up midgame in order to get to the late game. If they did, they would have been unstoppable. This thread isn't about how Z can never beat T, it's that if T follows a defensive strategy for a while, losing map control while massing more mech, there is a point where Z has no chance to beat them.
Those terrans were playing mech style 1/1/1 build long before anybody other than avilo on US/EU even considered it. So you got that part backwards. They realized how strong mech was long before people outside of asia caught on (except for avilo really with his ghost mech build). I still think avilo came up with it first, but I digress.
In one game I watched, I think it was maka versus cool maybe (or check, not sure) - maka tried to turtle mech on steppes of war. Everybody, including the commentators, were saying how much of a mech favored map it was. Then the zerg surprised everybody by beating maka on that map.
And maka is probably the best mech terran in the world right now. Ever since I started watching him in the early days of PlayXP, he has been going mech. He has far more experience, and far more tournament wins going mech than any other terran. And he still loses to cool's zerg all the time.
maka doesnt use mech.. he either does 1 base 2 fac + marine allins or plays bio + 2 fac tank do you people not even watch the games you're commenting on? you really think tlo and rainbow executed well in those games? tlo barely even uses sensor towers.
On June 03 2010 12:41 IdrA wrote: maka doesnt use mech.. he either does 1 base 2 fac + marine allins or plays bio + 2 fac tank do you people not even watch the games you're commenting on? you really think tlo and rainbow executed well in those games? tlo barely even uses sensor towers.
Its same thing for 90 % of the zerg's game showen in the thread so far the zergs just failed and don't execute. I mean the sheth QXC one is blatantly bad lol.
Ok I've taken your crap for a while here xnub, calling me a woodleague player and saying I'm blatantly bad. Xnub, why don't you go win something, ANYTHING, and until then just leave the big boys alone. Ok?
On June 03 2010 12:41 IdrA wrote: maka doesnt use mech.. he either does 1 base 2 fac + marine allins or plays bio + 2 fac tank do you people not even watch the games you're commenting on? you really think tlo and rainbow executed well in those games? tlo barely even uses sensor towers.
I don't have the energy to argue about ZvT mech anymore. It's bad enough playing it, reliving it on the forums is even worse. Glad to see you and other high profile players actually taking the time to try and spell it out though.
On June 03 2010 12:50 Sheth wrote: Ok I've taken your crap for a while here xnub, calling me a woodleague player and saying I'm blatantly bad. Xnub, why don't you go win something, ANYTHING, and until then just leave the big boys alone. Ok?
"Well YOU can't do it, so I'm doing great!"
>.> He's not criticizing you. He's saying that the replay is not the best example for making an "X is imba" claim, which is true. Unless, of course, you claim that you played superbly well?
Zeke, I clearly didn't play that well vs. this Mech build. The whole point of this thread is showing how hard it is to find a counter to this build. I get it I didn't execute or play great, however it doesn't mean I should be bashed continually. Here was what I was talking about with xnub Zeke. These are all quotes from him to me. "Sheth is not even trying for the last 3 games he is playing like a wood league player. He didn't need to do anything sheth was just playing like ass don't need to hars or do anything when the player you are fighting is playing like a silver league player. Ultras suck we have know this from the start of the game don't know why sheth didn't"
On June 03 2010 12:41 IdrA wrote: maka doesnt use mech.. he either does 1 base 2 fac + marine allins or plays bio + 2 fac tank do you people not even watch the games you're commenting on? you really think tlo and rainbow executed well in those games? tlo barely even uses sensor towers.
What, the one game Rainbow won was on steppes of war. TLO's wins he barely got, and mostly from being clever (or bunker rushing).
Actually, on that topic, why doesn't copying what Check does on all of the other games in the series against Rainbow work fine? I mean, just from the ladder (pre-patch 12 when this mech stuff wasn't happening really) and background, Check shouldn't be that much better than Rainbow, but he raped Rainbow in that series. And Rainbow turtled and meched some, like on Scrap Station. Check even made some big mistakes that game like morphing too many broodlords. I suppose it's possible that some mech builds--when they're smoothed out--might be imbalanced. But we haven't seen that yet.
On June 03 2010 12:41 IdrA wrote: maka doesnt use mech.. he either does 1 base 2 fac + marine allins or plays bio + 2 fac tank do you people not even watch the games you're commenting on?
That's just misleading. For one, maka doesn't use the same build every single game like you do. He's even raped you with mass ravens long before the roach nerf, durrr? He's done quick battlecruiser rushes, 1/1//1 rax/fac/starport thor drops "pure mech" with floating the barracks. His zerg lately has been mostly helion harrass followed by mass tanks + thor + marines. He uses the marines as a mineral sink since he's gas limited by the majority of his mech army. When he feels he can win early he'll upgrade the marines too, sometimes not. To say he doesn't use mech is hogwash.
On June 03 2010 12:57 Sheth wrote: Zeke, I clearly didn't play that well vs. this Mech build. The whole point of this thread is showing how hard it is to find a counter to this build. I get it I didn't execute or play great, however it doesn't mean I should be bashed continually. Here was what I was talking about with xnub Zeke. These are all quotes from him to me. "Sheth is not even trying for the last 3 games he is playing like a wood league player. He didn't need to do anything sheth was just playing like ass don't need to hars or do anything when the player you are fighting is playing like a silver league player. Ultras suck we have know this from the start of the game don't know why sheth didn't"
lol I bet that if you haven't tried to use ultralisk he would have said something like : " the zerg is so bad he doesnt even use ultralisk while this is obviously the solution against mech since patch 13"
Lot of terran players said that the solution against mech was to completely outmacro the terran, well I think the replays show pretty well that even in this case you don't win.
On June 03 2010 13:05 drewbie.root wrote: dont worry sheth, zeke is about as gosu as xnub T_T
I never claimed I was good. But honestly, trying to say that you played perfectly when you most obviously didn't does not make sense. My own suckage has nothing to do with it.
It turns out it was a misunderstanding on my part; I didn't see xnub's flaming posts, sorry about that.
(Oh, and "you" is used as a general term, not you, drewbie )
Zerg versus mech is really wearing me out of playing SC2. It seems like so many of my games are versus Terran these days and they all mech. I'm faced with two choices. I can:
Baneling Bust and win. Most mid-Diamond level players know the basic roadmap of how to mech but completely fail in the early game to defend themselves. Baneling Bust pretty much always wins once I see they're going fac after rax.
Macro and lose. I can try different things, different strategies, different angles. It doesn't matter. I'm going to lose. At least with this strategy I can get a few replays to tighten up my build and control and possibly beat a mid-Diamond meching Terran who just facerolls his keyboard but I know facing someone of equal skill as mech I'm going to lose.
It's hilarious to see Zerg players endlessly crying about T Mech when Sen is going from place to place rolling the living piss out of strong Mech players.
The excuse I always hear after this is "well, Sen is amazing!"? So? If something can be beaten with sufficient skill, it's not imbalanced.
Go play Mech for a while - seriously. You'll learn a lot about it and how to counter it. I've learned several things that make mech very, very difficult as T. I'm not a pro or anywhere near pro-level but I'm #1 in my diamond league and am already seeing Zerg players experiment with strategies that make playing Mech hell.
On June 03 2010 13:13 iEchoic wrote: It's hilarious to see Zerg players endlessly crying about T Mech when Sen is going from place to place rolling the living piss out of strong Mech players.
The excuse I always hear after this is "well, Sen is amazing!"? So? If something can be beaten with sufficient skill, it's not imbalanced.
Go play Mech for a while - seriously. You'll learn a lot about it and how to counter it. I've learned several things that make mech very, very difficult as T. I'm not a pro or anywhere near pro-level but I'm #1 in my diamond league and am already seeing Zerg players experiment with strategies that make playing Mech hell.
Yeah I'm going to have to agree with you, I get the funny feeling alot of the zerg crying about how Imba Mech is are the kind that control group their whole army an just A-move it into 6-7 tanks an act surprised it doesn't go well lol
On June 03 2010 13:13 iEchoic wrote: It's hilarious to see Zerg players endlessly crying about T Mech when Sen is going from place to place rolling the living piss out of strong Mech players.
The excuse I always hear after this is "well, Sen is amazing!"? So? If something can be beaten with sufficient skill, it's not imbalanced.
Go play Mech for a while - seriously. You'll learn a lot about it and how to counter it. I've learned several things that make mech very, very difficult as T. I'm not a pro or anywhere near pro-level but I'm #1 in my diamond league and am already seeing Zerg players experiment with strategies that make playing Mech hell.
Yeah I'm going to have to agree with you, I get the funny feeling alot of the zerg crying about how Imba Mech is are the kind that control group their whole army an just A-move it into 6-7 tanks an act surprised it doesn't go well lol
Wait what? I can't just A-move into tanks? Darn dood. Thanks for this heads up yo!!
And iEchoic sure Sen can win a game or two vs mech, I can win a game or two vs mech. Its not that EVERY game Mech will ALWAYS win. Its just that if t doesn't make too many mistakes z will lose vs. mech. Its imbalanced, that if a zerg plays perfectly no matter what that he will lose vs. a 1 or 2 mistake terran. Its like saying Monopoly is balanced, when just cuz someone chose the thimble they get to roll an extra time every third turn. He might not win every time, but he sure has an unhealthy advantage, and if the rules don't change I'm going to try and find me a thimble to use.
On June 03 2010 13:09 Tenks wrote: Zerg versus mech is really wearing me out of playing SC2. It seems like so many of my games are versus Terran these days and they all mech. I'm faced with two choices. I can:
Baneling Bust and win. Most mid-Diamond level players know the basic roadmap of how to mech but completely fail in the early game to defend themselves. Baneling Bust pretty much always wins once I see they're going fac after rax.
Macro and lose. I can try different things, different strategies, different angles. It doesn't matter. I'm going to lose. At least with this strategy I can get a few replays to tighten up my build and control and possibly beat a mid-Diamond meching Terran who just facerolls his keyboard but I know facing someone of equal skill as mech I'm going to lose.
It's boring and frustrating.
Same here, but extend it to all match-ups. Splash damage is just far too effective vs zerg armies and ZvZ is a joke.
The thing to me is that it's way too polarized Zerg basically goes from almost 0% chance to win early on, a 50%ish chance to win in the mid game then right back to 0% chance if the game goes really late because of critical mass on splash damage.
There's going to be a point where Blizzard is happy with the game balance and we're going to have to work out strategies for beating certain builds like we did in BW instead of asking Blizzard to change the units.
While I realize that this is Beta, I definitely see this trend continuing well after the game goes live.
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
Why don't you go watch the Sen vs TLO games and tell me what exactly you or qxc could do so much better? He played fantastically, and I even believe he significantly outplayed Sen in the final game where Sen pulled a tech-switch and erased ten minutes of inferior gameplay and harassment just by the virtue of the fact that mutas are incredibly difficult to counter as T mech.
On June 03 2010 13:24 Sheth wrote: And iEchoic sure Sen can win a game or two vs mech, I can win a game or two vs mech. Its not that EVERY game Mech will ALWAYS win. Its just that if t doesn't make too many mistakes z will lose vs. mech. Its imbalanced, that if a zerg plays perfectly no matter what that he will lose vs. a 1 or 2 mistake terran. Its like saying this game is balanced, when just cuz someone chose the thimble in monopoly they get to roll an extra time every third turn. He might not win every time, but he sure had an unhealthy advantage, and if the rules don't change I'm going to try and find me a thimble to use.
Sen didn't 'win a game or two', he convincingly won a best of 5, and I don't even believe he outplayed TLO in the final game. TLO drastically outplayed him throughout the entire course of the final game and still ended up losing because Sen exploited the Mech weakness.
It's not just Sen winning a "game or two" against mech. So far, no one has used mech and beat him in a BoX. And this is sort of the story. I mean, the biggest win for terran mech so far was QXC vs Sheth.
Check made huge mistakes against Rainbow, but he won convincingly. And Rainbow really didn't make any big mistakes. He got a sensor tower. He got thors to stop the muta harass. His money was consistently low. He got upgrades. But, Check was too on top of him. And granted, what Check did was super hard to do, but it made Rainbow look like a chump.
Will someone please set me straight about this so I can stop thinking it's a decent idea. It seems like everyone's in agreement that the problem stems from late game. Changing tank targeting AI or damage is going to bork up early-mid and we'll have gotten nowhere. Changing tank supply from 3 to 4 will have a pretty negligible effect until we start approaching the 200 cap.
In the LZ v MoMaN match, MoMan was 50 supply ahead when he hit 200/200.
In the QXC v Sheth LT, Sheth's maxed army of ultras and roaches couldn't even get near QXC's tanks, all while QXC had 70 supply elsewhere.
Sen is proving it's possible to beat, the rest are proving they're not good enough. Mutas are very, very hard to deal with as Terran mech. Zerg players fall into the trap of thinking "he has Thors, my Mutas will lose against thors, therefore I am countered and cannot use my Mutas any longer". Just by making mutas against mech you instantly control the entire map, force the mech'er to stay on one base or waste money on turrets to protect 2 (protecting 3 is basically impossible), and are able to harass against slow defensive units.
I watched TLO vs. Sen. Your both (iEchoic, koppik) miss understanding the mech were reffering to in this thread. Why don't you watch one of the three reps posted at the OP. TLO Didn't play that sort of mech. I'm going to bed now, so sleep well in your knowledge that T is not overpowered at all, and that your really just that much better then the zergs you beat.
iEchoic, TLO didn't abuse it properly, and IMO me or qxc can execute it much better, if anyone wants to step up to the challenge, i will play anytime ok?
On June 03 2010 13:32 Sheth wrote: I watched TLO vs. Sen. Your both (iEchoic, koppik) miss understanding the mech were reffering to in this thread. Why don't you watch one of the three reps posted at the OP. TLO Didn't play that sort of mech. I'm going to bed now, so sleep well in your knowledge that T is not overpowered at all, and that your really just that much better then the zergs you beat.
TLO opened mech-heavy and was forced to adjust throughout the rest of the series because he realized that Sen was too smart for that.
Why don't you post a replay of Sen losing a series to Mech?
On June 03 2010 13:13 iEchoic wrote: It's hilarious to see Zerg players endlessly crying about T Mech when Sen is going from place to place rolling the living piss out of strong Mech players.
The excuse I always hear after this is "well, Sen is amazing!"? So? If something can be beaten with sufficient skill, it's not imbalanced.
Oh, ok. If Strategy A takes very little skill and beats every other strategy except Strategy Q performed flawlessly, all is well (hyperbole, please don't argue that mech takes skill or more than one strat works; I am argueing against iEchoic's absurd generalization on balance, not the build specifically). Of course mech is possible to beat, but if it leads to an 80% average win rate it's absurdly imbalanced.
It's very difficult to evaluate this situation objectively as the very term "imbalance" is subject to interpretation, we all have racial biases and we don't have access to full statistical information. We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful. The onus is on you to provide some magical solution which doesn't involve godlike mechanics if you want to argue with zerg's elite when you do not even play the race.
The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2. People would complain that Allied tech was too strong, and I would simply tell them, keep the pressure on, I play soviets, and guess what, if the allied get a chance to tech high, like a battle lab (equivalent of hive tech, t3 tech, thor tech, etc... in sc2 kinda) then YOU are doing something wrong, not the game.
I feel this game is the same, it's just taking longer for most people to figure it out.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
Rainbow did a pure mech. He got four thors to hold off mutas, some turrets, sensor towers, did very effective hellion harass, and got eaten alive by Check. What he did wasn't appreciably different from what QXC did, but Check first attacked at the seven minute mark and didn't stop attacking until he won.
IdrA viewed it as view of "imbalance" of mech because Rainbow won one game in bo7, even though the two had about equal ladder ranking pre-patch 12, playing a similar number of games with a similar win ratio. But I think it's actually a better argument for, at least at very high level competition, mech being fine.
On June 03 2010 13:37 drewbie.root wrote: i'm starting to think that iechoic is a troll
First sign that you have no argument: just label the other person a troll.
Sarcasm aside, I'd suggest some Zerg players pick up mech and play it. You'll learn that it does have several weaknesses (or just watch Sen, who is very good at exploiting them).
On June 03 2010 13:36 Aberu wrote: The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
I stopped reading here
Well you shouldn't have. The truth is that game was highly competitive as well, and there were people that would complain that allied tech was better than soviet tech. But the fact was, that was part of the balance of the game, soviet's job was to not let allied tech up. I think that zerg's job is to get map control, and contain the enemy and harass their econ whilst still holding their own macro strong.
Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
On June 03 2010 13:41 Aberu wrote: Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
A large majority of the replays posted in this thread by adherents of the 'mech is too strong' philosophy involve the zerg players throwing massed hydras and roaches into the mech army, unfortunately.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
On June 03 2010 13:36 Aberu wrote: The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
I stopped reading here
Well you shouldn't have. The truth is that game was highly competitive as well, and there were people that would complain that allied tech was better than soviet tech. But the fact was, that was part of the balance of the game, soviet's job was to not let allied tech up. I think that zerg's job is to get map control, and contain the enemy and harass their econ whilst still holding their own macro strong.
Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
how many do we need to repeat the same damn things ? Nydus worm ONLY WORKS if the terran player is BAD and don't spot the nydus worm in his base. Drop overlord for what ? See all our army getting killed by tank spread among his base ? He can also simply deny our drop and just go into our base and simply destroy our base, base switch isnt at the advantage of the zerg player.
And the balance of the game is not suppose to be like : Race A should win before 10 min otherwise race A loose.
On June 03 2010 13:41 Aberu wrote: Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
A large majority of the replays posted in this thread by adherents of the 'mech is too strong' philosophy involve the zerg players throwing massed hydras and roaches into the mech army, unfortunately.
I agree, I think that mech isn't too strong. I think I agree with the argument that the seige tanks should be able to miss shots, and shouldn't have such perfect AI. Our ultralisks can miss hitting marauders, why can't the seige tanks overkill?
But overall, I'm on your side. I think the top zerg players mentioned before in this thread as well that also say mech is too strong play extremely heavy macro games early on with defensive spine crawlers and spreading creep. They play this like it's zerg from sc1.
Even Idra (who has the best macro out of any zerg player imo) is guilty of pretty much just sticking to roaches and hydras, and maybe infestors. There are other units and there has to be a way of using them.
On June 03 2010 13:36 Aberu wrote: The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
I stopped reading here
Well you shouldn't have. The truth is that game was highly competitive as well, and there were people that would complain that allied tech was better than soviet tech. But the fact was, that was part of the balance of the game, soviet's job was to not let allied tech up. I think that zerg's job is to get map control, and contain the enemy and harass their econ whilst still holding their own macro strong.
Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
But those would cut into the unbeatable rouch/hydra spam!.. Oh wait!
On June 03 2010 12:50 Sheth wrote: Ok I've taken your crap for a while here xnub, calling me a woodleague player and saying I'm blatantly bad. Xnub, why don't you go win something, ANYTHING, and until then just leave the big boys alone. Ok?
You normaly don't play like that i don't know if you were sleepy or just gave up on the 3rd match or what. Sry you play those 2 games very badly i mean come on you built 3 infetor pits there in one of the games out from your nat you clearly stoped careing and just gvae up or were really really sleepy.
Not saying you play like that all the time you don't but those 2 match you did play like a wood legue player lol you got to admit it. People keep bringing it up as a reason terran mech is OP and im sry you know you can't use those 2 games lol. But ya terran 200/200 that fare in the game can be called OP early mid is fine still. Just that crit #.
And if it helps im sry if i hurt you feelings did not mean to just bad replay for any sort of example verg vs terran.
On June 03 2010 13:33 drewbie.root wrote: iEchoic, TLO didn't abuse it properly, and IMO me or qxc can execute it much better, if anyone wants to step up to the challenge, i will play anytime ok?
This is actually a great idea.
Seriously. Instead of this idiotic bickering in the thread, you and qxc should just sit down and do a couple of series with some killer players, and post the replays. It should be pretty obvious what's what after that.
On June 03 2010 13:33 drewbie.root wrote: iEchoic, TLO didn't abuse it properly, and IMO me or qxc can execute it much better, if anyone wants to step up to the challenge, i will play anytime ok?
This is actually a great idea.
Seriously. Instead of this idiotic bickering in the thread, you and qxc should just sit down and do a couple of series with some killer players, and post the replays. It should be pretty obvious what's what after that.
With commentary I'd watch it, sounds like a plan! Better yet how about a stream on TL about the Do's an Don'ts of ZergvsMech? ^.^
I see a lot of people here saying that all Zerg has to do is use Nydus and OV drops. They are failing to realize that Sensor Towers render drops and Nydus useless. Vikings will be on the overlords before they have a chance to drop units and tanks/thors will already be on their way to mop up any units that actually made it on the ground.
On June 03 2010 13:36 Aberu wrote: The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
I stopped reading here
Well you shouldn't have. The truth is that game was highly competitive as well, and there were people that would complain that allied tech was better than soviet tech. But the fact was, that was part of the balance of the game, soviet's job was to not let allied tech up. I think that zerg's job is to get map control, and contain the enemy and harass their econ whilst still holding their own macro strong.
Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
how many do we need to repeat the same damn things ? Nydus worms ONLY WORKS if the terran players is BAD and don't spot the nydos worm in his base. Drop overlord for what ? See all our army getting killed by tank spread among his base ? He can also simply deny our drop and just into our base and simply destroy our base, base switch isnt at the advantage of the zerg player.
And the balance of the game is not suppose to be like : Race A should win before 10 min otherwise race A loose.
I'll agree that the drops aren't the best idea, but how many of these top players have incorporated ultras? None, ultras were rebalanced as anti mech, but for some reason no one uses them. And the nydus isn't just for in the base to blow it up, it's also for ledges to attack mineral lines and have unscouted high ground advantage in early/mid.
Also that kinda is how a game that has a supply cap of 200 (CnC games with no supply cap, or any supply at all), sounds to me! I mean if you can't beat them unit for unit, why not beat them when unit for unit you win in some way?
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault. Not to mention going out of your way to get Sensor Towers to say "lolno" to drops (which is false. If you see a bunch of sensor towers...So what? If they're out of position, they're out of position)
On June 03 2010 13:44 3clipse wrote:Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range.
I think this is a HUGE misconception. Thors are not a great counter for Mutas. Sure, Thors beat Mutas if they get in a fight with eachother, impressive. If you define counter by 'what wins when both things a-move eachother', then yeah, it's a fantastic counter.
Having a unit that beats your opponent's unit is worthless if you surrender control of the entire map to have it. You cannot defend multiple bases with a Thor. You need turrets, which are a money sink. You can not attack without static defenses or without leaving a significant amount of defense at home.
Zerg players have this strange misconception that because Mutas beat Thors, and they have mutas and the opponent has thors, they're losing the game. You control the entire map, have the other player contained, and have much better scouting info. If you can't make something of that, you're doing it wrong.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault.
Exactly what I've been trying to say. What happened to early harass?
On June 03 2010 13:37 drewbie.root wrote: i'm starting to think that iechoic is a troll
First sign that you have no argument: just label the other person a troll.
Sarcasm aside, I'd suggest some Zerg players pick up mech and play it. You'll learn that it does have several weaknesses (or just watch Sen, who is very good at exploiting them).
How about you pick up Zerg, beat mech, post the replays, and then you can claim it's not OP.
Seriously, you are using one player to attempt to claim that something isn't overpowered. You've read the opinions of many dozens of players, Zerg who have been raped by it, Terran who have raped with it and even ****ing Protoss, who have seen the replays and realized how bad Zerg have it, and just because Sen can beat Terran players who aren't as good as he is, it's not OP?
I guess Agent Smith wasn't OP in the Matrix because Neo could beat him, right? Your logic is horrible. Get the **** out.
I think all races need T4 tech UBer hive upgrade and super portal prism. that allows 350 supply... this game is so strange that 100 of your supply will be workers.... and being an advantage early becomes a supreme disadvantage later when you cant mass a big enough army regardless of your income and great macro. i suppose you could make 20 crawlers... but would that really do anything vs mech but waste money? you could also make a million overseer,, but that would be a waste of gas obviously infested terran are lame. also tanks dont seem to splash themselves very hard at all with the new splash... its ridiculous.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault.
The classic "if it gets to this stage in the game, you deserve to lose" argument. This would make the starcraft 2 absolute shit. Zergs would win every game they managed a successful baneling bust or 1 hatch mutas and terran would win every macro mech game. MAYBE it would pan out to a 50/50 ratio eventually but it would be no fun to play or watch.
On June 03 2010 13:44 3clipse wrote:Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range.
Having a unit that beats your opponent's unit is worthless if you surrender control of the entire map to have it. You cannot defend multiple bases with a Thor. You need turrets, which are a money sink. You can not attack without static defenses or without leaving a significant amount of defense at home.
You'd have a point if thors didn't have such absurd range that only 1 or 2 is needed to defend a main + natural.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault.
The classic "if it gets to this stage in the game, you deserve to lose" argument. This would make the starcraft 2 absolute shit. Zergs would win every game they managed a successful baneling bust or 1 hatch mutas and terran would win every macro mech game. MAYBE it would pan out to a 50/50 ratio eventually but it would be no fun to play or watch.
Except the argument made sense. You're saying that the Terran opponent has 200/200, 3/3 Tanks, Thors, Vikings (which are 2 different branches of upgrades), and sensor towers and turrets everywhere, and you don't have enough resources for 200/200 3/3 Mutas to attack their bases while their extremely immobile army crawls to your front door?
Also, the thing is, a build based off of mech play has weaknesses. Use them. It creates an inherent weakness in the build. Late-game scenarios are not the only important parts of a build.
On June 03 2010 13:55 3clipse wrote: You might have had a point if thors didn't have such absurd range that only 1 or 2 is needed to defend a main + natural.
Here's some important things though:
- Thors can actually be killed by mutalisks. This is something that Zerg players seem to completely ignore. They act like because Thors counter mutas, thors can not be killed by them. If you're sitting your thor in the middle of nowhere trying to defend multiple bases where it cannot be repaired, smart Zerg players (read: barely any) can just kill your Thor. I very rarely see zerg players try to kill a solo defensive thor with mutas and even more rarely see zerg players try to spread out their mutas. I don't know the exact amount of mutas it takes to kill a thor, it's worth opening the map editor and checking. Spread them out and take it down.
- The counter to this is keeping your thor near your mineral line (so it can be repaired). This keeps you from defending multiple bases. Either way, you have an opportunity.
I have a question for everyone here who thinks Mech is overpowered:
Given that even pro players at the moment basically move everything in a giant ball, and this will likely be less common as the skill level increases, this will make siege tanks and thors (splash damage) less powerful. Don't you think it's premature/bad practice to nerf something that can be effectively weakened with the application of micro?
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault.
The classic "if it gets to this stage in the game, you deserve to lose" argument. This would make the starcraft 2 absolute shit. Zergs would win every game they managed a successful baneling bust or 1 hatch mutas and terran would win every macro mech game. MAYBE it would pan out to a 50/50 ratio eventually but it would be no fun to play or watch.
good point =] also, its really not hard at all for terran to defend any allin from the zerg when going mech. Just make a proper wall to stop baneling busts, and good scouting > mutas. Mass lings is a decent opener but again, if the T is paying attention then he will just sit and make like 8 blue-flame hellion and r a p e any lings.
On June 03 2010 13:30 Mack wrote: +1 supply siege tanks.
Will someone please set me straight about this so I can stop thinking it's a decent idea. It seems like everyone's in agreement that the problem stems from late game. Changing tank targeting AI or damage is going to bork up early-mid and we'll have gotten nowhere. Changing tank supply from 3 to 4 will have a pretty negligible effect until we start approaching the 200 cap.
In the LZ v MoMaN match, MoMan was 50 supply ahead when he hit 200/200.
In the QXC v Sheth LT, Sheth's maxed army of ultras and roaches couldn't even get near QXC's tanks, all while QXC had 70 supply elsewhere.
Remember whatever change you make to t, in a tvz will also affect t, in a tvp mabye negative mabye not.
Wouldn't a fix to tanks be a travel time on their shot rather than a nerf to their AI? This would make them behave like pretty much every other range unit in the game where you'd need to manually stagger their position/sieging time or they could have shots overkilling targets, or at the very least not maximizing splash potential automatically.
On June 03 2010 13:50 iEchoic wrote: Zerg players have this strange misconception that because Mutas beat Thors, and they have mutas and the opponent has thors, they're losing the game. You control the entire map, have the other player contained, and have much better scouting info. If you can't make something of that, you're doing it wrong.
I completely agree with this, but it's missing the 2nd part of the situation. The Terran doesn't need to care. So what if the Terran is contained? You can't win with only air harass if the other player prepares defenses for it. Missile turrets and thors are sufficient enough to defend a base and eventually that Terran is going to hit critical tank mass and be able to crawl his way across the map. There are also a lot of risks with mutas, for example you're weak to certain pushes as you try to get a mass of mutas that force map control.
On June 03 2010 13:34 3clipse wrote: We have no choice but to go by the fallible opinions of the community, and the aggregate opinion of non-terran players (even at the top level, see op) is overwhelmingly that mech is too powerful
That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda. There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
Every time I see Zerg vs Mech replays I just see the zerg players spamming roaches and hydras into mech. Every. Single Time. Even high-level players (with the exception of sen). It's like banging your head against the wall and hoping it fixes the problem eventually.
It would make sense to provide an alternative solution while you're criticizing their gameplay. Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range. Broodlords? Even if you get the tech, vikings easily prevent you from using them. For every option zerg has, terran seems to have the perfect hard counter with absurd range.
Because all of these perfect counters cost nothing, right? Letting the Terran player go unharmed while harvesting enough gas to get a significant amount of Tanks, Thors, and Vikings is the Zerg player's fault.
The classic "if it gets to this stage in the game, you deserve to lose" argument. This would make the starcraft 2 absolute shit. Zergs would win every game they managed a successful baneling bust or 1 hatch mutas and terran would win every macro mech game. MAYBE it would pan out to a 50/50 ratio eventually but it would be no fun to play or watch.
good point =] also, its really not hard at all for terran to defend any allin from the zerg when going mech. Just make a proper wall to stop baneling busts, and good scouting > mutas. Mass lings is a decent opener but again, if the T is paying attention then he will just sit and make like 8 blue-flame hellion and r a p e any lings.
On June 03 2010 13:55 3clipse wrote: You might have had a point if thors didn't have such absurd range that only 1 or 2 is needed to defend a main + natural.
Here's some important things though:
- Thors can actually be killed by mutalisks. This is something that Zerg players seem to completely ignore. They act like because Thors counter mutas, thors can not be killed by them. If you're sitting your thor in the middle of nowhere trying to defend multiple bases where it cannot be repaired, smart Zerg players (read: barely any) can just kill your Thor. I very rarely see zerg players try to kill a solo defensive thor with mutas and even more rarely see zerg players try to spread out their mutas. I don't know the exact amount of mutas it takes to kill a thor, it's worth opening the map editor and checking. Spread them out and take it down.
- The counter to this is keeping your thor near your mineral line (so it can be repaired). This keeps you from defending multiple bases. Either way, you have an opportunity.
Ok against a good terran what good terran leaves his thor in the wide open for muta to kill? No good terrans see how I can use the same argument to you?
Thors are an amazing counter to muta 1 thor at main + nat is really all you need with a turret or 2 and there is no way muta are gonna kill your economy. If you try to kill the thor will the terran will repair the thor unless he's bad or something.
Right now Mech is insanely strong and rediculous how strong it is and I agree with the OP on removing the smart AI for tanks. I think that would probably balance it out as I had never thought bout that. If the tanks in Broodwar had the smart AI of tanks in sc2 I bet they would be just as imbalanced. Great thinking OP I wish blizzard would actually consider it too bad they won't
On June 03 2010 13:55 3clipse wrote: You might have had a point if thors didn't have such absurd range that only 1 or 2 is needed to defend a main + natural.
Here's some important things though:
- Thors can actually be killed by mutalisks. This is something that Zerg players seem to completely ignore. They act like because Thors counter mutas, thors can not be killed by them. If you're sitting your thor in the middle of nowhere trying to defend multiple bases where it cannot be repaired, smart Zerg players (read: barely any) can just kill your Thor. I very rarely see zerg players try to kill a solo defensive thor with mutas and even more rarely see zerg players try to spread out their mutas. I don't know the exact amount of mutas it takes to kill a thor, it's worth opening the map editor and checking. Spread them out and take it down.
- The counter to this is keeping your thor near your mineral line (so it can be repaired). This keeps you from defending multiple bases. Either way, you have an opportunity.
Ok against a good terran what good terran leaves his thor in the wide open for muta to kill? No good terrans see how I can use the same argument to you?
Read the guy I was responding to. That's what he said the T would do and was what he was complaining about. Unless he means walking from one mineral line to the other, which takes quite a long time.
Aberu, you made me rise from sleep to lol at you. Thanks. <3
"I'll agree that the drops aren't the best idea, but how many of these top players have incorporated ultras? None, ultras were rebalanced as anti mech, but for some reason no one uses them. And the nydus isn't just for in the base to blow it up, it's also for ledges to attack mineral lines and have unscouted high ground advantage in early/mid."
Siege tanks have a smart AI that refuses to overkill targets, it sounds good it seems like a great idea at first because oh tanks wound up wasting a lot of shots vs fast units like speedlings in broodwar. But the problem is without the tanks wasting shots it's not possible for a zerg ground army to get into position to kill anything more than just a few tanks. Again watch the replays if you disagree, I think that if the smart AI is removed so that tanks waste shots a zerg will still take HEAVY losses but if they're in a situation that Sheth was in where he was ridiculously far ahead in macro able to rebuild 200/200 armies in less than a minute it would then be possible to break the mech.
Maybe you are not supposed to be able to do it with a GROUND army? Artificially making units dumb is a bad idea and communicating targets in a high-tech army should be state of the art.
Banelings dont hurt your own units, but siege tank splash is a big killer. Dropping some units right into the middle of the tanks is a viable tactic, right? At least it was in Starcraft 1 if you managed to pull it off.
Mech TvZ, as it is, is probably overpowered. However, I don't think it's really that severe. It's beatable, but its just heavily in the Terran's favour, meaning zerg has to do almost everything right...whatever that may be.
I think tanks should melt everything on the ground in high enough numbers. A tank nerf such as no more smart target selection might fix the matchup but it would have profound consequences on other matchups...which may not exactly be ideal.
The issue here is that Zerg doesn't have a good enough alternative.
Corruptor + Broodlord has potential but is shut down by Ravens with PDDs and HSM.
I'm thinking that it'd probably work out if Corruptor shots can't be intercepted. Corruptors would then be able beat Viking/Raven, allowing Broodlords to rip up the ground (Thors suck against both Corruptors and Broodlords).This would probably just result in more HSMs, which also splash friendlies anyway and by flying your corruptor ball at their viking ball it'd hurt the terran almost as much as it'd hurt you.
This will not affect any other matchup, since no other race can intercept corruptor shots. Even if further corruptor buffs are needed, corruptors are fairly pathetic units as they are having the niche application of killing colossi anyway, and buffing them probably would be good. (Maybe something like the Devourer's attack mechanic in SCBW instead of castable corruption so they really dominate the air better, being quite expensive units)
An alternative would be an ultra buff...something that would protect ultras from getting smushed by sieged tanks...but that really seems far fetched seeing as ultras have always melted to sieged tanks even in SCBW.
On June 03 2010 13:36 Aberu wrote: The terran mech complaints remind me of back in the days of Command and Conquer Red Alert 2.
I stopped reading here
Well you shouldn't have. The truth is that game was highly competitive as well, and there were people that would complain that allied tech was better than soviet tech. But the fact was, that was part of the balance of the game, soviet's job was to not let allied tech up. I think that zerg's job is to get map control, and contain the enemy and harass their econ whilst still holding their own macro strong.
Does anyone use nydus worms? Does anyone overlord drop on these mech turtlers?
how many do we need to repeat the same damn things ? Nydus worms ONLY WORKS if the terran players is BAD and don't spot the nydos worm in his base. Drop overlord for what ? See all our army getting killed by tank spread among his base ? He can also simply deny our drop and just into our base and simply destroy our base, base switch isnt at the advantage of the zerg player.
And the balance of the game is not suppose to be like : Race A should win before 10 min otherwise race A loose.
I'll agree that the drops aren't the best idea, but how many of these top players have incorporated ultras? None, ultras were rebalanced as anti mech, but for some reason no one uses them. And the nydus isn't just for in the base to blow it up, it's also for ledges to attack mineral lines and have unscouted high ground advantage in early/mid.
Also that kinda is how a game that has a supply cap of 200 (CnC games with no supply cap, or any supply at all), sounds to me! I mean if you can't beat them unit for unit, why not beat them when unit for unit you win in some way?
lol ultra, just look at the 2 replays in the OP, and you will understand. Epic fail
On June 03 2010 13:44 3clipse wrote:Mutas? Severely countered by thors which have nearly seige tank range.
I think this is a HUGE misconception. Thors are not a great counter for Mutas. Sure, Thors beat Mutas if they get in a fight with eachother, impressive. If you define counter by 'what wins when both things a-move eachother', then yeah, it's a fantastic counter.
Having a unit that beats your opponent's unit is worthless if you surrender control of the entire map to have it. You cannot defend multiple bases with a Thor. You need turrets, which are a money sink. You can not attack without static defenses or without leaving a significant amount of defense at home.
Zerg players have this strange misconception that because Mutas beat Thors, and they have mutas and the opponent has thors, they're losing the game. You control the entire map, have the other player contained, and have much better scouting info. If you can't make something of that, you're doing it wrong.
are you completely stupid man? please stop posting in here. 1 thor + 2 turrets > 10 muta 2 thor + 2 turrets > 15 muta 3 thor + 4 turrets > 30 muta Does that sound cost efficient to you ? Also if the terran upgrades his thors ( which he obviously will ) it will be even worse of a raping, oh yea and the building armor upgrade + turret range upgrade. lol. You say that turrets are a money sink, and t needs mass defense blah blah blah, but theres a few things you are forgetting. Minerals do not matter AT ALL for terran when he is doing this strat, the only thing that is important is gas, T will always have enough excess minerals to spam turrets or CC's or repair or marines in bunkers or hellions or w/e. Also you are obviously not watching the replays or possibly even reading the OP, because qxc did not attack at all, he just turtled for the ENTIRE game, and waited until the zerg ran out of resources, so your idiotic points about not being able to attack are completely irrelevant to this thread.
Also, I watched the TLO vs sen games, and TLO went mass vikings, that is not even close to the strategy that we are saying his imba, mass vikings is not IMBA, its downright bad and TLO deserved to lose, so get off sen's nuts, because he will not beat me or qxc doing this style ok?
Lastly, even in a standard MMM game, muta harass is really not hard to deal with at all. you are just bad if you think otherwise ok? Like you said, muta are terrible in a head on fight, so all you have to do is make 3-4 turrets at each base, enough to buy you some time to reinforce if the mutas decide to commit to a counter when you move out. I used to have the most problems with mass lings into muta into baneling style vs zerg, but then i realized that 2 thor + 8 rine + the rest of your money going into marauders will insta - kill all the mutas. I also realized that this style is relatively low eco, because you have to use all your larva on units, and just taking a fast 3rd exp with bunkers + PF + turrets, and taking the game into late game is pretty much invincible.
I don't understand how this one troll idiot noob thinks that he is smarter than 20 people who are higher skilled than him ????? seriously wtf, are you serious? are you reading what you type?
iEchoic are you trolling?I mean seriously you have to be brain dead to think that Mech vs Zerg is balanced.Your main argument is that Sen can stop it???So what everyone else is just bad?Does that mean that all terran players are good because they can beat zergs?Or does that mean that when two evenly skilled players,one terran and one zerg play against each other the terran player will ALWAYS WIN simply because countering mech requires RIDICULOUS amount of skill?In a balanced game the person with the superior skill will always win,this here is not the case.Your main argument is that 1 person can stop it so it's not imba...so all other thousands of players are just bad and even tho they may be better players than their terran opponents they still deserve to loose because they are not the all mighty Sen.Please respond to this post.
Threads like this really irritate me. On one side we have several high skilled progames and casters and on the other saide we have some low skill no names telling them they need to play better ? Really ? You think sheth or catz thinks mech is imba cause he lost that one game OP posted ?? Get your head out of your ass . They probably played hundreds of games by this point, and have an incomparable amounts of game knowledge to all those random trolls here.
On June 03 2010 14:14 HaZzZaRd wrote: iEchoic are you trolling?I mean seriously you have to be brain dead to think that Mech vs Zerg is balanced.Your main argument is that Sen can stop it???So what everyone else is just bad?Does that mean that all terran players are good because they can beat zergs?Or does that mean that when two evenly skilled players,one terran and one zerg play against each other the terran player will ALWAYS WIN simply because countering mech requires RIDICULOUS amount of skill?In a balanced game the person with the superior skill will always win,this here is not the case.Your main argument is that 1 person can stop it so it's not imba...so all other thousands of players are just bad and even tho they may be better players than their terran opponents they still deserve to loose because they are not the all mighty Sen.Please respond to this post.
hey man, his main Sen argument comes from 2 games where TLO went MASS VIKINGS in the EARLY GAME vs sen, i don't think he even read the OP LOL
During all patches until 10-th - zergs crashed every terran on every tournament. And now when situation changed - instead of experemenentating and creating new buildorders they start whining. And i have to say - everything depends on server. European zergs are useless. They have no clue what to do at all. I don't take Dimaga, since i haven't played him forages. American zergs are quite ahead, it's way harder to play with them. Korean zergs - well you know all - why talking... Noone in world right now can win hot-top korean zerg in bo7. Why talking about imbalance in TvZ then? I also want to point out - that koreans terrans almost no use pure tech, except the shortest maps 2 factories rush. I hope you have enough brains and don't think they simply don't know about such "imba"
I will chime in to agree that TvZ mech is really the only thing I felt was OP in my time in beta. I played terran pre-patch 13 at platinum level and started using this strat once it started becoming more popular then proceeded to have a 20+ game winning streak against zerg. Now these aren't exactly pro level games but still decently skilled and it does show that assuming equal skill the mech terran will come out on top the vast majority of the time which should not be the case IMO. You can't expect 99.9% of zerg to harass and outsmart at the level of Sen or other top Zerg pro's, while on the other hand mech play requires very little thought and is basically 1a2a. I can't offer any great solutions myself but I did like Antimage's suggestions a couple of pages back.
On June 03 2010 14:19 3D.Strelok wrote: During all patches until 10-th - zergs crashed every terran on every tournament. And now when situation changed - instead of experemenentating and creating new buildorders they start whining. And i have to say - everything depends on server. European zergs are useless. They have no clue what to do at all. I don't take Dimaga, since i haven't played him forages. American zergs are quite ahead, it's way harder to play with them. Korean zergs - well you know all - why talking... Noone in world right now can win hot-top korean zerg in bo7. Why talking about imbalance in TvZ then?
I'm pretty sure the top zerg players are actually trying different things and its NOT working. I have tried everything I can think of and still get stomped by good terrans.
The only time I have really beat a good terran when he went mech was when I went muta - into fast broodlord and even then that was more likely then not a fluke for me to even win. If you have been paying attention at all in tvz its ridiculous just how strong mech rapes a zerg army...
That is not the point even if this build can be stopped by someone that plays 12 hours a day does that mean that terran mech is not OP because it CAN be stopped?To my understanding the person with the higher skill should ALWAYS win.
Hi, not to be a pest or anything since this discussion is over my skill level but it seems there is an easier answer than nerfing AI. The main issues for not Nydus/dropping seems to be it can't be done effectively. So why not nerf sensor tower, and shave a bit of time off the nydus (5 seconds?) which, I'd think, would have a far lesser impact on over all game balance. I wouldn't need a long explanation for why it can't work. A simple high level player saying it couldn't work would be enough, but it really sounds like this is what the discussion keeps circling around. The counter not being effective enough.
On June 03 2010 14:14 HaZzZaRd wrote:Your main argument is that Sen can stop it???So what everyone else is just bad?
I think the argument is that, at least at the top level, there really hasn't been many good examples of terran mech dominating. QXC vs Sheth is a good example, but it was just one style of play and there were certainly potential places where he could have won (earlier in the match--not near the end). There are examples of turtling terran mech getting owned at the top level too--like from Sen or Check.
Saying you know "oh, it's broken: after the 30 minute mark, if the Terran and Zerg have split the map, the zerg can't do anything" doesn't say that much, even if it's definitely the case.
We can add also TL.invitational. But there will be also zerg second place. And protoss, not terran on first.
You know when i ask all zergs - why the hell korean zergs own everyone and you can't - they always answer: "These korean zergs - don't have any good terrans to play against". And when i ask - and tell me terran who will beat those koreans - they never talk about personalities, but about strategies. Very funny thing.
On June 03 2010 14:21 blade55555 wrote: I have tried everything I can think of and still get stomped by good terrans.
Why has no one pointed out that one player does not necessarily represent a large enough sample size to make a claim? When I see people say "but sen can win" it made me think about this tidbit about the map medusa:
The original map was very difficult for Terran against Protoss; though the statistics do not appear terribly imbalanced at first glance (39-18 in favor of Protoss) they become much more damning once you realize that Flash went 7-1 against Protoss on the map, without which the statistics reduce to a dismal 38-11.
So was the map balanced? Because T progamers who werent named Flash were getting smashed by Protoss players. So let me ask, would you tell those T progamers who practice 10 hours a day and have coaches to get better and quit whining?
As an interesting side note after 2008 they remade the map.
On June 03 2010 14:31 Santriel wrote: Lulz, zerg spammers crying they can't mass muta and get an instant win.
QQ more.
Actually if you read the thread you would realize zerg aren't crying about not being able to mass muta. Should read the thread before commenting next time methinks .
Ok lets talk about top Diamond level then.Every single Zerg I know is getting owned by terran mech.They have map control,better apm,30-40 supply advantage and they still have NO CHANCE.Is that balanced?
On June 03 2010 13:36 iEchoic wrote: That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda.There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
What I find the most disturbing is that 2 of the replays between Sheth vs QXC are from the LAST PATCH and that before starting this thread, Raelcun didn't wait a few days for Zerg players to test the new balance.
Crying imbalance immediately after the new patch is just silly - at least give some time for the players to come up with new strats following this new patch.
On June 03 2010 13:36 iEchoic wrote: That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda.There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
What I find the most disturbing is that 2 of the replays between Sheth vs QXC are from the LAST PATCH and that before starting this thread, Raelcun didn't wait a few days for Zerg players to test the new balance.
Crying imbalance immediately after the new patch is just silly - at least give some time for the players to come up with new strats following this new patch.
Fully, fully accept!!! Give it at least 1-2 months and see how it goes
On June 03 2010 13:36 iEchoic wrote: That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda.There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
What I find the most disturbing is that 2 of the replays between Sheth vs QXC are from the LAST PATCH and that before starting this thread, Raelcun didn't wait a few days for Zerg players to test the new balance.
Crying imbalance immediately after the new patch is just silly - at least give some time for the players to come up with new strats following this new patch.
Fully, fully accept!!! Give it at least 1-2 months and see how it goes
See the problem is that we do not have 1-2 moths if you want to play a balanced game when it comes out....
On June 03 2010 13:36 iEchoic wrote: That list is a joke, the thread-maker has an agenda.There's no doubt he expended far more effort trying to find voices that agree with him than disagree with him.
What I find the most disturbing is that 2 of the replays between Sheth vs QXC are from the LAST PATCH and that before starting this thread, Raelcun didn't wait a few days for Zerg players to test the new balance.
Crying imbalance immediately after the new patch is just silly - at least give some time for the players to come up with new strats following this new patch.
Fully, fully accept!!! Give it at least 1-2 months and see how it goes
How do any of the changes affect the matchup at all?
Oh wait drops are more expensive to research now and um... well.... Infestors are easier to position so when they die they're in a better spot?
OK i think the real problem is the thor's AA. it doesnt make sense... In BW when you had units that did splash to air. valks / sairs. they did lots of little damage shots.. so that spreading and armor upgrades could really help. Thors do insanely large damage ,... and also bonus to light? if they do insane damage AA shouldnt it be bonus to massive? They effectively blow mutals out of the air so fast with insane damage that there is not time to spread and macro... if you try to spread.. they will just blow away one clump move on to the next and so on... where with sairs they might take a while to kill 1 clump before moving to your other clump . giving you time to spread again. If sairs had a slow rate 42 splash attack ... would you really be able to micro against them? Or if valks had 400 hp and no scourge exist could you possibly beat them?
Heres 1 suggestion i thought of . make it so when infestors NP a unit they can swap their energy with the units. So if my infestor survives ( wasnt targetted eg bad micro by terran) i can possibly have taken the thors energy , and get another NP or fungal growth maybe... Its alot of maybes, but it at least rewards the player whos microing well.
Im talking about there would have to be an upgrade for the infestor and a swap energy button you would have to click.
Ok this is a ridiculous idea probly . but also infestor should have an innate ability ( similar to immortal) where it only takes damage to its energy , so it can only die with 0 energy. We can call it Psionic shield or something cheezy. This would be great in tandem with the Energy Swap idea. cause then if you micro fast your chance to escape your infestor goes up,, but your chance to get of another spell goes down against a good microing terran. Also this would make ghosts have an important role in ZvT as well.
Wait wait cut those ideas... Just give Infestor increased energy regeneration underground... Perfect.
In Broodwar, zerg had leverage when facing mech and that was the mutalisk. A combination of buffed missle turrets, thor splash damage, and viking range really hard counters mutalisks into the ground.
When you faced tanks in broodwar, you hard countered them with mutas to abuse the lack of terran mobility. This forced the terran to cut into his tank totals with goliaths. The difference is, mutalisks could actually go toe to toe with goliaths and SC1 turrets. Now goliaths do splash, missle turrets are on steriods, and valkyries can attack ground and air. This gives terran 3 solid options for battling air, 2 of which do formidable on the ground as well. There is little tension between the powerful immobile force that is terran mech and terran anti air. Mutalisks no longer have the option of dictating the pace of the game because after a certain point, they just get countered too hard.
Nothing is going to stop siege tanks from dominating ground force, this is their purpose. Their weakness is mobility and air units. However, zerg air harass becomes obsolete way too quick, when it should be a strong force to be reckoned with all game for the entire game.
Wow, I haven't been playing much, been addicted to LOL lately. But, I do not see how Terran can have better map control then Zerg in high level play.
Further more this whole "late game when he has 200/200" blah blah blah, really by the time he gets 200/200, a zerg should have like +2 bases on the terran. Most maps leave terran so exposed, I don't see how turtling is that effective past 2 bases. Zerg just aren't using drops, nydus to their full extent imo.
Hell if Terran is FE try rushing w/ mass lings/banelings I guarantee you will see results.
On June 03 2010 09:14 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: MoMaN did an excellent job of abusing Lz and playing mind games sniping expansions and doing a great job of using drops fake drops nydus worm everything people are always saying the zerg has to do to beat mech and he STILL lost...
Mech can feel overpowered, but let's not exaggerate. MoMaN lost that game because he didn't build a Spire. After MoMaN killed Lz's gold, Lz's economy was trashed; he didn't have nearly enough gas to build Thors or Vikings in any significant quantity. Transitioning to air instead of throwing away roaches against Tanks would have won MoMaN the game. His loss doesn't have anything to do with mech balancing issues.
EDIT: Do note that I agree with the general idea of the OP; mech against Zerg does need some work. But the Lz vs. MoMaN game doesn't prove anything. Late game Lz just built Tanks because MoMaN didn't even threaten air.
2-race RTS games are much easier to balance ^^ Red Alert 2 anyone?
Jokes aside, I fully endorse this idea. It was a huge part of TvP in SC1 to actually micro your tank fire on different blobs of dragoons while your vultures clean up the zealots in front supported by mines.
Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
On June 03 2010 14:43 kidcrash wrote: In Broodwar, zerg had leverage when facing mech and that was the mutalisk. A combination of buffed missle turrets, thor splash damage, and viking range really hard counters mutalisks into the ground.
When you faced tanks in broodwar, you hard countered them with mutas to abuse the lack of terran mobility. This forced the terran to cut into his tank totals with goliaths. The difference is, mutalisks could actually go toe to toe with goliaths and SC1 turrets. Now goliaths do splash, missle turrets are on steriods, and valkyries can attack ground and air. This gives terran 3 solid options for battling air, 2 of which do formidable on the ground as well. There is little tension between the powerful immobile force that is terran mech and terran anti air. Mutalisks no longer have the option of dictating the pace of the game because after a certain point, they just get countered too hard.
Nothing is going to stop siege tanks from dominating ground force, this is their purpose. Their weakness is mobility and air units. However, zerg air harass becomes obsolete way too quick, when it should be a strong force to be reckoned with all game for the entire game.
I totally agree, 3 thors shoudln't be able to shit on 15 mutas. If the AOE damage wasn't there or at least was reduced terrans would be forced to back their tanks up with not only thors but marines as well, opening up some real options for zerg.
On June 03 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote: Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
Yeah.. thats it, were not creative enough. I'm pretty sure that between all of the top Z players just about every variation has been attempted, some working better than others. At the end of the day it doesn't work.
On June 03 2010 13:58 iEchoic wrote: If you're sitting your thor in the middle of nowhere trying to defend multiple bases where it cannot be repaired
This is how you should've finished this sentence.
You are completely retarded
On June 03 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote: Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
wth are you talking about? Haven't we already established nothing a zerg makes can straight up beat a mech army with good composition?
I'm not trying to say the match up is fine, but MOST zergs are just engaging head on in Diamond league. The match up does need some adjustments, but I don't think its as hard as some Zerg players make it out to be....
The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
why are you guys running units into tanks. tanks are 3 food. If you see alot of tanks just go all mutas. Dont even have to get curropters. just straight muta. It takes a pretty long time for t to get max. z should be maxed before then.It he has thors just go to his base and kill stuff there. All this whining on how t mech is unbeatable is really counter productive.
I mean z should be 1 base up on t anyway. You should max faster because of cheaper units and faster production rate/build time. pound for pound mutas kill everything the terrans have outside of thors. if he has thors then just fly else where and kill his bases.
I swear, I have yet to see a t win a tournament and people are crying about how imbalanced t is.
On June 03 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote: Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
Yeah.. thats it, were not creative enough. I'm pretty sure that between all of the top Z players just about every variation has been attempted, some working better than others. At the end of the day it doesn't work.
Yes please you should really explain your theory to maka (T) who lost vs cool (Z) in a prize money BO5 tournament. Im sure he was just not paying enough attention considering that maka said quoute "We need to win to feed ourselves". Name one terran who won a tournament since patch 11? TLO lost TvZ BO% vs Sen with a mech strat he claimed it was unbeatable on EU server. Day9 even made a daily on how imba that strat was. Still Sen wtfpwnedkkthxbyebye him w/o too much trouble. But im sure you zerg guys who post here tried everything and did everything perfecly and Sen/Cool/Dimaga are just lucky to kill terrans in every tournament.
Alright, I read like the first 7 pages and just really want to say this.
In BW, Zerg's response to terran late game was the defiler right? Dark swarm + lurker vs mech, or dark swarm + ultraling vs infantry. I didn't play BW as competitively as Starcraft 2, so those examples are surely a little inaccurate but its the general idea.
Blizzard WANTS ultralisks to be the solution to Terran mech and the Marauder with the Infestor playing a similar role as the defiler. As bad and terrible as people make ultralisks out to be, has anyone actually seen a mass army of frenzied ultralisk charge at a Terran mech army? In the Qxc vs Sheth game, he surely had the time to make a large infestor/ultraling army and confront this immobile mech army. I watch streams all the time and it's almost always 1-2 ultralisks and rarely more than maybe 5, and never frenzied. Ultralisks have a lot of health and in numbers take a TON of damage before falling. With lings backing them up and some well placed neural parasites, the ultralisks will do some serious damage. I haven't seen this ultilized in Starcraft 2.
Avilo presenting his nydus strategy might be a bad strategy, but it doesn't matter. His point is he isn't convinced that every possible strategy has been exhausted and I'm not either.
On June 03 2010 15:12 Slipspace wrote: Alright, I read like the first 7 pages and just really want to say this.
In BW, Zerg's response to terran late game was the defiler right? Dark swarm + lurker vs mech, or dark swarm + ultraling vs infantry. I didn't play BW as competitively as Starcraft 2, so those examples are surely a little inaccurate but its the general idea.
Blizzard WANTS ultralisks to be the solution to Terran mech and the Marauder with the Infestor playing a similar role as the defiler. As bad and terrible as people make ultralisks out to be, has anyone actually seen a mass army of frenzied ultralisk charge at a Terran mech army? In the Qxc vs Sheth game, he surely had the time to make a large infestor/ultraling army and confront this immobile mech army. I watch streams all the time and it's almost always 1-2 ultralisks and rarely more than maybe 5, and never frenzied. Ultralisks have a lot of health and in numbers take a TON of damage before falling. With lings backing them up and some well placed neural parasites, the ultralisks will do some serious damage. I haven't seen this ultilized in Starcraft 2.
Avilo presenting his nydus strategy might be a bad strategy, but it doesn't matter. His point is he isn't convinced that every possible strategy has been exhausted and I'm not either.
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk hellions =uselss vs roaches marauders = useless vs hydra BC = uselss vs corruptor Blord > all terran ground
On June 03 2010 14:45 Corwin wrote: Mech can feel overpowered, but let's not exaggerate. MoMaN lost that game because he didn't build a Spire. After MoMaN killed Lz's gold, Lz's economy was trashed; he didn't have nearly enough gas to build Thors or Vikings in any significant quantity. Transitioning to air instead of throwing away roaches against Tanks would have won MoMaN the game. His loss doesn't have anything to do with mech balancing issues.
I agree with this completely, the Lz game was a bad example. MoMaN could have easily ended the game with a simple air transition.
I think the thread has gotten derailed from its original idea, that zerg vs. mech can get to a point in the game where it's just no longer balanced. He wasn't arguing that mech cannot be beaten with zerg at anytime by anyone. Sure these games could have been won earlier if zerg did things differently but that isn't the point.
Although a lot of you don't seem to care about late game balance, that's what this is about. What it came down to is that zerg had half the map and unlimited resources but no real options.
On June 03 2010 15:12 Slipspace wrote: Alright, I read like the first 7 pages and just really want to say this.
In BW, Zerg's response to terran late game was the defiler right? Dark swarm + lurker vs mech, or dark swarm + ultraling vs infantry. I didn't play BW as competitively as Starcraft 2, so those examples are surely a little inaccurate but its the general idea.
Blizzard WANTS ultralisks to be the solution to Terran mech and the Marauder with the Infestor playing a similar role as the defiler. As bad and terrible as people make ultralisks out to be, has anyone actually seen a mass army of frenzied ultralisk charge at a Terran mech army? In the Qxc vs Sheth game, he surely had the time to make a large infestor/ultraling army and confront this immobile mech army. I watch streams all the time and it's almost always 1-2 ultralisks and rarely more than maybe 5, and never frenzied. Ultralisks have a lot of health and in numbers take a TON of damage before falling. With lings backing them up and some well placed neural parasites, the ultralisks will do some serious damage. I haven't seen this ultilized in Starcraft 2.
Avilo presenting his nydus strategy might be a bad strategy, but it doesn't matter. His point is he isn't convinced that every possible strategy has been exhausted and I'm not either.
Dark swarm was terrible against mech in bw iirc
Mostly true, but it at least gave your army enough damage reduction to actually get a few attacks off and damage his army. As it is right now, you can throw 100 supply worth of zerg army at a mech ball and the terran would only lose maybe 4 or 5 units. I'm not saying that this was what people did (it certainly was not ideal), but you could at the very least slowly chip away at his army if you had map control and an economic advantage.
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk hellions =uselss vs roaches marauders = useless vs hydra BC = uselss vs corruptor Blord > all terran ground
See wut I did thare?
obviously you dont play zerg so let me help you : NP thor doesnt work because infestor are instantly killed by tank, infestor range = 9, tank = 13 ok, and yes some zerg units counter some terrans units, but there is NO hard counter,
so the composition tank + thor + hellion + viking finally just rape every composition of zerg army as long as terran adapt slighty his comp
seriously do you guys just listen to all the things that have been said ? because you dont add anything to the debate here
Mutas just get destroyed by Terran. The way Zerg dealt with Mech/Tank play in SC1 was revolved around DS and good mutalisk sniping. Now the Thor is basically a giant turret with tons of HP and AA splash with insane AA range (oh, and it can move). Zerg literally has nothing that can absorb shots from Mech play that is now even efficient in not overkilling.
I think nydus play can be good, but it shouldn't be the only option. Doom drops are good too, but I feel like a lot of games where that does happen, the Terran is sieged half was across the maps and then just abandons his base and kills the Zerg while most of his units are away. Then 90% of the time in base trading, Terran is going to come out on top with the whole MULE-ing and floating structures.
EDIT: Roaches need to be rebuffed a bit. They were a decent a decent option back then, now they are just crap. Tunneling claws was pretty good at catching Terran sieges offguard if there weren't any detectors, but no one even gets roaches anymore because they've been nerfed to hell.
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk hellions =uselss vs roaches marauders = useless vs hydra BC = uselss vs corruptor Blord > all terran ground
See wut I did thare?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings HARD COUNTERS MUTAS great vs roaches maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk Tanks HARD COUNTER ALL GROUND easily kills infestors hellions =uselss vs roaches HARD COUNTERS ZERGLINGS good vs hydras marauders = useless vs hydra Amazing vs roaches BC = uselss vs corruptor bc are useless period..... Blord > all terran ground GETTING OWNED BY VIKING
On June 03 2010 15:12 Slipspace wrote: Alright, I read like the first 7 pages and just really want to say this.
In BW, Zerg's response to terran late game was the defiler right? Dark swarm + lurker vs mech, or dark swarm + ultraling vs infantry. I didn't play BW as competitively as Starcraft 2, so those examples are surely a little inaccurate but its the general idea.
Blizzard WANTS ultralisks to be the solution to Terran mech and the Marauder with the Infestor playing a similar role as the defiler. As bad and terrible as people make ultralisks out to be, has anyone actually seen a mass army of frenzied ultralisk charge at a Terran mech army? In the Qxc vs Sheth game, he surely had the time to make a large infestor/ultraling army and confront this immobile mech army. I watch streams all the time and it's almost always 1-2 ultralisks and rarely more than maybe 5, and never frenzied. Ultralisks have a lot of health and in numbers take a TON of damage before falling. With lings backing them up and some well placed neural parasites, the ultralisks will do some serious damage. I haven't seen this ultilized in Starcraft 2. Avilo presenting his nydus strategy might be a bad strategy, but it doesn't matter. His point is he isn't convinced that every possible strategy has been exhausted and I'm not either.
I wouldn't count Avilo's opionion for really anything as before when Terran was struggling I guess a bit vs zerg he would scream how imbalanced zerg was and how easy zerg was and Terran couldn't win if the game went past 10 minutes (yet there were matches by good players at the time proving him wrong). Guess what as soon as Terran's mech gets boosted and almost every zerg player is struggling against it so hard right now he says its because zergs don't know how to play. Not trying to be rude but I wouldn't go by his opinion .
Also to note mech is beatable but that doesn't mean its balanced... Its so hard to beat a good terran player who goes mech as zerg its ridiculous. I don't see how anybody is saying mech is balanced its just every other zerg player is bad I mean really? Lots of good terran players are agreeing its so easy to beat a zerg as mech it just is I don't know how people can say its balanced :S.
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk hellions =uselss vs roaches marauders = useless vs hydra BC = uselss vs corruptor Blord > all terran ground
See wut I did thare?
Yes you wrote a incoherent string of poorly spelled unit names while acting kind of toolish with a meme.
Note how the person you quoted used, for four out of the six units, used the word "raped", while you, for every example, gave examples of "uselessness".
In other words, Marauders do nothing against mutalisks, but they are not countered by mutalisks. On the other hand, not only would a Zergling be useless against a banshee, it is also "raped" (countered) very heavily by units like Hellions and Siege Tanks.
Also Battlecruisers beat corruptors cost for cost.
On June 03 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote: Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
what stalling? qxc didnt attack once the whole game on steppes / lt lol........
I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
Thor splash should be removed.That way Terran will have to actually play the game instead of getting 10 tanks, 3 thors.4-5 hellions and roflstomp zerg...
On June 03 2010 15:25 Wr3k wrote: I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
It was a good relation too. And the person with the better micro always won that match. It seems like micro is now less significant in this match up now (at least for Terran) and it tends to show as armies grow in numbers.
On June 03 2010 15:12 Slipspace wrote: Alright, I read like the first 7 pages and just really want to say this.
In BW, Zerg's response to terran late game was the defiler right? Dark swarm + lurker vs mech, or dark swarm + ultraling vs infantry. I didn't play BW as competitively as Starcraft 2, so those examples are surely a little inaccurate but its the general idea.
Blizzard WANTS ultralisks to be the solution to Terran mech and the Marauder with the Infestor playing a similar role as the defiler. As bad and terrible as people make ultralisks out to be, has anyone actually seen a mass army of frenzied ultralisk charge at a Terran mech army? In the Qxc vs Sheth game, he surely had the time to make a large infestor/ultraling army and confront this immobile mech army. I watch streams all the time and it's almost always 1-2 ultralisks and rarely more than maybe 5, and never frenzied. Ultralisks have a lot of health and in numbers take a TON of damage before falling. With lings backing them up and some well placed neural parasites, the ultralisks will do some serious damage. I haven't seen this ultilized in Starcraft 2. Avilo presenting his nydus strategy might be a bad strategy, but it doesn't matter. His point is he isn't convinced that every possible strategy has been exhausted and I'm not either.
I wouldn't count Avilo's opionion for really anything as before when Terran was struggling I guess a bit vs zerg he would scream how imbalanced zerg was and how easy zerg was and Terran couldn't win if the game went past 10 minutes (yet there were matches by good players at the time proving him wrong). Guess what as soon as Terran's mech gets boosted and almost every zerg player is struggling against it so hard right now he says its because zergs don't know how to play. Not trying to be rude but I wouldn't go by his opinion .
Also to note mech is beatable but that doesn't mean its balanced... Its so hard to beat a good terran player who goes mech as zerg its ridiculous. I don't see how anybody is saying mech is balanced its just every other zerg player is bad I mean really? Lots of good terran players are agreeing its so easy to beat a zerg as mech it just is I don't know how people can say its balanced :S.
Please don't get me wrong, I certainly don't agree with Avilo's solution. But he at least has the balls to tell people they haven't exhausted the options and I think thats true as well, but with the strategy explored in my earlier post, and not his.
I kind of pride myself in playing Starcraft because the balance in this game is not like WoW. I've played that game and people constantly cry nerf and it's deafening. I pride myself in playing Starcraft because I like to believe that Starcraft players are above that.
On June 03 2010 15:25 Wr3k wrote: I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
Even though it's not a fair trade, 4 mutas can take out 1 thor if you're careful not to bunch them up. If all terran has for air defense is thor then a full-out muta switch will kill him. That just doesn't work when there's a few marines sprinkled in the mix, which there always are since the rest of the army is so gas heavy.
I think some of the reason there's so much crying about TvZ is because most people are not playing in Pro circles...
The skill gap between Terran and Zerg on lower levels is astounding. Most Zerg players i've played against in platinum/gold have about 150 + apm and good macro/micro. Terran players around 30 apm and require little no macro.
Zerg are busy scouting the map, constantly positioning units, preparing for cheese, constantly spawning larvae and macroing while harassing and trying to bust the wall early before his mech is too high to win. This requires a decently skilled player. It truly isn't easy to do...
are you completely stupid man? please stop posting in here. 1 thor + 2 turrets > 10 muta 2 thor + 2 turrets > 15 muta 3 thor + 4 turrets > 30 muta Does that sound cost efficient to you ? Also if the terran upgrades his thors ( which he obviously will ) it will be even worse of a raping, oh yea and the building armor upgrade + turret range upgrade. lol.
Hi I'm just a nobody jumping into the topic, and I'm a zerg who thinks Terran mech is imbalanced against Zerg (so I'm not trying to be disagreeable), but I just want to comment on the numbers above. I've been playing around with a unit tester to practice different scenarios (I know it doesn't exactly represent actual gameplay). 1 thor + 2 turrets I can consistently beat with 9 mutas. 2 thors with 8 mutas 2 thors + 2 turrets with 11-12 mutas 3 thors + 4 turrets with 23 mutas ^Tested with 3-3 upgrades on both Mutas and Thors, Thors/Turrets both clumped and spread out (i.e. w/ and w/out muta's splash), and barely any micro on my part. This is of course done by flying the whole muta group over the current target, and not by attack moving, so that they never form a vulnerable arc.
The resource cost--in particular gas--for the Zerg is much higher than the Terran to win the above fights, but so long as it does take out all of his in-base defense, it may be considered tactically sound if it allows you to wipe out his workers or other key buildings, or force units to retreat from elsewhere on the map, overall weakening his position.
On June 03 2010 15:25 Wr3k wrote: I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
yeah I think Thor is just too good at the moment, I don't know why Blizzard reduced their size (i guess it was patch 12 or 13) because as they said themselves "Thor didnt really need that"
Thor is just too good against mutalisk while they are also very good against ground unit. Blizzard need to find them their role.
Are thors the AA terran unit and therefore should be good against air but really bad against ground (like goliaths were), in this case they should reduce the ground dammage and change the air dammage so it will be slightly less strong against mutalish and a bit stronger against others air units (void rayds / banshee / broodlords)
or are thors some kind of strong polyvalent unit and therefore their AA power should be really reduced
are you completely stupid man? please stop posting in here. 1 thor + 2 turrets > 10 muta 2 thor + 2 turrets > 15 muta 3 thor + 4 turrets > 30 muta Does that sound cost efficient to you ? Also if the terran upgrades his thors ( which he obviously will ) it will be even worse of a raping, oh yea and the building armor upgrade + turret range upgrade. lol.
Hi I'm just a nobody jumping into the topic, and I'm a zerg who thinks Terran mech is imbalanced against Zerg (so I'm not trying to be disagreeable), but I just want to comment on the numbers above. I've been playing around with a unit tester to practice different scenarios (I know it doesn't exactly represent actual gameplay). 1 thor + 2 turrets I can consistently beat with 9 mutas. 2 thors with 8 mutas 2 thors + 2 turrets with 11-12 mutas 3 thors + 4 turrets with 23 mutas ^Tested with 3-3 upgrades on both Mutas and Thors, Thors/Turrets both clumped and spread out (i.e. w/ and w/out muta's splash), and barely any micro on my part. This is of course done by flying the whole muta group over the current target, and not by attack moving, so that they never form a vulnerable arc.
The resource cost--in particular gas--for the Zerg is much higher than the Terran to win the above fights, but so long as it does take out all of his in-base defense, it may be considered tactically sound if it allows you to wipe out his workers or other key buildings, or force units to retreat from elsewhere on the map, overall weakening his position.
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
thor = useless agains infestor NP also crap vs zerglings maraude/hellion/tanksr=useless vs mutalisk hellions =uselss vs roaches marauders = useless vs hydra BC = uselss vs corruptor Blord > all terran ground
See wut I did thare?
obviously you dont play zerg so let me help you : NP thor doesnt work because infestor are instantly killed by tank, infestor range = 9, tank = 13 ok, and yes some zerg units counter some terrans units, but there is NO hard counter,
so the composition tank + thor + hellion + viking finally just rape every composition of zerg army as long as terran adapt slighty his comp
seriously do you guys just listen to all the things that have been said ? because you dont add anything to the debate here
stop being stupid. You just listed zerg units and it's terran counter. He did the same with zerg to show that every unit has a counter and your comment is pointless. Take your own advice next time
blizzard are never going to implement a change that deliberately nullifies the 'smart' interface.
mbs, auto-splitting, zerglings auto surrounding - siege tanks not overkilling is just part of this, and it's not going anywhere. this is part of the legacy of making a game in 2010 and having to make sure the game is competitive to casual lovers of other RTS games.
deal with it or find a better idea (like a reduction to the siege tank radius or something).
On June 03 2010 15:25 Wr3k wrote: I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
I think you're on to something, but you might be focusing on the wrong part of the Thor to nerf. It's really the ground damage that needs to be nerfed. Currently going Thor doesn't hurt your ground army too much since it's still great against Hydra and Roach. If I could make changes to the Thor right now I would cut the cost and its ground damage in half. And I would remove the splash damage to air, but make it equally effective against light and armored. Long story short, Terran needs the Goliath back.
AT OP, those replays didn't display anything. The one on Steppes of War, Sheth made a roach warren and ended up making no roaches before lair.
So many mistakes in Sheth's Low APM play. QXC is the better player. Mistakes spotted in Sheth 1. Natural expansion had ultra late gas econ. Extractors at natural came too late. 2. Too many zerglings at start hurt his economy. Built 16 zerglings and fell behind in economy. 3. Compare drone count to scvs. 36-33. Why bother playing zerg if you're gonna have only a 3 drone difference. 4. Lair came ultra late. 5.All tech buildings came ultra late.
Turned out to be a noob turtling fest of 40 minutes. Zerg is not sim city its about mass bigger army first and taking initiative to attack.
If army sizes are equal terran always win duh? Same in SC1 maxed out protoss > jaedong.
EDIT: Roaches need to be rebuffed a bit. They were a decent a decent option back then, now they are just crap. Tunneling claws was pretty good at catching Terran sieges offguard if there weren't any detectors, but no one even gets roaches anymore because they've been nerfed to hell.
Not to try and change the topic too much, but changing roach to 2 supply totally killed the swarm feeling zerg had for me. If they needed to be nerfed, it should of been in hp, not in their supply.
Tunneling claws gives a nice surprise factor when you first catch the terran off guard. The only problem is the numbers aren't great enough for it to be overwhelming. Then the 2nd or 3rd time you push, terran will be ready with scans, then ravens and it's lost its effectiveness.
Do anyone else think that Blizzard should go back to its roots a little bit and apply some damage reduction rather than just applying damage bonuses? It seems back then when Tanks, hydras, goliaths (AA), dragoons, etc dealt less damage to light; and vultures, firebats, etc less to non-light, there was a lot more micro potential because armies don't die within a couple of seconds of a giant fight. Micro was a higher possibility in BW since our units didn't die to all the "terrible terrible damage" bonuses! It's ok to sacrifice run our zealots in first against a fleet of tanks because tanks didn't deal full damage to their armor!
On June 03 2010 15:43 whatthemate wrote: Turned out to be a noob turtling fest of 40 minutes. Zerg is not sim city its about mass bigger army first and taking initiative to attack.
I am one of the people who thinks mech is not imbalanced, but this is just lol. So wrong.
I'm a terran player and I gotta agree that mech is a little too good, and I also want to point out that late game terran's army not only beats zerg food for food but once we max out we can also sac a bunch of SCVs to free up even more supply while still being able to mine with Mules. Considering late game you'll often have 3-4 orbital commands you can almost survive on mules alone for minerals and just use SCVs for gas. If the zerg is really harassing well we also have the option of planetary fortress and the building armour and range upgrade which make turrets godlike (I get it almost every game v zerg, what else are you gonna use your ebay for if you're going mech?)
On June 03 2010 15:56 lu_cid wrote: So it's the thor that is OP now? Geez it's not even that good against air units. Only light air units that are clumped together.
Which.. is pretty much mutas for a long portion of the game before late 3rd tier tech in broodlords.
On June 03 2010 15:43 whatthemate wrote: AT OP, those replays didn't display anything. The one on Steppes of War, Sheth made a roach warren and ended up making no roaches before lair.
So many mistakes in Sheth's Low APM play. QXC is the better player. Mistakes spotted in Sheth 1. Natural expansion had ultra late gas econ. Extractors at natural came too late. 2. Too many zerglings at start hurt his economy. Built 16 zerglings and fell behind in economy. 3. Compare drone count to scvs. 36-33. Why bother playing zerg if you're gonna have only a 3 drone difference. 4. Lair came ultra late. 5.All tech buildings came ultra late.
Turned out to be a noob turtling fest of 40 minutes. Zerg is not sim city its about mass bigger army first and taking initiative to attack.
If army sizes are equal terran always win duh? Same in SC1 maxed out protoss > jaedong.
i'm sorry but you are an idiot, sheth was hands down the best zerg on USA server 2 months ago, and only reason he isn't now is because he was a bit inactive and stopped playing in tournaments. You aren't going to find any non-korean zergs that can do a better job vs that than sheth.
On June 03 2010 14:49 DooMDash wrote: Zergs just havent been playing creative enough. Honestly mutalisks are the key for staling long enough to do some great tech switches to throw the Terran off.
Yeah.. thats it, were not creative enough. I'm pretty sure that between all of the top Z players just about every variation has been attempted, some working better than others. At the end of the day it doesn't work.
Yes please you should really explain your theory to maka (T) who lost vs cool (Z) in a prize money BO5 tournament. Im sure he was just not paying enough attention considering that maka said quoute "We need to win to feed ourselves". Name one terran who won a tournament since patch 11? TLO lost TvZ BO% vs Sen with a mech strat he claimed it was unbeatable on EU server. Day9 even made a daily on how imba that strat was. Still Sen wtfpwnedkkthxbyebye him w/o too much trouble. But im sure you zerg guys who post here tried everything and did everything perfecly and Sen/Cool/Dimaga are just lucky to kill terrans in every tournament.
That was exactly my thought when TLO played Sen. I saw the daily right before that and Sen just totally demolished this strategy with very solid play.
I completely agree that the >currently< common strategies are getting beaten by that solid mech composition Terran uses. However I highly doubt that really "every" option is tested out properly in a perfect timing.
Also I have to disagree to those who claim "not whining" but saying basicly exactly the same like "what? my standard(!) tier 2 units dont kill a gas heavy all-kinds-of-mech composition so I have to buid tier 3 units to compete with them - oh my god".
With that being said - let's have a look at solutions (besides nerfing anything because that aint gonna happen any time soon):
Note: this is to the best of my knowledge...
Sen won his games by solid gameplay: he used queens to fend off any harassment by hellions plus they allow him to have larva capacity to keep his economy up. Furthermore a key point was map control - many zerg tend to use no overlords for spotting on the map because they fear getting supply blocked. However it comes down a lot to map control since many maps simply do not offer much space but rather a lot of chokes. If your army clusters in a choke tanks get extremly stronger. Besides that, abuse burrow since such gas heavy compositions do not allow ravens in most cases (otherwise its rather a benefit since it means less air or thor) and only scan as detection. Also I'd love to see a proper frenzy/ultra build being pulled of by professionals to see how it works.
But thats just my ideas.
Generally said I dont like how so many zerg players just give up after encountering a few tougher builds. Literally most of my games are against Terran for now, since people are to afraid to spend time changing their style and its much easier to blame blizzard.
I am happy to see a few more challenges in the game since it makes the game more awesome if someone suceeds with like 4 muta beating a thor, burrowed roaches ripping through tanks or a protoss geniously fending off a marauder push with forcefield and probes.
I do agree that mech is a bit OP and needs some fine (emphasis on fine) tweaking. But those two replays were a joke, and have nothing to do with current TvZ - the guy wasn't even trying. Early Hydras vs Mech? Really? Not opting to go for Spire tech at all, and on SoW, dropping it at 170 supply? If the point of those replays was to establish how much ground you can throw away at Mech, then they did their job.
On to the main point, I'm in favor of any testing, and Raelcun's idea might be interesting. Mech needs some fix, and if while at it, it maybe makes TvT more fun, then all the better.
I've been following this thread since it started and I've read a lot of garbage from people trying to defend "mech" not being broken.
I read "Look at Maka vs Check" lol Maka went bio three game's straight with a few tank support. "Zergs on top again" I don't think a terran went pure mech that whole tournament and the finals was ZvZ? Argument invalid much?
Then people talk about Sen vs TLO lol. TLO went bio with 2 tanks and mass vikings (and a few banshee's to harass)? TLO got raped.
With that said, neither of those players went pure mech. (Hellion/Tank/Thor/Viking/Raven) QXC's game was the ONLY game that showed how broken this match up was the best. LZ vs Moman was another good example.
People say drop, attempt dropping with sensor towers up and vikings patrolling the air. People say nydus, I want to see how bad a terran is to reacting to nydus networks (That overlord shouldn't even get close to terran's base) Don't run into the army, how the fuck do you engage at all then? You should of had muta air control - gl getting passed a few turrets and thors (show me a replay)
I'm just tired of nobody's talking about how the match up isn't broken, or it's too early to tell (might be) without ANYONE of these MFers showing their suggestions in a replay response of them doing it. Shit Drewbie (Terran player who knows this match up is broken) fucking called out everyone in this thread to 1v1 mech vs zerg and all the people defending had nothing to say.
With the rage aside, imo to make a drop viable what if overlords were undetected to sensor towers when carrying units.
On June 03 2010 15:25 Wr3k wrote: I am really starting to think this boils down to thor AA being too good. Mech wasn't OP when thor AA sucked. There should be some negative about making 10 tanks. In BW if you had a tank heavy force and Z went heavy mutas, you would lose. There was this relationship where muta>tank, goliath>muta, hydra>goliath, and tank>hydra. No such relationship exists in SC2 because thors AA is just too good.
It was a good relation too. And the person with the better micro always won that match. It seems like micro is now less significant in this match up now (at least for Terran) and it tends to show as armies grow in numbers.
Yeah, I made an entire post on the beta forums about why I think the Thor is breaking TvZ. Check it out and let me know if you agree.
As it currently stands siege tanks own on anything on the ground. This is how it should be. The tank is a relatively immobile, dedicated anti-ground unit, and it does a great job. With its fancy new AI preventing overkill the tank is even better than its brood war counterpart, and this is fine.
In SC2, when you build a force that is specialized into one role, such as anti-ground, anti-light, anti-armored, anti-air etc. it should also be weak against something else.
For example, the immortal fills its role very well as an anti-armored unit, yet is extremely weak against lings. The hellion is extremely strong against lings/zealots/hydras but is very weak against roaches, marauders or stalkers. The colossi is great against clumps of low hp ground units like MM or hydra/roach, but is weak against air. I'm sure we can all agree that units should be unique, and have specific roles that make them great for some purposes and not so great at others. The large majority of units in the game are exactly like this. They have a specific role, something they excel at.
Units form synergies with each other in many ways, and some have stronger synergy than others. For example, zealots and immortals work very well together because zealots are strong against lings, and immortals provide anti-armor fire support for the zealots. If you work sentries into the mix the force becomes even more effective at a variety of tasks. Each units strengths in combination form a cohesive unit which is better than one specific type of unit alone. If a unit is more specialized, it will have better synergy with other units. This can be illustrated with examples like marauder/hellion. Since the hellion provides anti-light and the marauder provides anti-armor the two mixed together can be insanely powerful against a mixture of light and armored units. Typically Terran units have the strongest synergy followed by protoss and zerg units due to their high degree of specialization.
If a unit is too strong at one or more specific roles, it can result in an insanely powerful composition. I previously mentioned hellion/marauder. Since a few hellions can kill vast numbers of zerglings, but are weak against armored, combining them with marauders forms a very strong all-around composition. These types of relationships can be dangerous if a certain unit composition is too good at multiple tasks. With the marauder and hellion this is not the case, since neither can attack air.
Enter the thor...
This role confused unit is quite good at multiple tasks including absorbing damage, dealing high dps to high hp ground targets, and even dealing with air units (more specifically light air).
Thors are in fact so good at killing lightly armored air units (i.e. mutalisks) that they can often kill several times their own value in mutalisks. This effect compounds in larger numbers, as 4-5 thors can easily kill 4x their value in mutalisks. When mixed with small numbers of marines, they become even more effective. I am beginning to think that they are too effective.
A mech force consisting of 3-4 thors, 10-15 marines, and 5-8 tanks is extremely effective at killing ground and air targets. In fact, this composition is not weak against any tier 1 or 2 zerg unit composition. The Thor is the reason that mech is overpowered against zerg. The only tier 2 unit that "counters" tanks is the mutalisk, and since a few thors can easily dismantle large numbers of mutalisks zerg simply has no answer to mechanized forces.
In SC1 there was a very interesting relationship between zerg ground forces and mech. In general: Tank>Hydra/ling Muta>Tank Goliath>Muta Hydra/ling>Goliath
This was great, because even though mech was quite powerful, zerg had a response. If the terran chose to make a tank heavy force, a mutalisk heavy force would be effective, and if terran chose a goliath heavy force, hydra/ling would be effective. Zerg was still quite cost ineffective at mech overall, but mobility and zergs booming economy typically made up for that fact.
In SC2 things are different. A large number of mutalisks cannot do any damage to a mechanized force. Additionally, marines are even better against mutas, and missile turrets have 240% the damage output against mutas as they did in SC1, for only 33% higher cost.
Imagine if the SC1 goliath was given extra damage and splash. You would have a situation where small numbers of goliaths could offset large numbers of mutas, allowing the terran to maintain a tank heavy force, and thus be extremely strong against anything the zerg could make. Combine this with a 240% increase to missile turret damage, and the mobile mutalisks wouldn't even be able to abuse the low mobility of the mech force.
Please nerf thor AA so that terran actually have to make more than 4-5 units to counter 20+ mutas. Terran weren't having severe issues with mutalisks prior to thor AOE being buffed, now things are just broken.
I find myself asking: "Why does the thor need to rape mutas so hard?" I really can't think of an answer considering how great marines and missile turrets are against mutas now.
i'm sorry but you are an idiot, sheth was hands down the best zerg on USA server 2 months ago, and only reason he isn't now is because he was a bit inactive and stopped playing in tournaments. You aren't going to find any non-korean zergs that can do a better job vs that than sheth.
drewbie root you will be forgotten like many other players trying to make a name for themselves in the beta.
same goes for sheth i spot many mistakes in his play. they are only arrogant just because they think have teamliquid backing them up. 2 months after release, you'll be forgotten and many of the players who didn't have access to beta will crush those who have a closed mindset(not discovering new strats) intent on swearing. You a revolutionist like flash or bisu?
its like saying the old savior/bisu/insert bonjwa is better than the current Flash which is false.
When you let time pass by, the younger generation undiscovered talent will arise to the top.
the best players of beta will be eliminated. How about when sc1 first came out, were they the best players of all time? Nope.
Why is this discussion only TvZ, isn't mech a bit (though not as much i agree) too powerful vs protoss either when combined with ghosts and vikings / turrets?
are you completely stupid man? please stop posting in here. 1 thor + 2 turrets > 10 muta 2 thor + 2 turrets > 15 muta 3 thor + 4 turrets > 30 muta Does that sound cost efficient to you ? Also if the terran upgrades his thors ( which he obviously will ) it will be even worse of a raping, oh yea and the building armor upgrade + turret range upgrade. lol.
Hi I'm just a nobody jumping into the topic, and I'm a zerg who thinks Terran mech is imbalanced against Zerg (so I'm not trying to be disagreeable), but I just want to comment on the numbers above. I've been playing around with a unit tester to practice different scenarios (I know it doesn't exactly represent actual gameplay). 1 thor + 2 turrets I can consistently beat with 9 mutas. 2 thors with 8 mutas 2 thors + 2 turrets with 11-12 mutas 3 thors + 4 turrets with 23 mutas ^Tested with 3-3 upgrades on both Mutas and Thors, Thors/Turrets both clumped and spread out (i.e. w/ and w/out muta's splash), and barely any micro on my part. This is of course done by flying the whole muta group over the current target, and not by attack moving, so that they never form a vulnerable arc.
The resource cost--in particular gas--for the Zerg is much higher than the Terran to win the above fights, but so long as it does take out all of his in-base defense, it may be considered tactically sound if it allows you to wipe out his workers or other key buildings, or force units to retreat from elsewhere on the map, overall weakening his position.
SCV can repair thors and turrets
I tested again just a few times, but I added 20 SCVs on autorepair. To defeat 3 thors + 4 turrets consistently the number went up from 23 mutas to 25-26. Not a big difference. 1 thor + 2 turrets went up from 9 to 15 mutas to counter the repairs, but how often will the thor already be surrounded by 20 scvs when you fly in? It takes time to decide if you need to pull the worker line and then actually do it. 2 thors + 2 turrets went up from 12 to 18 mutas. But again the thors were already surrounded by SCVs; in an actual base-raiding scenario, the mutas would kill the thors before the scvs even become a factor.
Mutas fare better against Thors than they're given credit; they just can't be controlled in the sc1 style.
i'm sorry but you are an idiot, sheth was hands down the best zerg on USA server 2 months ago, and only reason he isn't now is because he was a bit inactive and stopped playing in tournaments. You aren't going to find any non-korean zergs that can do a better job vs that than sheth.
drewbie root you will be forgotten like many other players trying to make a name for themselves in the beta.
same goes for sheth i spot many mistakes in his play. they are only arrogant just because they think have teamliquid backing them up. 2 months after release, you'll be forgotten and many of the players who didn't have access to beta will crush those who have a closed mindset(not discovering new strats) intent on swearing. You a revolutionist like flash or bisu?
its like saying the old savior/bisu/insert bonjwa is better than the current Flash which is false.
When you let time pass by, the younger generation undiscovered talent will arise to the top.
the best players of beta will be eliminated. How about when sc1 first came out, were they the best players of all time? Nope.
i'm sorry but you are an idiot, sheth was hands down the best zerg on USA server 2 months ago, and only reason he isn't now is because he was a bit inactive and stopped playing in tournaments. You aren't going to find any non-korean zergs that can do a better job vs that than sheth.
drewbie root you will be forgotten like many other players trying to make a name for themselves in the beta.
same goes for sheth i spot many mistakes in his play. they are only arrogant just because they think have teamliquid backing them up. 2 months after release, you'll be forgotten and many of the players who didn't have access to beta will crush those who have a closed mindset(not discovering new strats) intent on swearing. You a revolutionist like flash or bisu?
its like saying the old savior/bisu/insert bonjwa is better than the current Flash which is false.
When you let time pass by, the younger generation undiscovered talent will arise to the top.
the best players of beta will be eliminated. How about when sc1 first came out, were they the best players of all time? Nope.
That is a shitty argument considering we are talking about how Mech is OP right NOW. If you look back at SCBW there were some things that were completely broken and OP that didn't get addressed for years.
i'm sorry but you are an idiot, sheth was hands down the best zerg on USA server 2 months ago, and only reason he isn't now is because he was a bit inactive and stopped playing in tournaments. You aren't going to find any non-korean zergs that can do a better job vs that than sheth.
drewbie root you will be forgotten like many other players trying to make a name for themselves in the beta.
same goes for sheth i spot many mistakes in his play. they are only arrogant just because they think have teamliquid backing them up. 2 months after release, you'll be forgotten and many of the players who didn't have access to beta will crush those who have a closed mindset(not discovering new strats) intent on swearing. You a revolutionist like flash or bisu?
its like saying the old savior/bisu/insert bonjwa is better than the current Flash which is false.
When you let time pass by, the younger generation undiscovered talent will arise to the top.
the best players of beta will be eliminated. How about when sc1 first came out, were they the best players of all time? Nope.
are you completely stupid man? please stop posting in here. 1 thor + 2 turrets > 10 muta 2 thor + 2 turrets > 15 muta 3 thor + 4 turrets > 30 muta Does that sound cost efficient to you ? Also if the terran upgrades his thors ( which he obviously will ) it will be even worse of a raping, oh yea and the building armor upgrade + turret range upgrade. lol.
Hi I'm just a nobody jumping into the topic, and I'm a zerg who thinks Terran mech is imbalanced against Zerg (so I'm not trying to be disagreeable), but I just want to comment on the numbers above. I've been playing around with a unit tester to practice different scenarios (I know it doesn't exactly represent actual gameplay). 1 thor + 2 turrets I can consistently beat with 9 mutas. 2 thors with 8 mutas 2 thors + 2 turrets with 11-12 mutas 3 thors + 4 turrets with 23 mutas ^Tested with 3-3 upgrades on both Mutas and Thors, Thors/Turrets both clumped and spread out (i.e. w/ and w/out muta's splash), and barely any micro on my part. This is of course done by flying the whole muta group over the current target, and not by attack moving, so that they never form a vulnerable arc.
The resource cost--in particular gas--for the Zerg is much higher than the Terran to win the above fights, but so long as it does take out all of his in-base defense, it may be considered tactically sound if it allows you to wipe out his workers or other key buildings, or force units to retreat from elsewhere on the map, overall weakening his position.
SCV can repair thors and turrets
I tested again just a few times, but I added 20 SCVs on autorepair. To defeat 3 thors + 4 turrets consistently the number went up from 23 mutas to 25-26. Not a big difference. 1 thor + 2 turrets went up from 9 to 15 mutas to counter the repairs, but how often will the thor already be surrounded by 20 scvs when you fly in? It takes time to decide if you need to pull the worker line and then actually do it. 2 thors + 2 turrets went up from 12 to 18 mutas. But again the thors were already surrounded by SCVs; in an actual base-raiding scenario, the mutas would kill the thors before the scvs even become a factor.
Mutas fare better against Thors than they're given credit; they just can't be controlled in the sc1 style.
I didn't know that 2500/2500 of mutas beating 1300/600 worth of thor/turret was a good thing. Seems to me mutas get the right amount of credit as far as killing thors go. Which is almost none.
On June 03 2010 16:11 Merikh wrote: I read "Look at Maka vs Check" lol Maka went bio three game's straight with a few tank support. "Zergs on top again" I don't think a terran went pure mech that whole tournament and the finals was ZvZ? Argument invalid much?
Then people talk about Sen vs TLO lol. TLO went bio with 2 tanks and mass vikings (and a few banshee's to harass)? TLO got raped.
Yeah, it's like, these guys are complete scrubs for not going mech ! Or, they actually realised that it's a huuuge investment into something immobile, and difficult to play against heavy spire-play accustomed by the usual Roach gimmicks (drops/burrows). But yeah - hellions, tanks, upgrades, vikings, ravens, missile turrets, thors - easy to get on 1-2 bases.
On June 03 2010 16:46 lu_cid wrote: .... Yes, but then you kill much more value in tanks.
The problem is getting to that "then" part... If you're going pure mutas, the Terran is going to be a little smarter in investing in more AA. Even throwing excess minerals into marines will make it THAT much harder for the mutas to even deal damage.
On June 03 2010 16:11 Merikh wrote: I've been following this thread since it started and I've read a lot of garbage from people trying to defend "mech" not being broken.
I read "Look at Maka vs Check" lol Maka went bio three game's straight with a few tank support. "Zergs on top again" I don't think a terran went pure mech that whole tournament and the finals was ZvZ? Argument invalid much?
Then people talk about Sen vs TLO lol. TLO went bio with 2 tanks and mass vikings (and a few banshee's to harass)? TLO got raped.
With that said, neither of those players went pure mech. (Hellion/Tank/Thor/Viking/Raven) QXC's game was the ONLY game that showed how broken this match up was the best. LZ vs Moman was another good example.
People say drop, attempt dropping with sensor towers up and vikings patrolling the air. People say nydus, I want to see how bad a terran is to reacting to nydus networks (That overlord shouldn't even get close to terran's base) Don't run into the army, how the fuck do you engage at all then? You should of had muta air control - gl getting passed a few turrets and thors (show me a replay)
I'm just tired of nobody's talking about how the match up isn't broken, or it's too early to tell (might be) without ANYONE of these MFers showing their suggestions in a replay response of them doing it. Shit Drewbie (Terran player who knows this match up is broken) fucking called out everyone in this thread to 1v1 mech vs zerg and all the people defending had nothing to say.
With the rage aside, imo to make a drop viable what if overlords were undetected to sensor towers when carrying units.
AH! I knew haven't seen the games so I didn't know if they went mech or not. So that dissproves everyone who's been saying "sen has been raping xx terran player in a money tournament" when they didn't even go mech.
This discussion is zvt imbalance for mech being too strong not everything terran does. Bio I don't see as imbalanced, Mech is. I am wondering if the players who mentioned them watched the games or just saw the results and said it to try and make it seem as if mech was balanced when they didn't even do mech... Interesting.
you guys are moving away from raelcun's OP "terran mech in the lategame once they get full upgrades and sieged up and fully 200/200 with ravens and energy for spells you CAN NOT beat it. Now the thing is there should be no unbeatable strategy there should be no point at which you have to GG without fighting because you can't win. There needs to be a way to break a strategy with good control or good macro and after Sheth wound up suiciding a combined total of almost 20k minerals and 10k gas it's clear that macro isn't the way to go." what qxc did was split the map in half and not move out once the entire game, he made like 4-5 thors and 15+ tanks and then alll viking / raven, he had 0 plans for moving out, basically just played ONLY defense, and no amount of mutas can ever break it in the late game, and as long as the terran scouts properly in the mid game, and doesnt get suprised by the muta, then the t will NEVER lose vs mutas
I think the problem falls into the line of how Blizzard patched Terran over the weeks.
Infantry was heavily favored due to more cost efficient and faster to build compared to Mech.
AA was a slight issue for Terran (especially against Mutas), so they decided to give Thors the AA buff.
AFTER this buff, they wanted to buff tanks because they just weren't dealing enough damage with its splash.
Suddenly, we have two extremely cost efficient units that can deal with Zerg air and ground pretty well in the mid game. I think that if Blizzard were to first buff the tanks, they would've realized that the Thor AA didn't have to be so lopsided. Since people would've invested in more marines to go along with the tanks, and this would alone help deal with Mutas better. But since the Thor buff came first, we just have complete AA domination against Zerg. Blizzard needs to adjust the Thor a bit more because of that.
I admit I have not spent the time to read all 17 pages of this thread, but here are my thoughts on the problem and possible fixes:
1) Mech is also a rather powerful option against protoss. Late game tanks+ghost with emp and cloak does a very good job nullifying immortals and colosus with tanks.
2) Tanks can probably use a very slight dps nerf in the form of: - Reduced rate of fire, this may allow certain "fast" units such as zerglings to approach a line of tanks, or - Reduced AoE radius,which increases the amount of tanks required to create a "zone of death", or - Reduced damage, same as above, and also allows high health units to approach tanks before being melted away, or - Increase dead zone radius, which require tank users to pay a lot more attention to the positioning of their tanks, or - Nerf tank range in siege mode, which will allow neural parasite to safely mind control tanks (if zerg suicide a few overlords for sight), or - Increase the time it takes for tanks to siege and unsiege and further decrease their movement speed. This will create a much bigger window of opportunity for other races to catch the tanks out of position.
3) Thors+Vikings with Point Defense Drones makes an air counter to mech next to impossible. - Perhaps nerf thor anti-air damage. - I believe PDD to be a somewhat OPed of a spell (blocking next 20 missile attacks - that is a LOT of damage). An energy nerf to PDD can fix this. HMS can be buffed in exchange to make it a more attractive option.
4) Neural Parasite range increased, or maybe allow it to be casted while burrowed (this sounds OPed)
Watching many asian players, zergs have been doing really well against terrans.
PlayXP held recent tournament where the top zergs achieved multiple kills in a team battle (Prime vs oGS) against terrans and protosses.
And in world cup 3 terrans, 3 tosses, and 8 zergs advanced to 16 from the playoffs., with the top 4 being 3 zergs and 1 terran.
I think if terran mech was unstoppable the top terrans would be winning tournaments frequently against zergs using that strategy. But the real result seems to be otherwise.
Unless the american terrans and zergs here know starcraft2 much better than EU and Asia terrans/zergs.
And I noticed that a lot of casters are not very knowledgeable on the game as their fame masks them to be. I'm not saying that the specific caster here is not a great player, but I have noticed a lot of bad game analysis in the matchups that I'm familiar with. For example, a while ago, a caster was rooting on mass thors against smaller number of battlecruisers. And the caster was very surprised that bcs could take on thors. When thors do 6x4 damage to bcs. With say 3 armor on the bc that's 12 damage a shot to bcs. Even with full upgrades on the thor that's 24 damage against 3 armor on a 500 hp unit that can be repaired.
Personally, I've had games where ultralinghydraroach with infestors was able to break 10+ siege tank lines in long macro games. But in a lot of 2v2s I play a lot of zergs go pure hydraroach and 1a which melt to tanks.
On June 03 2010 16:57 cHaNg-sTa wrote: I think the problem falls into the line of how Blizzard patched Terran over the weeks.
Infantry was heavily favored due to more cost efficient and faster to build compared to Mech.
AA was a slight issue for Terran (especially against Mutas), so they decided to give Thors the AA buff.
AFTER this buff, they wanted to buff tanks because they just weren't dealing enough damage with its splash.
Suddenly, we have two extremely cost efficient units that can deal with Zerg air and ground pretty well in the mid game. I think that if Blizzard were to first buff the tanks, they would've realized that the Thor AA didn't have to be so lopsided. Since people would've invested in more marines to go along with the tanks, and this would alone help deal with Mutas better. But since the Thor buff came first, we just have complete AA domination against Zerg. Blizzard needs to adjust the Thor a bit more because of that.
I'd like to state they didn't buff tanks, they fixed the way splash damage worked for all splash dealing units. That change made tanks stronger. (Guess you could say that's a buff :D)
Splash damage now originates from the center of the target, rather than the impact location near the unit in order to maintain more reliable splash damage.
First people complain about terran going always bio. Terrans search for something else, and now people whine about it. EVERY single replay I saw where the Z lost vs a mech T, the Z just 1a'ed his army into the siegetank line from T, EVERYTIME. If mech is so powerfull, why don't we see the terrans dominate in tourneys?
On June 03 2010 17:06 lew wrote: First people complain about terran going always bio. Terrans search for something else, and now people whine about it. EVERY single replay I saw where the Z lost vs a mech T, the Z just 1a'ed his army into the siegetank line from T, EVERYTIME. If mech is so powerfull, why don't we see the terrans dominate in tourneys?
Do we want the ball vs ball back?
actually know what not worth the time if a mod would please delete this post I am done discussing this as there is no point anymore.
Ok, it seems like the whole thing about Terran mech is currently not different from other Beta stages, where people nearly instantly scream for nerf after some new strategy, or playstyle that has success appeared.
This is probably the reason, why Blizzard makes so many unnecesary balance changes back and forth to units and their stats. Its because it takes time to adapt. The metagame changed like 100x times during beta.
I really think the right path here is to try to think, play, adjust. Lets give it some time. Lets find constructive disscussion. Its wrong to just see 3-4 replays and then spend the rest of the day on forums spamming "Nerf mech, see? This replay prooves its imba, this one also"..
I remember a pretty long period, where Terrans were really screwd against those 4 gate all-ins, immortal pushes, etc.. This is no different.
Im open to see its hard for Zerg to beat lategame Mech. Also I might say its a bit imbalanced, but lets wait what the top Zergs after release can really do and than you can say, well.. Its not good, lets fix that. This is the only way to properly balance a game complex like Starcraft 2..
Also I think there is way more oppinions on this based on who plays what race.
On June 03 2010 16:57 cHaNg-sTa wrote: I think the problem falls into the line of how Blizzard patched Terran over the weeks.
Infantry was heavily favored due to more cost efficient and faster to build compared to Mech.
AA was a slight issue for Terran (especially against Mutas), so they decided to give Thors the AA buff.
AFTER this buff, they wanted to buff tanks because they just weren't dealing enough damage with its splash.
Suddenly, we have two extremely cost efficient units that can deal with Zerg air and ground pretty well in the mid game. I think that if Blizzard were to first buff the tanks, they would've realized that the Thor AA didn't have to be so lopsided. Since people would've invested in more marines to go along with the tanks, and this would alone help deal with Mutas better. But since the Thor buff came first, we just have complete AA domination against Zerg. Blizzard needs to adjust the Thor a bit more because of that.
I'd like to state they didn't buff tanks, they fixed the way splash damage worked for all splash dealing units. That change made tanks stronger. (Guess you could say that's a buff :D)
Splash damage now originates from the center of the target, rather than the impact location near the unit in order to maintain more reliable splash damage.
But in a lot of 2v2s I play a lot of zergs go pure hydraroach and 1a which melt to tanks.
lmao ^
I don't know what you mean by lmao but the truth is it doesn't matter what race you are, if you 1a anything you will lose to a competent player. Terran can 1a into P, P can 1a into Z, and Z can 1a into P, and in all cases the 1a-er will not be able to come out with a decent opponent
On June 03 2010 16:57 cHaNg-sTa wrote: I think the problem falls into the line of how Blizzard patched Terran over the weeks.
Infantry was heavily favored due to more cost efficient and faster to build compared to Mech.
AA was a slight issue for Terran (especially against Mutas), so they decided to give Thors the AA buff.
AFTER this buff, they wanted to buff tanks because they just weren't dealing enough damage with its splash.
Suddenly, we have two extremely cost efficient units that can deal with Zerg air and ground pretty well in the mid game. I think that if Blizzard were to first buff the tanks, they would've realized that the Thor AA didn't have to be so lopsided. Since people would've invested in more marines to go along with the tanks, and this would alone help deal with Mutas better. But since the Thor buff came first, we just have complete AA domination against Zerg. Blizzard needs to adjust the Thor a bit more because of that.
I'd like to state they didn't buff tanks, they fixed the way splash damage worked for all splash dealing units. That change made tanks stronger. (Guess you could say that's a buff :D)
Splash damage now originates from the center of the target, rather than the impact location near the unit in order to maintain more reliable splash damage.
But in a lot of 2v2s I play a lot of zergs go pure hydraroach and 1a which melt to tanks.
lmao ^
I don't know what you mean by lmao but the truth is it doesn't matter what race you are, if you 1a anything you will lose to a competent player. Terran can 1a into P, P can 1a into Z, and Z can 1a into P, and in all cases the 1a-er will not be able to come out with a decent opponent
On June 03 2010 17:06 lew wrote: First people complain about terran going always bio. Terrans search for something else, and now people whine about it. EVERY single replay I saw where the Z lost vs a mech T, the Z just 1a'ed his army into the siegetank line from T, EVERYTIME. If mech is so powerfull, why don't we see the terrans dominate in tourneys?
Do we want the ball vs ball back?
actually know what not worth the time if a mod would please delete this post I am done discussing this as there is no point anymore.
Well, if his post is worthless, then proove it by posting a replay of a zerg losing to mech and not 1a'ing his army into the siegetank line. I'm 100% sure you can't.
On June 03 2010 17:06 lew wrote: First people complain about terran going always bio. Terrans search for something else, and now people whine about it. EVERY single replay I saw where the Z lost vs a mech T, the Z just 1a'ed his army into the siegetank line from T, EVERYTIME. If mech is so powerfull, why don't we see the terrans dominate in tourneys?
Do we want the ball vs ball back?
actually know what not worth the time if a mod would please delete this post I am done discussing this as there is no point anymore.
Well, if his post is worthless, then proove it by posting a replay of a zerg losing to mech and not 1a'ing his army into the siegetank line. I'm 100% sure you can't.
If you weren't a terran player I might take you seriously. Don't know why you quoted my post though when all I said was I am done debating it :D.
The answer here doesn't lie in the mutalisk. The mutalisk has always been intended as a harrassment unit.
I mentioned earlier that Blizzard clearly wants the ultralisk to be the anti mech/marauder unit in conjunction with the infestor and speedling, similar to defilers and ultraling.
In the two games presented, neither take advantage of large numbers of 3/5 frenzied ultralisks backed up with plenty of speedlings and some well placed neural parasites. The Sheth vs Qxc game offered plenty of time and resources to try this.
I don't expect Blizzard will make any changes to mech until people try variations of this in high level play.
(note, I'm talking about a 200/200 army with 10+ ultralisks with ling and infestor support)
why do you insist on quoting the replay between sheth and qxc? drewbie? its just like saying how unfair in sc1 where maxed out 200/200 protoss with archons steam rolls zerg.
that replay shows nothing to prove anything. just as you said sheth was not playing on a daily basis. just watch the replay to see how afk and idle the larvae were? look at 5-6 minute mark. the problem with sheth is that he never changes his builds. he makes roach warren and too many zerglings and a spine crawler. just watch kasperskycup finals match game 6 sen vs tlo, sen lost because he done the exact same build, the greedy econ build, where you make 2 roaches and rest zerglings. this was countered by hellion. roaches ended up killing nothing, because hellions ran away. 2 roaches idle hurts zerg econ more than 2 idle helions because terran is gonan need it anyway.
Did you know reactored hellion build that qxc does with a fast expand(unsafe expand making CC like that and exposed), is completely countered by a super fast speedling all in? the natural CC can be taken out using mass banelings strat as demonstrated by high level korean zerg. a risky build but always works if you manage to surround hellions with speedlings(kill about 2 at least you win).
basically you get enough banelings to take out 2 bunkers+ CC. that's like 20 banelings. after that you get hydras you win.
what a joke
drewbie bm and top player? plenty of other guys out there that are better.
I'm gonna say that Raven's are the root of the problem in late game zvt.
PDD literally nullifies every weapon in the zerg arsenal. WTF. 15 vikings wouldn't be so bad... Broodlords pop if you're not careful with them, but at least corruptors and FG will make dancing vikings seem vulnerable.
Again... What makes the terran mech ball invincible in the later game is the raven. It's PDD. I've even tried gathering ovies in the middle, dumping creep, making tumours and SLOW pushing with 15+ spore crawlers towards the terran's base. But when they have 4-7~ Raven's backed up by thors and marines, nothing in the air will survive or deal any damage.
I don't like to weigh in on "broken" arguments because I don't think, honestly, 99% of people are even qualified to make the statement that a certain race is broken. I am a hypocrite, however, so I'll weigh in...
I believe that, in a TvZ game, if the T plays borderline-perfect (no obvious mistakes), it is impossible for the Zerg to win. If a T plays a good game, he is slowly expanding with tanks/turrets, has thors, and has depots built around his main to prevent a nydus. Sensor towers prevent a drop. It doesn't matter if the Z out-bases you initially, because he can't ever attack or harass you.
As I said, I hate using myself as a personal example because my play is far from perfect, but I'll use one game of mine...
I'm playing a very solid T named Trump. His play is far from perfect, as is mine, but I think that, assuming the T doesn't make any stupid mistakes, every TvZ pure-mech game will reach the point where I'm at at ~ the 25 minute mark. He has his half of the map covered in sensor tower/turret/thor/siege, with a fleet of ~12 vikings flying around. I have some broodlords, infestors, hydras, corruptors and roaches, but there's nothing I can do.
I finally figured out (too late, unfortunately), that the only way Z can break this kind of mech is to suicide their ground army and build pure air. Pray he doesn't have too many thors, and you may be able to do it.
Honestly, to fix ZvT, I think it would be really neat if the supply cap on the game were either lifted to 400 or removed completely. It would punish the Z for sitting in his base all day, and reward the Z for taking so many expos while the T just turtles.
If anyone has any suggestions for how to win earlier than when I finally suicided my ground army and converted to air, let me know.
People wanting Dark swarm back are either toally lost or havent played the game.
With dark swarm terran would instantly loose to banelings! There wouldnt even be a chance...
Not to even mention that Terran doesnt have melee units...
But I believe something should be done. Against Zerg tanks are too good (only BL can save them). But against protoss this isnt the case. So it probably need to be some kind of buff for zerg that doesnt affect pvz to much.
On June 03 2010 17:31 rtano wrote: People wanting Dark swarm back are either toally lost or havent played the game.
With dark swarm terran would instantly loose to banelings! There wouldnt even be a chance...
Not to even mention that Terran doesnt have melee units...
But I believe something should be done. Against Zerg tanks are too good (only BL can save them). But against protoss this isnt the case. So it probably need to be some kind of buff for zerg that doesnt affect pvz to much.
You're pages behind :D hehe
I had a suggestion that was overlooked though. Hive tech upgrade that allows overlords carrying units invisible to sensor towers (overlords doing nothing act as normal units moving across the map) gives zerg the ability to overwhelm the terrans immobility and actually "can" use nydus/doom drops versus T. Give's zergs back the chance to just outplay terran players.
Okay moving on, terran mech in the lategame once they get full upgrades and sieged up and fully 200/200 with ravens and energy for spells you CAN NOT beat it.
Mech is extremely vulnerable to a solid ground army + infestors before a tank ball is amassed. Even though Maka has done a Rax-Expand, and both bases are running, the zerg was able to equalize the game with infestor+roach attack.
The zerg did lose the game, but this doesn't apply to mech because 1. Zerg got mutalisks and no corrupters, which means that thors will rape the only AA support the blords will have 2. The final unit composition for Maka was NOT mech, he had thor+marine+viking. His midgame tank-centered army was wiped out clean by mutalisks and broodlords.
On June 03 2010 16:44 Wr3k wrote: I didn't know that 2500/2500 of mutas beating 1300/600 worth of thor/turret was a good thing. Seems to me mutas get the right amount of credit as far as killing thors go. Which is almost none.
Zerg generally have more resources to work with than the other races, but while you can put a price on the units themselves as if you were making a trade, can you put a price on the tactical advantage of high-speed flyers that can rapidly strike anywhere on the map, hit both ground and air, and force your opponent to divide his army to deal with the threat in his base? Terran mech is very slow-moving on account of the thors, siege tanks, and ravens. This is where zerg has two advantages against mech: a versatile, fast-moving unit (Muta), and the ability to rapidly swap army compositions to counter your opponent's current lineup.
A combination of Mutas and Corruptors are superior to vikings; the fear of engagement comes from fighting them alongside the Thors and Ravens. We must remember that Thors are incredibly slow units. A hit on a base, whether it be a main or an expo, and taking out the defensive thor(s) and turrets (I provided the minimum numbers for a kill, now you just need to overkill it), gives the highly-mobile Mutas free reign to do as much damage to economy and production as possible, and unlike an ovie drop or Nydus harass, the Mutas have a good chance of escaping before reinforcements arrive. For what reinforcements do we need to be on the lookout with a mech build? It will be Vikings first since they're the fastest, and your air force could(should) be able to deal some fair damage to them before fleeing when the Ravens arrive, followed by any Thors that are pulled from the front lines or other expos. Now the siege tanks and expos are much more vulnerable to an air attack--use the advantage. The more air harass, the more anti-air the Terran needs, and the less tanks he'll be producing, which may yield a more favorable battle. The irrational fear of Thors is what's holding back much of the muta vs mech play. Just don't control them like you're playing SC1 and they'll do way better against thors than zerg ground does against mass tanks.
The answer here doesn't lie in the mutalisk. The mutalisk has always been intended as a harrassment unit.
Indeed it is a harassment unit, but harassment is not limited to poking a few workers and then giving up when you see turrets and thors. Anything that forces your opponent to divide his forces to deal with you is harassment and a major advantage for you.
I'm fine with bringing back overkill for siege tanks, I'm sad to see all the push breaking mechanics gone.
However, I'd then want siege tanks to cost 150/100 and 2 supply instead of 150/125 and 3 supply, and I'd like to get tank micro back too (see the video in the project micro thread).
On June 03 2010 09:44 Artosis wrote: i was actually going to write a very similar article this morning. might still do it. you are pretty much spot on, though.
anyone who argues with his points doesn't understand what's going on!
That stab versus Blizz was uncalled for ;D Your (he's) right ofc.
Actually I really think, there is nothing wrong with tanks in TvZ. They basically serve the same purpose lilk they did in SC1. In large numbers tanks make it hard for the Zerg Player to just build Hydras and Roaches and force him to counter them with Mutas. In my opinon these counterunits are one of the main reasons why SC1 and SC2 make so much fun to play. You can always adapt and you can always force the enemy to adapt to your units and switch to another unit composition again. In SC2 there is only one problem: Thors And no, I don't think Thors are overpowerd. I just think they take away some of the fun and some of the potential the TvZ matchup has to offer. In my opinion the way Thors work right now, completely takes away the speed and micro involved in the game. Because of the Splashdamage Thors are more than just a counter to Mutas. They make it basically impossible to use the Mutas for harassing purposes and therfore slow down the speed of the game, especially because they are so fast to get. In SC1 Terran Players would tech to science vessels, which would take longer than it does getting Thors in SC2. These Vessels were really strong against Mutas in SC1, but they had to use energy for there irradiate. Thors once build, are the perfect counter to Mutas, and therefore leave almost no space for harassment what so ever. In know this isn't SC1 and SC2 is a new game. Like I sad at the beginning I donnot even think mech is overpowerd, I just think changing the Thor a little bit would make this great game even better. Here are some Ideas:
1. Give the Thor unit energy but just for its splash attack. Maybe giving it a charging animation just like the Battlecruiser in SC1 before it was shooting its Yamato Gun. This could be quite short, but this way a skilled SC Player could save some of his Mutas. The animation is optional.
2. Give the Thor unit a siege mode. Just like the tank but in its siege mode it can only attack air units, while in its normal mode just being able to attack ground units. The thor wouldn't be abel to move while beeing in siege mode. Therefore the terran player needs to build more thors to cover its base, if he doesn't want to build turrets or marines. But moving around would make it vulnurable.
2.b. Just like 2. but the siege mode lets the thor use his splash damage attack, while the unsieged mode would allow the thor to do normal damage to ground and air units.
Important in all variations is, that there is a way for Zerg Players to use there Mutas again. Not only would this add some more micro to the matchup but it would also make it a little bit more aggressive.
I wanted to open my own thread about this for a long time, but could not figger out how to do it. I hope my post is understandable, as english is not my native language.
Seriously... I have no idea why they buffed the Thor to do splash damage vs Air in the first place. It's not like Terrans were losing to mass mutas every game in the first place, when everyone was massing bio balls, which did perfectly fine vs mutas already.
I mean.. notice how they took out most of the other forms of anti-air splash... e.g corsair, valkyrie, because once you reached a critical mass of these units it simply wasn't worth making air anymore for the opponent. They even removed the phoenix overlord ability.. so why the hell did they add splash back in again on the Thor?
On June 03 2010 19:31 teamsolid wrote: Seriously... I have no idea why they buffed the Thor to do splash damage vs Air in the first place. It's not like Terrans were losing to mass mutas every game in the first place, when everyone was massing bio balls, which did perfectly fine vs mutas already.
no. without thor splash Zerg would just mass muta evrygame ,harrass contain for ages with his 30 mutas and once the t moves out with his mass rines vs mass muta he instaloses cause 15 banelings rape his whole marines ball.
i still think people are jumping the gun way too fast here. 2weeks and its UNBEATABLE SUPER BROKEN! when other matchups where worse for months.
still see so many zvt wins with drops, broodlords,pure outmacro etc etc even on maps which are super horrible against mech(and there are quite some in this crapmappool).
imho people should wait abit and try to adapt before we have a huge balance whine post in general forums.
p.s. pls show me where those unbeatable terrans beat all the zergs and tourneys? cause somehow most the TvZs ive seen on vods/reps recently were lost by Ts... and it doesnt matter how "crushing" their 2 wins were when they lose the series 2-3...
On June 03 2010 19:31 teamsolid wrote: Seriously... I have no idea why they buffed the Thor to do splash damage vs Air in the first place. It's not like Terrans were losing to mass mutas every game in the first place, when everyone was massing bio balls, which did perfectly fine vs mutas already.
no. without thor splash Zerg would just mass muta evrygame ,harrass contain for ages with his 30 mutas and once the t moves out with his mass rines vs mass muta he instaloses cause 15 banelings rape his whole marines ball.
i still think people are jumping the gun way too fast here. 2weeks and its UNBEATABLE SUPER BROKEN! when other matchups where worse for months.
still see so many zvt wins with drops, broodlords,pure outmacro etc etc even on maps which are super horrible against mech(and there are quite some in this crapmappool).
Really now? That's news to me.. I don't remember ZvT being imbalanced before the Thor buff patch at all. Just look back on the reactions people had for the patch notes...
It was basically like this: T players "Oh, neat, another way to counter mutas now. Whatever, I'll continue massing my MMMs". And Z players were "Meh, I'll just keep doing my roach/hydra army like I always do".
And other matchups were not worse for months. Wtf are you talking about? Only P was slightly favored vs T at one point, which led to several P nerfs and T buffs. Who knows what it's like now.
On June 03 2010 18:57 Thor Change wrote: Actually I really think, there is nothing wrong with tanks in TvZ. They basically serve the same purpose lilk they did in SC1. In large numbers tanks make it hard for the Zerg Player to just build Hydras and Roaches and force him to counter them with Mutas. In my opinon these counterunits are one of the main reasons why SC1 and SC2 make so much fun to play. You can always adapt and you can always force the enemy to adapt to your units and switch to another unit composition again. In SC2 there is only one problem: Thors And no, I don't think Thors are overpowerd. I just think they take away some of the fun and some of the potential the TvZ matchup has to offer. In my opinion the way Thors work right now, completely takes away the speed and micro involved in the game. Because of the Splashdamage Thors are more than just a counter to Mutas. They make it basically impossible to use the Mutas for harassing purposes and therfore slow down the speed of the game, especially because they are so fast to get. In SC1 Terran Players would tech to science vessels, which would take longer than it does getting Thors in SC2. These Vessels were really strong against Mutas in SC1, but they had to use energy for there irradiate. Thors once build, are the perfect counter to Mutas, and therefore leave almost no space for harassment what so ever. In know this isn't SC1 and SC2 is a new game. Like I sad at the beginning I donnot even think mech is overpowerd, I just think changing the Thor a little bit would make this great game even better. Here are some Ideas:
1. Give the Thor unit energy but just for its splash attack. Maybe giving it a charging animation just like the Battlecruiser in SC1 before it was shooting its Yamato Gun. This could be quite short, but this way a skilled SC Player could save some of his Mutas. The animation is optional.
2. Give the Thor unit a siege mode. Just like the tank but in its siege mode it can only attack air units, while in its normal mode just being able to attack ground units. The thor wouldn't be abel to move while beeing in siege mode. Therefore the terran player needs to build more thors to cover its base, if he doesn't want to build turrets or marines. But moving around would make it vulnurable.
2.b. Just like 2. but the siege mode lets the thor use his splash damage attack, while the unsieged mode would allow the thor to do normal damage to ground and air units.
Important in all variations is, that there is a way for Zerg Players to use there Mutas again. Not only would this add some more micro to the matchup but it would also make it a little bit more aggressive.
I wanted to open my own thread about this for a long time, but could not figger out how to do it. I hope my post is understandable, as english is not my native language.
And again SC2 is a great game already!!!
Without Thors splash there is absolutely no way to beat a zerg as mech, mutas are already effective enough against mech tbh, it forces you to have thors all over the place and to have like 4 or 5 of them with your tanks so they don't get sniped. Note that spreading several groups of mutas soften the damage of thors a lot. Also your ideas for fixing it is not really what is needed ; Thors (and whole mech play btw) is immobile enough, why make it even more immobile ?
Sure, a whole bunch of marines could maybe deal with mutalisks, but then you don't have the hellions to engage fights and protect tanks from ground.
I'm not saying mech is not too strong against Z, ofc it is, but this is really not the way to fix it. Nor is the IA change, which will make tanks worthless.
There was a time when ppl used to say 200/200 terran mech in sc1 was impossible to beat as well. Geez this is a beta for crying out loud, i'd be more worried if the balance was perfect already.
On June 03 2010 19:31 teamsolid wrote: Seriously... I have no idea why they buffed the Thor to do splash damage vs Air in the first place. It's not like Terrans were losing to mass mutas every game in the first place, when everyone was massing bio balls, which did perfectly fine vs mutas already.
no. without thor splash Zerg would just mass muta evrygame ,harrass contain for ages with his 30 mutas and once the t moves out with his mass rines vs mass muta he instaloses cause 15 banelings rape his whole marines ball.
i still think people are jumping the gun way too fast here. 2weeks and its UNBEATABLE SUPER BROKEN! when other matchups where worse for months.
still see so many zvt wins with drops, broodlords,pure outmacro etc etc even on maps which are super horrible against mech(and there are quite some in this crapmappool).
Really now? That's news to me.. I don't remember ZvT being imbalanced before the Thor buff patch at all. Just look back on the reactions people had for the patch notes...
It was basically like this: T players "Oh, neat, another way to counter mutas now. Whatever, I'll continue massing my MMMs". And Z players were "Meh, I'll just keep doing my roach/hydra army like I always do".
And other matchups were not worse for months. Wtf are you talking about? Only P was slightly favored vs T at one point, which led to several P nerfs and T buffs. Who knows what it's like now.
do you realise at what stage of the beta thors got the splash? its basicly ages of gameplay evolution back.
people know now how AMAZING banelings are vs bio. and if you dont see how terrible tvz would be with the marines as the only antimuta unit then really ive got nothing more to say.
and really, be happy when you force thors. they take up the gas for tanks, are lovely NP targets,are slooow and dont "hardcounter" anything but just are a very good allround unit.
the "omg thors! now i cant use mutas!" is just so wrong. matter of fact when playing T in ladder (500+ atm)the vast majority in TvZ losses and playing Z vast majority of ZvT wins come from heavy muta play to control the map and mass expo.but that requires smarter play then massing roach/hydra and 1a...
I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
I don't think its likely to be changed as it would require effort on the programmers part of adding in tick based AI just for the tanks and blizzard are notoriously against programming anything but the bare minimum in complexity.
Dark Swarm or some AoE dmg reduction/negation spell is the only effective solution but the very core of late game zerg attack(dark swarm) was removed and given to both its enemies in Ravens Point Defence and Sentrys Guardian Shield.
Maybe Ultras taking dmg from an enemy should should produce a guardian sheild like aura cloud which only allows a set amount of dps to be able to effect covered units.
Also reduction of Point Defence or making it targettable to destroy or neural it.
I wonder what Sen thinks of this, he seems to beat terrans pretty easily with his fast extractor one base muta build. But then again he never lets the terran get out that 200/200 mech army. Or at least not in the games I've seen.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Would you mind to elaborate? How can a zerg player screw up, or, better: how not to screw up? How do you beat mech?
I don't think it's the tanks that are making terran mech too strong I think it's Thors. 10 range splash dmg AA is too strong. Tanks wouldn't be such a problem if mutas could actually be used to kill them. The way it is now all terran needs is a couple Thors and any amount of mutalisk you made is wasted resources. Terran should have to invest more resources to counter a large amount of mutas. Thors are just way too cost efficient.
Terran never feel weak when I play them. There's never one point in a game where I think I have an edge and I can push it. Can't use lings because he walls. Can't attack mid game because he has siege tanks. Can't muta harass efficiently because he made 2 Thors. Can't win late game because 200/200 mech is unstoppable.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle. Forcing the zerg player into one strategy of trying to break a timing window is not an acceptable level of balance because it means the terran player knows its coming and are frequently able to abuse defensiveness. In the Steppes game qxc left half his tanks at home and Sheth still could not kill his tanks with that many vikings and ravens on the field it was nearly impossible for him to get any air especially with excellent sensor tower usage and the slow speed of broodlords.
As it stands right now TvZ with mech the zerg has to play 100% no mistakes while the terran is able to make many many man small to medium mistakes and still win in many instances. This does not sit right with me as balanced at all.
On June 03 2010 20:22 Attica wrote: I don't think it's the tanks that are making terran mech too strong I think it's Thors. 10 range splash dmg AA is too strong. Tanks wouldn't be such a problem if mutas could actually be used to kill them. The way it is now all terran needs is a couple Thors and any amount of mutalisk you made is wasted resources. Terran should have to invest more resources to counter a large amount of mutas. Thors are just way too cost efficient.
Terran never feel weak when I play them. There's never one point in a game where I think I have an edge and I can push it. Can't use lings because he walls. Can't attack mid game because he has siege tanks. Can't muta harass efficiently because he made 2 Thors. Can't win late game because 200/200 mech is unstoppable.
this is where most Z are wrong. you can muta harrasscontain just fine. and you can easily pick of 1-2 thors with a decent bunch of mutas.
he has to move out with 2-3 thors less to support his turrets against the mutas which makes it VERY hard to have a force which can beat the Z in the openfield esp since he can easily grab a 3rd till you can even think of moving out.
i agree that micro wise it is more demanding for the Z once it gets late. but thats the same for TvP or PvZ.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle. Forcing the zerg player into one strategy of trying to break a timing window is not an acceptable level of balance because it means the terran player knows its coming and are frequently able to abuse defensiveness. In the Steppes game qxc left half his tanks at home and Sheth still could not kill his tanks with that many vikings and ravens on the field it was nearly impossible for him to get any air especially with excellent sensor tower usage and the slow speed of broodlords.
As it stands right now TvZ with mech the zerg has to play 100% no mistakes while the terran is able to make many many man small to medium mistakes and still win in many instances. This does not sit right with me as balanced at all.
spoilered to make the post less huge. spoilered to prevent spoilers ->
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle. Forcing the zerg player into one strategy of trying to break a timing window is not an acceptable level of balance because it means the terran player knows its coming and are frequently able to abuse defensiveness. In the Steppes game qxc left half his tanks at home and Sheth still could not kill his tanks with that many vikings and ravens on the field it was nearly impossible for him to get any air especially with excellent sensor tower usage and the slow speed of broodlords.
As it stands right now TvZ with mech the zerg has to play 100% no mistakes while the terran is able to make many many man small to medium mistakes and still win in many instances. This does not sit right with me as balanced at all.
spoilered to make the post less huge.
wouldnt you call altitude gameone idra vs tlo a macro victory?
Where he won with mass corruptor vs vikings? The lack of ravens abusing PDD is the reason why he lost his viking force. PDD means if the zerg fights there they lose and since it's up to the zerg to break the terran at that point many times the terran can force fights or even just with a mass of ravens cast PDD every time they engage. With the slow firing rate of corruptors PDD performs amazingly well as well as HSM if they do not move in clsoe to the vikings allowing for more shots.
Theres a reason why you won't find top level zerg games where they went mass corruptor vs viking raven they already know it won't work because of PDD.
i think the +10 hp boost on siege tanks was really uncalled for but in general i think ppl r overreacting to the power of mech. the odds in a game of tvz r pretty even now while 3 patches ago or so it was ridiculously much in favor of zerg. maps like stepps of war will always favor terran heavily because that map is designed so much for the terran race, it got nothing to do with game balance as long as they use maps like stepps of war or incinitration zone in the map pool
On June 03 2010 20:28 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: In the Steppes game
Using Steppes of War to show TvZ is imba is like using Neo Requiem or Battle Royale in Broodwar to show something is imba.
Morrow, I think they removed Incineration Zone from mappool already.
So you're going to completely ignore the fact that sheth with his full army couldn't take qxc who left half his tanks in his base? This shouldnt be the case no matter the map, qxc had a better economy in the steppes game than he did in lost temple and defended repeated maxed armies while there were consistantly a full group++ of tanks sitting idle in his base with the armies of Sheth barely able to kill even a tank in most of the engagements trading an entire army for that one tank. Wow gj bro doesn't matter what map we're talking about qxc was in a position where no matter where sheth attacked he had it covered cuz he had a mobile airforce covered with sensor towers and tanks in prime positions locking down all the ground choke points. IF sheth went air he's raped by viking/raven abuse + sensor tower. If he goes ground tanks tear him apart doesn't matter what map this is qxc played the map but it was the same story on LT as well. Once it gets to that point what can he do? It was clear he didn't have an answer by both games seeing as he even asked after game 5.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle. Forcing the zerg player into one strategy of trying to break a timing window is not an acceptable level of balance because it means the terran player knows its coming and are frequently able to abuse defensiveness. In the Steppes game qxc left half his tanks at home and Sheth still could not kill his tanks with that many vikings and ravens on the field it was nearly impossible for him to get any air especially with excellent sensor tower usage and the slow speed of broodlords.
As it stands right now TvZ with mech the zerg has to play 100% no mistakes while the terran is able to make many many man small to medium mistakes and still win in many instances. This does not sit right with me as balanced at all.
spoilered to make the post less huge.
wouldnt you call altitude gameone idra vs tlo a macro victory?
Where he won with mass corruptor vs vikings? The lack of ravens abusing PDD is the reason why he lost his viking force. PDD means if the zerg fights there they lose and since it's up to the zerg to break the terran at that point many times the terran can force fights or even just with a mass of ravens cast PDD every time they engage. With the slow firing rate of corruptors PDD performs amazingly well as well as HSM if they do not move in clsoe to the vikings allowing for more shots.
Theres a reason why you won't find top level zerg games where they went mass corruptor vs viking raven they already know it won't work because of PDD.
isnt that a bit deep into the theorycrafting assuming you have the huge gas and more starports suddenly for the ravens? also if we go heavy theorycraft isnt the danger always there of NP on the ravens which would spell like instant gg? and wouldnt such heavy air comittmend(viking+ raven soaks up like ALL gas) result in beeing super vulnerable to a simple "50 larva roachling go!" switch? not to mention that it can mainly only be used in defensive situations in air battles since you can force and run from fights so easy?
and wasnt idra already way way ahead when most of the viking/corrupter stuff was going on? with like 60 larva stockpiled and 2k/2k in the bank?
as said i dont super disagree with anything.and i agree that Z needs better control lategame. i just think that people are jumping the gun here way too fast.would be a great thread if it was for discussion how to beat it. i jsut dont agree with making a "THIS IS BORKEN! NERF NOW!" thread already.
I did not read all the posts, but I had a game where I outlasted 2 terrans (my partner died/dropped) because they were so immobile they had no chance at taking any expos against my replenishing mutalisks/zerglings.
On June 03 2010 20:28 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: In the Steppes game
Using Steppes of War to show TvZ is imba is like using Neo Requiem or Battle Royale in Broodwar to show something is imba.
Morrow, I think they removed Incineration Zone from mappool already.
So you're going to completely ignore the fact that sheth with his full army couldn't take qxc who left half his tanks in his base? This shouldnt be the case no matter the map, qxc had a better economy in the steppes game than he did in lost temple and defended repeated maxed armies while there were consistantly a full group++ of tanks sitting idle in his base with the armies of Sheth barely able to kill even a tank in most of the engagements trading an entire army for that one tank. Wow gj bro doesn't matter what map we're talking about qxc was in a position where no matter where sheth attacked he had it covered cuz he had a mobile airforce covered with sensor towers and tanks in prime positions locking down all the ground choke points. IF sheth went air he's raped by viking/raven abuse + sensor tower. If he goes ground tanks tear him apart doesn't matter what map this is qxc played the map but it was the same story on LT as well. Once it gets to that point what can he do? It was clear he didn't have an answer by both games seeing as he even asked after game 5.
Oh No Flash went 14CC, and Jaedong couldn't bust 1 tank, a wall and 2 bunkers with 20 hydras, Tanks are imbalanced, SCVs are imbalanced, also marines and walls. Let's remove everything from the game.
Oh wait.
Also very convenient of you to ignore the fact that sheth had terrible army composition, did not use lings to soak up damage and decided to play no rush 20 against a TERRAN, letting T take 3 UNCONTESTED BASES. Also the fact that there was pretty much NO airforce for the first 15 minutes of the game.
Most of the players listed here are from the root clan and have regular contact with each other, meaning their discussions could be biased.
That's basically your interpretation on what zerg is allowed to do. That's not your game you prolly won't understand why Qxc believed he deserved to win. Have you asked him if he ever lost to a zerg? You're saying map doesn't matter - which clearly it does.
Terran players who think that's its powerful in the above list need to substantiate their arguments. TLO has already offered to challenge.
Zerg players want to dictate how the game is meant to be played- No Rush 20 minutes therefore if I play macro game I should always win. This is basically how all zerg players want it. They want to be defensive macro instead of constant aggression. once again Artosis also needs to substantiate his point by providing high quality replays of where he was overwhelmed by perfect mech play instead of theorycrafting and raging over his losses on the asian server.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Would you mind to elaborate? How can a zerg player screw up, or, better: how not to screw up? How do you beat mech?
I would be very interested to read the response aswell, and if this is something I can be able to do even as a casual player against a Terran of equal skill and APM.
Actually, I would love to see the challenge being accepted by several players (and I don't doubt that TLO would be able to show us how its done).
We could call it "TLO's how-to-beat-mech Showmatches" where TLO plays against a series of top-level Terran-players. It would all be done in one livestream and casted by Day9.
On June 03 2010 20:35 MorroW wrote: i think the +10 hp boost on siege tanks was really uncalled for but in general i think ppl r overreacting to the power of mech. the odds in a game of tvz r pretty even now while 3 patches ago or so it was ridiculously much in favor of zerg. maps like stepps of war will always favor terran heavily because that map is designed so much for the terran race, it got nothing to do with game balance as long as they use maps like stepps of war or incinitration zone in the map pool
This. I wonder why you are listed as in favour of the imba cries.
Maps right now take away the disadvantage terran mech has, the immobility. Most of them are small and that makes easy for the terran mech ball to be everywhere. The thing is Thors are good (and maybe their range is bigger than it should be) but mutas still beat the crap out of a terran tank push and you can harass. In SC1 would you let a terran get 200/200 and wait for him to move? That seems to be the criteria for this post. Only games where the zerg lets T get full supply count for discussion. Dont you think that if you let the terran get there then you either should have a 200 army already and a ton of extra larva for really fast reinforcements or be smarter to win? If you think about zerg their army shoulnt fight an even supply battle in most cases, isnt their purpose to overwhelm the enemy with bigger numbers? So arguing that a max supply game favours a race that is supposed to win in those conditions isnt a bit the wrong thing to do?
Also most zergs should take a closer look at mutas! They hurt so much when well microed and kept away from thors
Just my opinion. I've played both P and T in beta and my biggest problems were always against zergs that did more than just roaches or hydras
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle.
I usually go for long macro oriented games, I start with ling infestor try to grab a third base and then tech up to ultralisks who do SO much damage against mech. also drop upgrade for overlords is essential.
its basicly like in broodwar. Stall time with ling + defiler. So you can get your ultras out and then you will be fine.
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle.
I usually go for long macro oriented games, I start with ling infestor try to grab a third base and then tech up to ultralisks who do SO much damage against mech. also drop upgrade for overlords is essential.
its basicly like in broodwar. Stall time with ling + defiler. So you can get your ultras out and then you will be fine.
Interesting. So your basically saying that Blizzard fixed Ultras with patch 14, and that they are the counter to mech?
I've been thinking about this matchup and I would like to ask you what you think about Missile Turrets. I believe that along with Siege Tanks and Thors these are one of the reasons Terran is so strong.
Ok, so Tanks are immobile and Thors are slow, but it is the missile turrets that cause the Terran to turtle so well. A mobile mutalisk army, or some drops might try to outmaneuver the Thors, but harrassment is completely shut down the moment terran builds 5-6 missile turrents around his base.
It seems to me that these strong anti-air defenses actually make the terran feel safe about pushing. Thors rape mutalisks, but any chance a good maneuvering Zerg might have is negated by the fact that Missile Turrets are so deadly.
Building only a couple in the mineral line simply means the terran can park their thors outside their natural and relax while the turrets keep him harrass free. A small number of mutalisks is completely ineffective against 2-3 Turrets and only if you push for more you might have a shot of taking them down. Not to mention they can be upgraded with extra range and armor.
So only if you commit to harrassing with multiple mutas will the Thors be needed to go back into the main. Harrassment is denied in this case as well because the Turrets buy sufficient time for the Thors to get back.
Same goes for Overlord drops. 1 Turrent can kill more than 1 overlord until the drops are done.
TL;DR: Missile Turrets are too strong against Mutalisks
I'm very curious how TLO would play against a defensive mech build, like the one QXC was using against Sheth. Might shed a lot of insight and new perspectives on the discussion.
This sounds like something that should at least be tried. I'm not sure it would even be enough though. I think that to really make a difference they'd also have to reduce the firerate on the tanks.
On June 03 2010 11:06 Wayra wrote: I think tanks are underpowered, they should have an alternate fire mode that shoots bullets for close range and air like in halo. They should make missile turrets also attack ground and have +3 armor so Terrans can more easily defend against mutas. In addition give ghost a special ability like...nerve gas that kills any biological unit in range, kinda like the emp except for zergs. In addition have vikings be able to plant aerial mines, that work as spider mines but only affect air units. Oh and have the nuclear bombs dropped by banshees and increase the radius and power of nuclear bombs so that it 1 hit any biological unit. Because common, radiation should be lethal to all biological units...in addition, make nuclear craters radioactive for 273 sec. Meanwhile, no creep can grow on it.
I also think that helions are too week, infernal lighter should come already upgraded. Biological units that get hit are on fire. While on fire, it cannot attack. Units on fire slowly dies. In addition, units that are on fire can spread the flames to adjacent units and structures. I think that will add an interesting aspect to the micro for zergs. Have the helions a larger spread or least attack faster. But that would make it slightly imba, so maybe scratch the last idea. Instead have helions fire do extra dmg buildings. I mean it makes sense cause fire should destroy buildings.
Oh and protoss voidrays are wayyyy too imbalanced, have it's range nerf to 2, and make it slower than the viking by .2112
IMO top zergs will eventually adapt and this doesn't really call for a terran nerf or zerg buff. TLO claims he can handle mech and is offering matches against top terrans. Koreans don't really seem to have trouble as well. Also remember how big a role maps play.
I'm sure everyone remembers this, and how there were threads about how mech was imbalanced on other maps as well. There was also a thread on TvZ stats with the winrate at 65% for a few months. Then zergs realized how to play against it and mech play almost completely disappeared.
The winrate for terrans isn't even as high for this situation. Where are these imbalanced terran users who should be winning tournaments? On top of that, it took broodwar players months before mech started getting raped silly and terrans stopped doing it every game.
How long has full mech in sc2 been around? A whole..... month? Not even.
the biggest problem with mech in my opinion is that it is nearly impossible to harass it or to throw it off balanced. A good anti-air force can be implemented in a very strong ground army, the fact is that some unitcompositions are able to annihilate a 200/200 zerg ground army OR a 200/200 air army in the same time. At least it seemed to me, i never actually went for 200.200 air cuz it s really hard to pull that off, but i lost battles when my army was heavily air and better upgraded, at least half of his force were tanks and still lost easely to the vikings-thors (possibly marines too)
In BW i loved playing against mech from the very first day it appeared on iccup, the had to defend and to aim for a good timing and close to perfect composition when moving out (it had to move out sooner or later). Now a terran player can win the game without ever atacking a single time just confortably take expos and strenghten his position to a point where it could rape 2 or 3 200/200 armies one after the other.
Why do ppl automatically blame everything on the Balance?
I'm sure if ppl would play Z VS Terran-Mech in SCBW the way they do it in SC2, they'd say it's totally freakin' IMBA too, because you can't really win just encountering the Terran in big Army-VS-Army-Battles - that's just not how it works.
As soon as you see Zerg using strong timing-attacks, great macro, Drops, Nydus-Worms, Speedling-Counterattacks, Burrow etc., Zerg definitely has a fair chance against Terran-Mech, but Zerg just seem to think that they can win in straight-up battles.
Try winning against Mech in SCBW when they have lots of Tanks+Goliaths and Mines all over the place - it's the exact same Problem as in SC2 and it can be resolved by using the same strategies as in SCBW:
- Good defense against Hellions (same as Vultures in SCBW) early on. - Heavily Macroing at the right time, which is even stronger in SC2 as in SCBW. - Counterattacking, Drops and generally abusing Zerg movement-speed and the slow Terran Mech Army. - Having the right Air and Ground Unit-composition to throw off Terrans that have too many Tanks and too less Anti-Ait or vice-versa.
I don't see why ppl even care about balance this early in the game - they should adress important stuff, like gamemechanics, B.Net.2.0 etc. I'm 100% sure ppl will find strategies to defeat Terran Mech even without further Balance-changes, so why is everyone whining? Let thousands of ppl play thousands of games and come up with different strategies first, before blaming everything on balance.
That's IMHO a pretty short-sighted and even arrogant approach, as if you ppl already know how the game should and can be played. Well, guess what - we're all still noobies in SC2...
*Edit: Besides, it's all about the Maps now. tiny little Maps are good for Mech and that's basically every Map in SC2 so far... Think about how freaking IMBA Zerg will be in larger Maps, with stuff like Nydus-Worm, incredibly fast armies, incredibly strong Drops and easier time to macro up...
On June 03 2010 21:42 De4ngus wrote: IMO top zergs will eventually adapt and this doesn't really call for a terran nerf or zerg buff. TLO claims he can handle mech and is offering matches against top terrans. Koreans don't really seem to have trouble as well. Also remember how big a role maps play.
Where do you get that koreans aren't having trouble. Aren't IdrA and Artosis at the top of the asian server? IdrA was like #4 or 5 pre-patch...
I want TLO versus a lineup of the best mech players. I will never say imba again if somebody shows me play that actually works. Lz vs. Moman is the most depressing thing I've seen, and I'm starting to wonder here.
Moman abused mobility. No, let me take that back. Be bent mobility over and had his way with it the whole game. Lz moved tanks right on top of a group of roaches without detection. He lost two expansion at a key point in the game. I mean, againt any other matchup, how did Moman not do enough to win? If protoss suffered losses like that against zerg, they would have already gg'ed. And what makes it even worse, Lz basically says after the game that Moman lost because he didn't try to base trade at the end. What? A zerg can dominate the entire midgame and the only way to have a chance at victory is base trade? I just don't get.
I feel like the biggest problem around mech balance right now revolves around the Thor. Think about some of the unit interactions in Brood War - Like the Thor, Terran had access to effective splash damage, this being Irradiate and Valkyries, which served the same purpose as a stone wall to Mutalisks; once they were in play, investing further in mutas was basically throwing away resources. Now think about where in the tech tree these things show up:
Why is that important? A few reasons. Investing in Vessels and/or Valkyries not only took a good deal more time and resources, but having them would seriously detract from the actual strength of the mech push in Broodwar. So the general trend, if the zerg went for air, was to get Goliaths instead. Goliaths were certainly good against Mutalisks, but they didn't totally negate their presence - they could remain in play as a limiter to the Terran, if his tank count was too high, he would be punished for it. Likewise, if the Goliath count was too high, the typical zerg hydra army would be stronger against it. It was a fine dynamic, and it made for relatively balanced games.
Going back to Starcraft II, not only does the Thor come out early - but it hugely reinforces the ground strength of the mech push while negating air. Once you have one or two with a few SCVs to repair, going for lair air is no longer viable, and Terran can happily commit to tank heavy builds without worry. Right now, there's no risk involving in getting Thors. If the zerg isn't investing in air, you still have a unit with huge hitpoints and ground attack. Tanks are good against Zerg ground, and that's always been the case, and it probably won't change, and air should remain a viable option for dealing with it - at least earlier on in the game. Really, the easiest way to fix this without butchering the unit is moving the Thor up in the tech tree.
Is mech as bad as people claim it is right now? Probably not. Before Hive, its lopsidedly strong against more or less anything Zerg can do. Once (if) Zerg gets to hive tech, accompanied with roaches/drop, a lot of options open up as far as dealing with it, and it can play on a lot more even ground with Terran. Broodlords/Corrupter/Roach works fine against typical Mech play; and requires a heavy commitment to vikings to deal with. But really, the game is still developing, and Terran just seems a lot more 'finished' in terms of the options tech tree in comparison to Zerg right now.
On June 03 2010 22:20 UnderTowed wrote: I still think Roach+Hydra+Infest works fine...
How?
Last time I checked, Terran mech still steamrolls through any Zerg army despite the latest changes. Doing a counter-attack doesn't work since Terran will just continue the steamroll.
I really think the root of the issue is Terrans can too easily make themselves muta-proof. Turrets got their buff to do an asinine amount of damage to the mutalisk then Thors got their buff to do an asinine amount of damage to mutalisk with splash. I think if thors got their splash removed this entire issue would resolve itself. That way you could easily move your mutas in overtop his tank line to pick them off to lower the 'critical mass' then move in with your ground army. The way it stands right now you can pick off MAYBE two tanks, probably more like one when there are 3-4 thors standing around.
Grant you, Terran will start to turret up near their siege tanks after the change. I'm fine with that. That is completely immobile. You can't move a turret. You can medivac a Thor and have him be all places at once.
Sigh. Mech is not broken vs Zerg. It's the exact same situation as in Brood War, where a heavily fortified Terran base is impossible for Zerg to break. LUCKILY FOR ZERG THEY HAVE MAP CONTROL FOR AN HOUR BEFORE TERRAN CAN MOVE OUT, LOL. Zerg can literally take every exp on the map without fear. Terran, despite this perceived imbalance, is STILL not doing as well as either Zerg or Protoss, and the best you can come up with is "there are no good Terran players". These examples of mech imbalance are just terrible. Zergs not powering hard enough, throwing inferior armies at Terran from bad angles, not tech switching frequently enough, etc. Take the map and force Terran to move out before he's comfortable! Then punish him. It's not rocket science. Sen and plenty of others can do it. Why can't you? For every "mech is imbalanced" replay (where apparently MoMaN qualifies as a top player to be used as an example) I can easily provide 15 where Terran mech simply gets crushed by solid Zerg play. Nobody even seems to realize that Terran can't attack Zerg either in these games, because if T is not perfectly positioned they will lose. Idiots throwing shit at T for an hour is evidence of imbalance? Get real.
It really hurts me hearing all the T players saying "of course tanks melt all ground units, USE AIR!" Clearly that's the case, but does that make it right? Who decided T should be absolutely unbeatable on the ground? They weren't unbeatable on the ground in BW and they had tanks then.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Let's make it happen. iCCup TV presents: The Little One vs. Mech??
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Let's make it happen. iCCup TV presents: The Little One vs. Mech??
I really hope you guys will make it happen, not much time left
I've been thinking a huge amount, and why not just give Infestors any of the below: Infestors +50hp faster energy regen or consume smaller energy requirements for spells / higher starting energy cheaper gas cost 125gas or 100gas faster infestation pit build time faster upgrade times/merge upgrades
This could make the TLO ling/infestor delay the push out to secure your own 3rd much more accessible for all of us that aren't TLO. Then as we all have it as a solid strategy against mech and things evolve the price/buffs to infestor could be tweaked out if needed.
Or faster lair upgrade time/faster spire build time. Or even more crazy nerfed hp ultra to tier 2 and upgrades on tier 3 for hp/armour. Queens using energy to speed up buildings could be so cool too.
Has anybody tried using ultra with frenzy in patch 14? According to blizzard this should be the the counter to terran mech. I guess if ultrras stil suck bad ass, blizzard should consider changing the armor type of the ultra so that it did not take extra dmg from tanks.
On June 03 2010 23:10 TheLittleOne wrote: give me an oponnent, a resonable time and I will be there. My time is rather limited atm but I am sure we will a way!
As soon as you see Zerg using strong timing-attacks, great macro, Drops, Nydus-Worms, Speedling-Counterattacks, Burrow etc., Zerg definitely has a fair chance against Terran-Mech, but Zerg just seem to think that they can win in straight-up battles.
Did you read the other threads about this? Drops, Worms etc. require your opponent to leave himself vulnerable. No or not enough missile turrets. No sensor tower etc. As Idra put it, its not a good strat to rely on your opponents shortcomings.
Plus, I strongly disagree with the rest of your post. SC2 is not like SC1 when it comes to terran mech. Tanks no longer overkill, their auto-aim will prevent that. They are MUCH stronger than they were in BW.
Im not trying to say terran mech needs to be nerfed to the ground, but if we're talking about it, please do not compare apples to oranges. SC2 is not BW. What was balances in BW is not automatically balanced in SC2.
TLO, I'm now part of your fan club. Because even though I think mech is a bit overpowered endgame I'm glad a terran who thinks otherwise is willing to play some more games vs this style and then talk about it ^^
P.S. (Would love to see QXC vs. TLO) They both have 3 letter names even, how much more epic could it get?
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I am breaking a leg for the few people saying that mech is infact not overpowered at all. You can count me as T and Z. Because i play TvZ but, when faced with a Terran I started playing alot Zerg again now. And I feel like I only have problems against mech if I really screw up or when facing a very hard opponent.
I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Wow. This is one of the reasons TLO has so many fans So baller!
I think allowing Infestors to cast while burrowed could help balance this out. Just burrow 3-5 Infestors into parasite range of the tanks. You can cause them to blow themselves up really fast because the AI always targets mind controlled units last, but if there are none of YOUR units present (Infestors are burrowed) then the tanks will start blowing themselves up really fast. The Terran must be watching his army very closely or he could lose a lot of tanks really quick.
Another idea would be to change the AI so that it targets mind controlled units as a priority, forcing the victim to have to micro to prevent too much damage to his own army and making parasite more worthwhile in dangerous fights.
In the meantime, splitting up all your mutalisks and attacking the few Thors will take them out without many losses and then the tanks are easy pickings.
Im sorry PacketOverflow, but this is probably the funniest idea Ive found here.. Not only that would be countered by single Raven, or Turrets, which both are now used cos of burrowed Roach. It would break the whole game probably, like - instantly..
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle.
I usually go for long macro oriented games, I start with ling infestor try to grab a third base and then tech up to ultralisks who do SO much damage against mech. also drop upgrade for overlords is essential.
its basicly like in broodwar. Stall time with ling + defiler. So you can get your ultras out and then you will be fine.
Now I def wanna see the match cause this is something I haven't seen any zerg try before...but if anyone would be willing to try a new strat it would be TLO
One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
Any match versus TLO needs to have the terran playing straight-up, with all strats available, from marine/scv cheese, to MMM+tanks, to mech. Unfortunately that makes for alot more games to "prove" anything, and we have like no time.
Edit: To clarify, I'm saying that the zerg player cannot be allowed to "cheat," because knowing what the opponent is going to do without having to scout and/or prepare for possible early all-ins/pushes is not a realistic game.
I think that the best way to solve the mech problem is to make muta more viable verses terran.
Instead of thor doing splash damage, it should fire at 1-4 targets, like the multishot ability from warcraft 3, and maybe get a small damage buff. This would have the added benefit of aiding in TvT, since the thor would be quite viable against massed vikings, where it currently isn't because vikings spread so much. Another benefit I see is that, where the thor isn't as powerful against muta, the terran will be required to supplement his mech forces with some marines, or else build turrets on his tank lines. I really think this could work.
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
Any match versus TLO needs to have the terran playing straight-up, with all strats available, from marine/scv cheese, to MMM+tanks, to mech. Unfortunately that makes for alot more games to "prove" anything, and we have like no time.
how is that diff from any other ladder game when u KNOW the terran's gonna go mech if you're Z...the point is to show that the strat is beatable which people claim its not. Also TLO has discussed the strat he uses so whoever he plays has the same advantage
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
Any match versus TLO needs to have the terran playing straight-up, with all strats available, from marine/scv cheese, to MMM+tanks, to mech. Unfortunately that makes for alot more games to "prove" anything, and we have like no time.
how is that diff from any other ladder game when u KNOW the terran's gonna go mech if you're Z...the point is to show that the strat is beatable which people claim its not. Also TLO has discussed the strat he uses so whoever he plays has the same advantage
You don't know. I was overcompensating for mech and lost to an all-in marine push last night. I felt like a f*&%$ng noob.
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
Any match versus TLO needs to have the terran playing straight-up, with all strats available, from marine/scv cheese, to MMM+tanks, to mech. Unfortunately that makes for alot more games to "prove" anything, and we have like no time.
how is that diff from any other ladder game when u KNOW the terran's gonna go mech if you're Z...the point is to show that the strat is beatable which people claim its not. Also TLO has discussed the strat he uses so whoever he plays has the same advantage
You don't know. I was overcompensating for mech and lost to an all-in marine push last night. I felt like a f*&%$ng noob.
well you should've scouted better then sry ...obv if you see 1/1/1 its some kind of mech build, multiple barracks = bio. Not really that hard to figure out
There's a little variance that can be tricky (is the terran going mech, biomech, or 1/1/1) and on 4 player maps sometimes you may get unlucky and not get in before wall-off, but for the most part it's pretty clear. Either way, if Zerg players can just see some stable strategy that works they can at least have something to work on and adapt to be safe vs other builds as well.
All I saw was the rax with no addon, depots, and a couple marines when I checked his ramp. Had I also sacced an overlord, I would have seen 3 more rax, but I didn't. Do most people sac an overlord early?
Edit: And yes, I scouted his position last and could not get thru the wall-in.
On June 03 2010 10:30 Louder wrote: More brood lords / corruptors / nydus into main/expansions
I agree with This, I don't have problems with mech as zerg. I saw Ret own the shit out of mech with roaches/speedlings and blings. Then he just tunneled the roaches into the Terrans mineral lines and forced a gg. I don't think Its the tanks. I think its more not letting shit happen. Not letting you opp get ahead etc.. you can't just sit there and let the Terran build up. Get skill and stop crying about everything.
On June 03 2010 23:51 shiftY803 wrote: All I saw was the rax with no addon, depots, and a couple marines when I checked his ramp. Had I also sacced an overlord, I would have seen 3 more rax, but I didn't. Do most people sac an overlord early?
I see most people sac an OV vs T nowadays....I think its worth it myself to avoid a situation where you lose to an all-in like that
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
Any match versus TLO needs to have the terran playing straight-up, with all strats available, from marine/scv cheese, to MMM+tanks, to mech. Unfortunately that makes for alot more games to "prove" anything, and we have like no time.
Edit: To clarify, I'm saying that the zerg player cannot be allowed to "cheat," because knowing what the opponent is going to do without having to scout and/or prepare for possible early all-ins/pushes is not a realistic game.
It doesn't really matter, the op is actually pointing out that mech is broken against Zerg. Ok, fine. Then just let's see a series from TLO in ZvT, just normal series, T can do whatever he wants, but as in the current state of the game mech is the most effective in TvZ that's what his opponent will be doing anyway. Sure we're talking about mech vZ but it doesn't FORCE the T in this kind of showmatch to go straight for mech.
On June 03 2010 23:51 shiftY803 wrote: All I saw was the rax with no addon, depots, and a couple marines when I checked his ramp. Had I also sacced an overlord, I would have seen 3 more rax, but I didn't. Do most people sac an overlord early?
I see most people sac an OV vs T nowadays....I think its worth it myself to avoid a situation where you lose to an all-in like that
Yeah it sucks, but if you have that little information you probably should do it. At the very least you should realize you have no scouting information and try to do something a little more safe. Having lings+blings is something that should do alright, speedlings are always useful and later on you can use the blings in drops. This is especially true if you see many marines on the ramp as early on a lot of mech builds seem to cut marines for hellions.
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
.
The whole premise of this threads argument is that Mech is NOT winnable, under any circumstance, in the late game.
Denoting "late game" means that the opponent WILL know that the Terran is going mech.
So, I really don't understand your apprehension here? It was obvious in the matches posted, the zerg KNEW the T was full mech LONG before the game ended, in fact, in both games, they knew a few supply armies before the end of the game (They had plenty of time to rebuild anything they wanted.)...The PREMISE of the OP was that EVERYTHING is ineffective.
Now are you trying to say that mech is exploitable if you do proper scouting?
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle.
I usually go for long macro oriented games, I start with ling infestor try to grab a third base and then tech up to ultralisks who do SO much damage against mech. also drop upgrade for overlords is essential.
its basicly like in broodwar. Stall time with ling + defiler. So you can get your ultras out and then you will be fine.
win.
im glad tlo made that bw reference, thats exactly how i feel about tvz. things aren't imba cause you can't beat them.
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
.
The whole premise of this threads argument is that Mech is NOT winnable, under any circumstance, in the late game.
Denoting "late game" means that the opponent WILL know that the Terran is going mech.
So, I really don't understand your apprehension here? It was obvious in the matches posted, the zerg KNEW the T was full mech LONG before the game ended, in fact, in both games, they knew a few supply armies before the end of the game (They had plenty of time to rebuild anything they wanted.)...The PREMISE of the OP was that EVERYTHING is ineffective.
Now are you trying to say that mech is exploitable if you do proper scouting?
Doesn't that defeat your entire argument?
Of course mech is winnable. If the zerg player is better, or if he just eventually wins. Broken doesn't mean 100-0. Broken could mean 55-45, or 65-35, whatever. Zerg players won't ever stop saying imba until something is proven to work 50-50, skill being equal.
Edit: To clarify, I'm saying you can change your early build and decision-making if you know what the opponent is doing. Like against P, zerg has to always worry about 2-gate pressure. What if you knew, for a certainity, that he was going to do one gate->core. Well, then just go ahead and throw down that early hatch without even scouting. This is starting to be a dumb argument, I just wanted to get people thinking a little bit.
On June 03 2010 23:42 shiftY803 wrote: One thing I think is a problem in a "mech vs. zerg showmatch" is that the zerg player enters the game KNOWING the terran is going mech. That is ridiculous and changes the game completely.
.
The whole premise of this threads argument is that Mech is NOT winnable, under any circumstance, in the late game.
Denoting "late game" means that the opponent WILL know that the Terran is going mech.
So, I really don't understand your apprehension here? It was obvious in the matches posted, the zerg KNEW the T was full mech LONG before the game ended, in fact, in both games, they knew a few supply armies before the end of the game (They had plenty of time to rebuild anything they wanted.)...The PREMISE of the OP was that EVERYTHING is ineffective.
Now are you trying to say that mech is exploitable if you do proper scouting?
Doesn't that defeat your entire argument?
Of course mech is winnable. If the zerg player is better, or if he just eventually wins. Broken doesn't mean 100-0. Broken could mean 55-45, or 65-35, whatever. Zerg players won't ever stop saying imba until something is proven to work 50-50, skill being equal.
Well nothing will ever be 50/50 strictly because of map imbalances...some races and matchups will always be slanted on certain maps just as it was in BW. I think one of the main probs with mech actually is the fact that a lot of maps currently favor terran with small chokes and distances..I see zerg have a lot more success on Metalopolis which is the most wide open map than on something like Steppes of War or LT
Question vs mech do you play long macro games or go for timing attacks? This thread was intended to be about the fact that vs mech you can't macro you have to break the terran earlier and for many of the macro players like Sheth or Idra this means they are forced to play out of their chosen playstyle.
I usually go for long macro oriented games, I start with ling infestor try to grab a third base and then tech up to ultralisks who do SO much damage against mech. also drop upgrade for overlords is essential.
its basicly like in broodwar. Stall time with ling + defiler. So you can get your ultras out and then you will be fine.
do you have any replays you could show us with this strat? cause I'm really curious to see how you executed this and to know if the terran was just plainly sucking or most zergs are just complaning for notting. To be honest... at some point I had much success with ultras but now... seems that terran has found a way around ultras
Okay I thought SC2 is a RTS game. We are the COMMANDER giving COMMANDS to units,right? But they're not fat ham bags without brains. They have their own,little minds which make them know what they need to do. What would You do if You saw a tank with small force of infantry? Kill infantry and laugh at tank? Yeah,tanks are so weak,who cares,RIGHT? Tanks are something to be feared of in real life. People know what THEY SHOULD TARGET FIRST. Bunker with heavy machine gun? WE NEED TO TAKE IT DOWN TO ADVANCE. Tank? WE NEED TO TAKE IT DOWN SO WE CAN ADVANCE. Infantry with Anti-tank weapons? WE NEED TO TAKE THEM DOWN SO OUR TANK WILL REMAIN UNHARMED. Are people mindless slugs whose don't know what they should do? They can't count how many mortar rounds they should shoot to clear a bunker? Of course they'll always shoot one or two more,but damn not ENTIRE SUPPLY. If You want to make Tanks in SC2 mindless slugs whose don't know with what they fight,how they should fight and what they should target,OK. Just make supply cap 50,so everyone can damn control them right. No problem in SC1? Yeah,because other units did not have their own "minds". SC2 should be a next-gen RTS. Not a step-back.
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
ahh I would like to play vs your mech
damn where is iCCup.Diamond when you need him!! edit: lol right below me
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
ahh I would like to play vs your mech
Let's make it happen along with TLO vs. mech. Let's do a Zerg vs. Mech event!
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
ahh I would like to play vs your mech
I just had a nerdgasm. Sen and TLO are two of my favourite players to watch. Much respect to these hero zergs
If we could get oGs.Cool in on this too my mind would assplode.
On June 03 2010 13:20 drewbie.root wrote: you are wrong iEchoic, put sen vs qxc or me, he will lose 100% no chance, put any zerg up ok? its stupidly imba
ahh I would like to play vs your mech
Let's make it happen along with TLO vs. mech. Let's do a Zerg vs. Mech event!
This! Sen and TLO vs Mech? LOL nice :D...Make this happen!
Go Sen, go TLO! (Yes I've been playing terran lately so go team that shows theres no imba in ZvT!)
Oh and Maka plays a really solid mech and Cool beat him so we're going to see the Zs win and show theres no imba in mech right? :D
I think that Tanks need a different type of firing priority, Ultras need to be stronger somehow or cost less food or something.. they just get eaten up so fast even with 8-10..
I don't see how this "discussion" is still ongoing, if you want to sit on your ass and play a passive macro game without the slightest adaptation to your play, then throw half of the maps resources worth of units at a force that specializes in strong defense... and then make claims of imbalance? You guys need to give it more time before you start claiming imba matchups.
Has anyone considered that T players mech because its (so far) the safest and most effective way to play against zerg?
Consider the maps, most of them are small and have many narrow choke points that mech can brilliantly take advantage of, if the playing field allows for a certain type of play style, then smart players will abuse the shit out of it.
One last thing to think about is Terran Bio against Zerg. TLO (hes the first top player I've seen do this, I don't know if hes the first however) has shown some incredible ling/speedling/bling/infestor use against Bio. I'm sure there are countless ways to defeat that style of play while still playing bio, likewise, I'm sure there are countless ways for Zerg to play against Mech.
NOTE- If my post is poorly organized I apologize, I started last night but I went to sleep before I finished it.
ROFL, tanks refuse to over killing!?! wow, imba... I had no idea that was the case.....man I so overlooked that, no wonder the damaged seemed so godly and impossible to get close. Terran are too strong
I think the one thing that really makes Terran OP is their several vision options. Turrets, Ravens, Scans, and Sensor Towers are way too many options for Terran to know where and what their opponent is doing. This poll is simple and I want to know what everyone else thinks about it. Lol let's be honest. Being able to create a unit that can see 1/6 of a 2 player map, is just like having a xel' tower protected in your base. Lol I know I'm going to get some hate for this but this is how I feel about them.
This is not fair, sen and TLO is so much better than all the other terrans on the table for this z vs mech show down, it would result in one sided rapes, let's put Maka on the table then maybe we have a better representation of what Terran is truly capable of with mech.
and yes like TLO said ultras are the counter, it works fine as long as you put 4 ultras in melee range of bunch of tanks, each ultra does 40 damage all have splash damage, so all the tanks get own after 1 swipes from 4 ultras as they each splash all the tanks near. Drop them with overlords if you have to, it works try it.
What qualify me agree agreeing with TLO's advice? I tested this with my friends and my friends are good, also I did beat Chill + kennigit 1vs2 and i got replay to prove it
On June 04 2010 01:36 rei wrote: What qualify me agree agreeing with TLO's advice? I tested this with my friends and my friends are good, also I did beat Chill + kennigit 1vs2 and i got replay to prove it
From what I hear it would actually be harder to beat chill 1v1 than to be chill and kennigit 1v2
How about instead of screaming for nerfs they just fix ultras's an give them a roll vs mech? kind of pity the damn things when they die before they even land a single hit lol.
On June 04 2010 01:36 rei wrote: This is not fair, sen and TLO is so much better than all the other terrans on the table for this z vs mech show down, it would result in one sided rapes, let's put Maka on the table then maybe we have a better representation of what Terran is truly capable of with mech.
Is it's as imba as they claims they could take some games. One of the terrans seems pretty sure of this.
The people claiming Mech is beatable and not OP are Terran players content with 1A'ing their ball of metal death into any Zerg and insta-winning. Don't give me shit like "Oh, but we are immobile and we rely on positioning." Every map is a fucking fish bowl made of nothing but choke points. You hit a button and your army becomes invincible. That sure does take skill.
Yeah, it's beatable, but the Zerg player has to play absolutely perfectly, be at a constant 140 APM, do dozens of things correctly, harass constantly, capitalize on any mistakes made by the Terran player, be ahead economically, and only then will maybe barely win.
Meanwhile the Terran player can sit at 30 APM, macro up ez mode, push out and win. He doesn't have to react to anything the Zerg player does, except build a few missile turrets. Why the hell should he win when he does so much less than the Zerg player?
All these high level replays tell us nothing, because the game is played by tens of thousands of people that aren't that good. Yeah, a few dozen Zerg can beat it. But there's tens of thousands who can't. So your answer is "Get better?" Maybe you should have taken your own advice when it came to Void Rays huh?
On June 04 2010 01:36 rei wrote: What qualify me agree agreeing with TLO's advice? I tested this with my friends and my friends are good, also I did beat Chill + kennigit 1vs2 and i got replay to prove it
From what I hear it would actually be harder to beat chill 1v1 than to be chill and kennigit 1v2
haha, kennigit didn't drag Chill down in that game, in fact he and Chill attacked my expo the entire game killed it few times before I finally manage to single handily wipe out kennigit's mutas and then proceed to own Chill before my teammate even move out of his base.
Sorry Grimjim, but dont you think its a bit too early to make such as statement? This game is not even released and you talk like you have played it for like 5 years.. Its just funny to read, really. Im pretty sure you will speak differenty in like 3-4 months.. It just blows my mind to see so many people blaming about pathetic imbalance and they literally serve you whole matchup in like 5 sentences and than scream for imbalance. Jesus christ, just stop that..
On June 04 2010 01:43 Grimjim wrote: The people claiming Mech is beatable and not OP are Terran players content with 1A'ing their ball of metal death into any Zerg and insta-winning. Don't give me shit like "Oh, but we are immobile and we rely on positioning." Every map is a fucking fish bowl made of nothing but choke points. You hit a button and your army becomes invincible. That sure does take skill.
Yeah, it's beatable, but the Zerg player has to play absolutely perfectly, be at a constant 140 APM, do dozens of things correctly, harass constantly, capitalize on any mistakes made by the Terran player, be ahead economically, and only then will maybe barely win.
Meanwhile the Terran player can sit at 30 APM, macro up ez mode, push out and win. He doesn't have to react to anything the Zerg player does, except build a few missile turrets. Why the hell should he win when he does so much less than the Zerg player?
All these high level replays tell us nothing, because the game is played by tens of thousands of people that aren't that good. Yeah, a few dozen Zerg can beat it. But there's tens of thousands who can't. So your answer is "Get better?" Maybe you should have taken your own advice when it came to Void Rays huh?
Pathetic.
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
I don't recall a BW game where the zerg player let the terran have equal bases/equal gas the whole game and won. So I don't get why zerg should be able to fail to out-expand their opponent and win in SC2.
That said, I agree that T3 zerg is crap right now, and minor buffs to the Ultralisk aren't going to change that.
From SC1 to SC2 both Tanks and Zerglings got AI buffs. Tanks shoot smarter and Zerglings run better.
However the Tank got a DPS buff and a splash buff, while the Zergling got a DPS nerf. Additionally the combined bunched Zergling AI + no tank overkill = Zerglings are fucking useless now. They used to be decent at killing tanks if you could get enough of them in range. Oh did I mention no more Dark Swarm?
Solution: Nerf tank AI, buff Zergling DPS, bring back Dark Swarm!
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
See? Bio has an answer. There is no answer to Mech.
Provide me a multitude of replays at the Diamond level, against randomly pitted opponents, ZvT, where the Zerg player wins consistently with a single strategy that is consistent across all maps. Because I can find plenty of replays of the opposite.
No, do not provide me a bunch of replays of Sen beating Terran's with 3 Siege Tanks and Marine/Marauders. That is not Mech.
Once I see these, I will shut up, admit I am a total scrub who is just not good enough to beat Mech, and I'll go on my way.
On June 04 2010 01:59 Uranium wrote: From SC1 to SC2 both Tanks and Zerglings got AI buffs. Tanks shoot smarter and Zerglings run better.
However the Tank got a DPS buff and a splash buff, while the Zergling got a DPS nerf. Additionally the combined bunched Zergling AI + no tank overkill = Zerglings are fucking useless now. They used to be decent at killing tanks if you could get enough of them in range. Oh did I mention no more Dark Swarm?
Solution: Nerf tank AI, buff Zergling DPS, bring back Dark Swarm!
I'm down for a zergling dps buff, but Dark swarm? really? There is no way dark swarm could really be balanced imo.
On June 04 2010 01:59 Uranium wrote: From SC1 to SC2 both Tanks and Zerglings got AI buffs. Tanks shoot smarter and Zerglings run better.
However the Tank got a DPS buff and a splash buff, while the Zergling got a DPS nerf. Additionally the combined bunched Zergling AI + no tank overkill = Zerglings are fucking useless now. They used to be decent at killing tanks if you could get enough of them in range. Oh did I mention no more Dark Swarm?
Solution: Nerf tank AI, buff Zergling DPS, bring back Dark Swarm!
I'm down for a zergling dps buff, but Dark swarm? really? There is no way dark swarm could really be balanced imo.
Zergling dps? Why that? They wont reach sieged tanks, but they are already strong enough to kill Thors without cover from tanks. Higher Zergling dps will do only one thing: Screw up the EARLY GAME.
Burrowed Roaches coming from several sides will eventually reach the tanks and then the tanks will kill themselves with Splash ... OR they unsiege and they dont have a chance to kill the burrowed Roaches.
Stop thinking that you have to be able to do a ground assault against a sieged bunch of tanks. Use your superior air force as IdrA shows!
he has a point theres really only one unit that counters seiged tanks and by the time you get it they have already done enough damage to you that they dont need to seige up anymore and can just use a few vikings to finish it off. =/
I think between 2 equal skilled players Mech will always win against Zerg. To win as Zerg vs Mech the opponent has to make mistakes and you have to be able to abuse them.
My brother told me about the shift-queue-attack and combined with the smart AI... they really are extremely overpowered (have been since the start from beta... but nobody used them. blah the 10 HP buff ).
Let's make it happen Bo7 Mech vs Zerg is it unstoppable :D we'll find out!!!
Can't wait to see these show matches. If someone could possibly put this poll in its own thread (someone with a familiar face) would make this event that much more epic.
On June 04 2010 01:59 Uranium wrote: From SC1 to SC2 both Tanks and Zerglings got AI buffs. Tanks shoot smarter and Zerglings run better.
However the Tank got a DPS buff and a splash buff, while the Zergling got a DPS nerf. Additionally the combined bunched Zergling AI + no tank overkill = Zerglings are fucking useless now. They used to be decent at killing tanks if you could get enough of them in range. Oh did I mention no more Dark Swarm?
Solution: Nerf tank AI, buff Zergling DPS, bring back Dark Swarm!
I'm down for a zergling dps buff, but Dark swarm? really? There is no way dark swarm could really be balanced imo.
Zergling dps? Why that? They wont reach sieged tanks, but they are already strong enough to kill Thors without cover from tanks.
Burrowed Roaches coming from several sides will eventually reach the tanks and then the tanks will kill themselves with Splash ... OR they unsiege and they dont have a chance to kill the burrowed Roaches.
Stop thinking that you have to be able to do a ground assault against a sieged bunch of tanks. Use your superior air force as IdrA shows!
Lol I wasn't saying it was needed, just saying I'm down with a zergling dps buff, I don't think it would completely break the game if they were more on par with thier SC1 counterparts, where dark swarm would surely screw up everything. Either way, it has nothing to do with the thread so I'm gonna stop.
I watched those sheth reps and with the amount of mistakes on his part, he didnt deserve to win either of those games. I'm not saying that tvz is fully balanced, but the gap is nowhere near what can be seen in those games, sheth's play was just ... bad.
first of all - a zerg needs to actually know when to STOP producing drones, its ok to oversaturate your main since you know you'll transfer some of the drones to your nat and the rest to 2nd/3rd nat, but there's something wrong when a zerg has 20+ drones in his main that are nearly finished gathering and he still produces 20+ drones in his 2nd nat and then repeats the same mistake with his 3rd nat and in the result, stays with 100 drones for half of the game's duration. to top it off, his attacks almost never target the terran's army, he goes for the expos, only god knows what for since its obvious his opponent has a shitpile of resources stocked at this point, kills off scvs thus allowing the terran to even further strenghten his army. You can't expect to be able to do shit to a full terran's mech army who has 30 to 50 MAX food in workers, while you have double that at each stage of the game, and your 200/200 army consists of 40 roaches and some change.
the game on steppes of war is even better, he sees 30+ tanks and decides to switch to... ultras, just brilliant. had he switched to broodlords the game would've been pretty much over at that point.
terrans mech is slightly too strong and yes its very easy to pull off, but a good zerg has a fighting chance against this, provided he makes the right unit switches and actually attempts to weaken the terran's army with each wave of his attacks, not suicides it to kill a planetary fortress and some scvs.
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
See? Bio has an answer. There is no answer to Mech.
Provide me a multitude of replays at the Diamond level, against randomly pitted opponents, ZvT, where the Zerg player wins consistently with a single strategy that is consistent across all maps. Because I can find plenty of replays of the opposite.
No, do not provide me a bunch of replays of Sen beating Terran's with 3 Siege Tanks and Marine/Marauders. That is not Mech.
Once I see these, I will shut up, admit I am a total scrub who is just not good enough to beat Mech, and I'll go on my way.
As I said before I think Ultras's needed to be buffed to fit the roll of Anti-mech, something like the immortals hardened shell but I still don't think mech is as overpowered as everyone is screaming.
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
See? Bio has an answer. There is no answer to Mech.
Provide me a multitude of replays at the Diamond level, against randomly pitted opponents, ZvT, where the Zerg player wins consistently with a single strategy that is consistent across all maps. Because I can find plenty of replays of the opposite.
No, do not provide me a bunch of replays of Sen beating Terran's with 3 Siege Tanks and Marine/Marauders. That is not Mech.
Once I see these, I will shut up, admit I am a total scrub who is just not good enough to beat Mech, and I'll go on my way.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Burrow - Missle Turrets,Ravens,You always have additional units which can deal with burrowed Roaches after they unburrow,retreating works too. Mind Control - 9<13 Learn math Fungal - It's not-so effective
On June 04 2010 02:16 ZlaSHeR wrote: terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Of course it isn't unbeatable, but it shouldn't be so hard that the Zerg player has to pull off way more difficult and APM-intensive moves than the Terran player in order to beat the him (I'm in no position to claim so, but it's the premise of the discussion).
Anyway. I would love to see this race-balance showdown matches happen. It would be a new milestone in RTS-beta testing.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth,
all those "Options" are simply NOT VIABLE against any decent mech terran. burrow and movement burrow are completely usreless against scan and raven. Furthermore the terran will see your roach moving burrowed and he will symple scan and completely rape them while theyre burrowed... so usefull
can you explain to me how you NP a tank who has 13 range with a 9 range spell ? I really need to see that. Same with fungal growth against tanks.
Drop are going to be spotted with sensor tower and your overlords getting destroyed by vikings, that has been said a thousands of time... If you dont play zerg/mech terran just dont give some crappy solution like you're the messiah and all the zerg are fucking noobs.
i never go mass ground army against Terran anymore because Tanks are so ridicoulosly good. Thor/Viking/Rines/Tanks/Ravens are just as hard to deal with with Ling/Bling and Muta/Blord/Corruptor.. but at least you instantly sacrifice only half your army to the tanks (the rest to the Thors and Rines though... cuz with no ground support your Mutas get eaten alive too).
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Burrow - Missle Turrets,Ravens,You always have additional units which can deal with burrowed Roaches after they unburrow,retreating works too. Mind Control - 9<13 Learn math Fungal - It's not-so effective
So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
9<13 sure, but are you saying you'll only have 9 infestors out by the time they haev 22 siege tanks? If thats the case you're a really shitty zerg. Plus the idea is that you mind control just one tank, and if they're clustered up, which for the most part they will be since everyone has 1 control group syndrome, they blow each other up, therefore mindcontrolling 9 will fuck up the 13. If you're saying that the terran mech will kill the infestors, well thats what high ground is for. I'll tell you if I push out with tanks on Lost Temple, plenty of times there are infestors on the high ground, basically used to hold the tanks and turtle up while they get ultralisks out (which do fuck up tanks, they're fast now, have 300 hp, and can get up close. If I'm getting a viking or raven in order to see the high ground, you mind control that and guess what, they dont' have vision AND they cant kill the raven/viking because theyr'e fucking siege tanks. Thors you say? Maybe they'll attack the air unit? Well shit, you grab the thor too.
Fungal growth is not so effective? Tanks bunched up, lock them down deal like 50 damage over time to a 125 hp unit, they can't move so they wont' unsiege or anything, well thats when you can do something fancy to them.
Yes, Tanks are good against zerg, but believe it or not, you're wrong if you think that its unstoppable.
On June 04 2010 02:16 ZlaSHeR wrote: terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Of course it isn't unbeatable, but it shouldn't be so hard that the Zerg player has to pull off way more difficult and APM-intensive moves than the Terran player in order to beat the him (I'm in no position to claim so, but it's the premise of the discussion).
Anyway. I would love to see this race-balance showdown matches happen. It would be a new milestone in RTS-beta testing.
This seems to be the mind set of all the Zerg posting so far "Zomg all Terran are scrubs an Zerg takes so much moar skillz but mech is to imbalanced!!!! NERFZZ!!" or something along those lines. Terran has two choices go Bio which does alright early game an then get rolled by Zerg later on or switch to mech an turtle up, same goes for Protoss you can't really rely on gateway unit for long so you need to get a robo out pretty quickly if the Zergs going hydra/rouch.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Burrow - Missle Turrets,Ravens,You always have additional units which can deal with burrowed Roaches after they unburrow,retreating works too. Mind Control - 9<13 Learn math Fungal - It's not-so effective
So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
The pros do it, why not?
If 100 minerals can assure that you cant be backstabbed by some roaches and also helps versus air, why not?
I don't see how this "discussion" is still ongoing, if you want to sit on your ass and play a passive macro game without the slightest adaptation to your play, then throw half of the maps resources worth of units at a force that specializes in strong defense... and then make claims of imbalance? You guys need to give it more time before you start claiming imba matchups.
Yes, because this thread is about the usual lazy ass zerg who goes macro-macro-1-a and cries and not actually about decent players who do stuff like drops and nydusworms and running around their chair while singing "whallahallululu".
We get it. 1a is not the way to do it. Problem is that even if you are not that bad, mech still seems to be, regardless of what unit composition and attacking ways Zerg chooses, extremely safe and, if i may say with all respect to the excellent terran players, isn't as demanding skillwise as all the effort that Zerg has to put into his play. Terran needs to take care of the map and macro well and get their timings down and then finally siege his way up to the zerg base... and Zerg has to do all that and search for all the little holes in terrans defense. Always when i win vs. terran-mech it seems like "oh well, but if he just had three turrets/a signal tower build here i couldn't have nydused and raped his base while he was sitting at the front of his expo.". Those are just blunders, but not a actual weakness in his strategy.
Long story short, it just SUCKS that you cannot beat the terran army without trickery, because all trickery works only if he doesn't have detection at some points, doesn't have turrets here, doesn't leave 2 tanks in base to defend, i.e. if he's making obvious mistakes.
That beeing said SC2 is still young, so i'm not saying this is the end of story, but the difficulty for Z is not something that suddenly jumped in somebodies mind but pretty real.
On June 04 2010 01:36 rei wrote: This is not fair, sen and TLO is so much better than all the other terrans on the table for this z vs mech show down, it would result in one sided rapes, let's put Maka on the table then maybe we have a better representation of what Terran is truly capable of with mech.
and yes like TLO said ultras are the counter, it works fine as long as you put 4 ultras in melee range of bunch of tanks, each ultra does 40 damage all have splash damage, so all the tanks get own after 1 swipes from 4 ultras as they each splash all the tanks near. Drop them with overlords if you have to, it works try it.
What qualify me agree agreeing with TLO's advice? I tested this with my friends and my friends are good, also I did beat Chill + kennigit 1vs2 and i got replay to prove it
For nearly half this thread, Drewbie has been saying he would woop anyone's ass with mech...And almost every Zerg in this thread has pointed to him as being one of the top Terran players and used his statements as gospel regarding the OPness of mech.
But now that there is an actual challenge of two extremely strong Zerg vs Drewbie, he isn't good enough anymore?
On June 04 2010 02:28 ZlaSHeR wrote: So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
eh dude... you need to watch more VODs / Replay or get in top diamond (> 600 points), no offence but Terran does put alot of towers in the middle of the field to prevent any AIR and get detects. Also you forgot to add "SCAN" to your detection list!
Tanks are 160hp and FG does only 36dmg. Ultras have 500 hp not 300, they're no faster than they were before (with upgrade) and if you rely on high ground you are generally giving up map position on the Terran taking away your one advantage of mobility. Plus many maps have a natural that's far enough away to avoid the main's high ground.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Burrow - Missle Turrets,Ravens,You always have additional units which can deal with burrowed Roaches after they unburrow,retreating works too. Mind Control - 9<13 Learn math Fungal - It's not-so effective
So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
9<13 sure, but are you saying you'll only have 9 infestors out by the time they haev 22 siege tanks? If thats the case you're a really shitty zerg. Plus the idea is that you mind control just one tank, and if they're clustered up, which for the most part they will be since everyone has 1 control group syndrome, they blow each other up, therefore mindcontrolling 9 will fuck up the 13. If you're saying that the terran mech will kill the infestors, well thats what high ground is for. I'll tell you if I push out with tanks on Lost Temple, plenty of times there are infestors on the high ground, basically used to hold the tanks and turtle up while they get ultralisks out (which do fuck up tanks, they're fast now, have 300 hp, and can get up close. If I'm getting a viking or raven in order to see the high ground, you mind control that and guess what, they dont' have vision AND they cant kill the raven/viking because theyr'e fucking siege tanks. Thors you say? Maybe they'll attack the air unit? Well shit, you grab the thor too.
Fungal growth is not so effective? Tanks bunched up, lock them down deal like 50 damage over time to a 125 hp unit, they can't move so they wont' unsiege or anything, well thats when you can do something fancy to them.
Yes, Tanks are good against zerg, but believe it or not, you're wrong if you think that its unstoppable.
TLO did it on Lost Temple, along with random Planetary Fortresses to protect his expo's since his army isn't that mobile it buys him a lot of time.
heh interesting list people saying mech is to strong, half of that list was very vocal about mech being useless at the start of the beta.... but what this means is that the metagame is constantly evolving still for terran's matchups and no one really knows for sure, a balance change may not be needed, ive been pushed back by a few tosses that used upgraded warp prisms by zealot dropping on my tanks and doing light harrasment all over... I was a rank 1 platinum first reset and now a diamond, which is basically the new plat any way but, the times my mech has been stopped, its because a player did something unorthodox and did not send wave after wave into my tanks. I would love to post replays but unfornutely my old harddrive died that had good examples =/ if i get a few decent games ill be sure to post them up. but some examples i can describe is that for protoss ive been beaten by a vortex and a few phoenixes lifting my tanks while a bunch of charge zeals were dropped in by warp prisms, while stalkers with blink killed my vikings. zergs, i rarely see anything creative out of them, would like to know how overlord drops and those things would work against this.
also on the topic of drops into the tanks, tbh im all for removing the overkill AI as that would massively buff dropping into mass tanks to a similar level of SC1.
but can someone correct me if im wrong but isnt this terran mech situation very similar to SC1? in which the mech army was nearly unstoppable and the other races had to abuse the fact that T mech isnt mobile.... However this may be a map issue as well as alot of the great T matches in SC1 ive watched, seemed to be on bigger maps =/
On June 04 2010 02:59 KiF1rE wrote: heh interesting list people saying mech is to strong, half of that list was very vocal about mech being useless at the start of the beta....
They totally changed the Thor, the tank price/time production and the AOE damages (they are much stronger now).
but can someone correct me if im wrong but isnt this terran mech situation very similar to SC1? in which the mech army was nearly unstoppable and the other races had to abuse the fact that T mech isnt mobile.... However this may be a map issue as well as alot of the great T matches in SC1 ive watched, seemed to be on bigger maps =/
no this is completely different, in BW you were able to make mutas, they were strong and not instantly killed by thors. If you made mutas terran players had to make a ton of goliath which werent good against ground army unlike thors. You can add the fact that tank has smart AI, make full damage to zergling/hydralisk, and hellion are way more devastating against zerglings than vultures.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
In my opinion, if you want to be terran mech, you have burrow, you have movement underground, you have drops, you have mind control to have tanks kill themselves, you have fungal growth, theres always options to fight what you perceive as unbeatable, but nothing is unbeatable. iNcontroL was talking about this on LZ's stream during the TT1 v Artosis showmatch, terran mech is difficult to counter but its not unbeatable, Terran Mech was also difficult to beat in BW but its not unbeatable, theres nothing in SC2 that is unbeatable.
Burrow - Missle Turrets,Ravens,You always have additional units which can deal with burrowed Roaches after they unburrow,retreating works too. Mind Control - 9<13 Learn math Fungal - It's not-so effective
So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
9<13 sure, but are you saying you'll only have 9 infestors out by the time they haev 22 siege tanks? If thats the case you're a really shitty zerg. Plus the idea is that you mind control just one tank, and if they're clustered up, which for the most part they will be since everyone has 1 control group syndrome, they blow each other up, therefore mindcontrolling 9 will fuck up the 13. If you're saying that the terran mech will kill the infestors, well thats what high ground is for. I'll tell you if I push out with tanks on Lost Temple, plenty of times there are infestors on the high ground, basically used to hold the tanks and turtle up while they get ultralisks out (which do fuck up tanks, they're fast now, have 300 hp, and can get up close. If I'm getting a viking or raven in order to see the high ground, you mind control that and guess what, they dont' have vision AND they cant kill the raven/viking because theyr'e fucking siege tanks. Thors you say? Maybe they'll attack the air unit? Well shit, you grab the thor too.
Fungal growth is not so effective? Tanks bunched up, lock them down deal like 50 damage over time to a 125 hp unit, they can't move so they wont' unsiege or anything, well thats when you can do something fancy to them.
Yes, Tanks are good against zerg, but believe it or not, you're wrong if you think that its unstoppable.
TLO did it on Lost Temple, along with random Planetary Fortresses to protect his expo's since his army isn't that mobile it buys him a lot of time.
Are you talking about that game vs Idra? Because I'm pretty sure TLO lost that game
On June 04 2010 02:28 ZlaSHeR wrote: So you're telling me terran not only builds mass siege tanks and pushes out with them, but they also build turrets in the middle of the amp for detection? Gotcha, let me try out that strat later, throwing up 100 minerals in the middle of the map with no salvage and no practical use, genius.
1 gaz is aprox 2.5 mineral because or the collecting rate on 1 base. ( and That doesn't count MULE)
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
See? Bio has an answer. There is no answer to Mech.
Provide me a multitude of replays at the Diamond level, against randomly pitted opponents, ZvT, where the Zerg player wins consistently with a single strategy that is consistent across all maps. Because I can find plenty of replays of the opposite.
No, do not provide me a bunch of replays of Sen beating Terran's with 3 Siege Tanks and Marine/Marauders. That is not Mech.
Once I see these, I will shut up, admit I am a total scrub who is just not good enough to beat Mech, and I'll go on my way.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
*bangs head on wall*
Uhh, Mech is a single strat that works against Zerg every time. Every game I'm raped by it, I ask the Terran "Hey, how often do you lose using a build like this?" Their answer? "Lol maybe 1 in 20."
Should a build succeed 1 in 20 times?
You ask what's the point of a matchup if one build works everytime. Well, herpa derp, MECH FUCKING WORKS EVERYTIME.
On June 04 2010 02:59 KiF1rE wrote: heh interesting list people saying mech is to strong, half of that list was very vocal about mech being useless at the start of the beta.... but what this means is that the metagame is constantly evolving still for terran's matchups and no one really knows for sure, a balance change may not be needed, ive been pushed back by a few tosses that used upgraded warp prisms by zealot dropping on my tanks and doing light harrasment all over... I was a rank 1 platinum first reset and now a diamond, which is basically the new plat any way but, the times my mech has been stopped, its because a player did something unorthodox and did not send wave after wave into my tanks. I would love to post replays but unfornutely my old harddrive died that had good examples =/ if i get a few decent games ill be sure to post them up. but some examples i can describe is that for protoss ive been beaten by a vortex and a few phoenixes lifting my tanks while a bunch of charge zeals were dropped in by warp prisms, while stalkers with blink killed my vikings. zergs, i rarely see anything creative out of them, would like to know how overlord drops and those things would work against this.
also on the topic of drops into the tanks, tbh im all for removing the overkill AI as that would massively buff dropping into mass tanks to a similar level of SC1.
but can someone correct me if im wrong but isnt this terran mech situation very similar to SC1? in which the mech army was nearly unstoppable and the other races had to abuse the fact that T mech isnt mobile.... However this may be a map issue as well as alot of the great T matches in SC1 ive watched, seemed to be on bigger maps =/
Mech would honestly be fine if there wasn't smart AI for tanks. I think that is the reason mech is imba imo. If sc1 tanks had the smart AI tank that sc2 has I think it would have been just as imbalanced.
If you don't know the AI for the sc2 tanks it never overkills a unit so you can't drop a zealot or something on top of tanks only 2-3 will fire at it instead of all 15 (I dont' know the exact numbers to 1 shot a zealot bot I am assuming 2-3 maybe more but you get what I am saying).
Thats one hell of an angry rant if Ive ever seen one an you didn't do much besides imply every terran that uses mech is a scrub which isn't very constructive. Terrans other options? Go Bio an get raped by plague spam an rouch/hydra... so can you blame them for using alot of tanks?
See? Bio has an answer. There is no answer to Mech.
Provide me a multitude of replays at the Diamond level, against randomly pitted opponents, ZvT, where the Zerg player wins consistently with a single strategy that is consistent across all maps. Because I can find plenty of replays of the opposite.
No, do not provide me a bunch of replays of Sen beating Terran's with 3 Siege Tanks and Marine/Marauders. That is not Mech.
Once I see these, I will shut up, admit I am a total scrub who is just not good enough to beat Mech, and I'll go on my way.
herpa derp, pls providez me single strategy that consistently works on every map against terran as zerg derp derp.
Come on man...you're trying to ask for starcraft 2 to be a 1 build game that'll always work, if there were a single strat taht worked against terran mech every single time then what would the point be in that matchup.
*bangs head on wall*
Uhh, Mech is a single strat that works against Zerg every time. Every game I'm raped by it, I ask the Terran "Hey, how often do you lose using a build like this?" Their answer? "Lol maybe 1 in 20."
Should a build succeed 1 in 20 times?
You ask what's the point of a matchup if one build works everytime. Well, herpa derp, MECH FUCKING WORKS EVERYTIME.
if you ask what strat the guy used who beat him, then you shall win 20/20 games ez
if you ask what strat the guy used who beat him, then you shall win 20/20 games ez
I do, and never get a clear response. So I ask here, and I'm told to perform miracles with burrowed Roaches and Mutalisks. So I ask for replays and I get no response.
The level of frustration this brings is astounding. If people would just show me replays I'd shut up. But no one delivers.
if you ask what strat the guy used who beat him, then you shall win 20/20 games ez
The one loss was the night he got hammered and played SC2 ladder by accident.
In seriousness, a person's skill in any given game varies according to a logistic distribution. Even a player like Flash can lose to someone much weaker on a bad day. Has nothing to do with the strat they used.
--------------------------------
This showmatch will be epic. Although, I hope people realize that it won't prove anything. People will look at the loser and say, "well of course he lost, he made mistake X, and should have done Y, blah blah blah" while the argument continues.
Balance issue aside, I think removing tank smart-targeting would be good for the game in general, because it would allow for exciting tactics from both the terran and their opponent. Right now, there is nothing except autofire and maybe manually targeting an infestor or something. I mean, everyone is always complaining about low skill cap, and this would help raise it a little.
yes I agree but i think there is no chance for blizzard to remove smart AI, theyve worked on it and they are proud of their new AI so i dont see them changing because of players feedback
I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat. You will never win if you believe you can't win. You may try a 100 games, maybe 200 games (which I doubt anyone here has even come close to doing), and still you can have a positive attitude and say maybe if I tweak this little timing here. I watch games of Broodwar and I see players do phenomenal things that I NEVER would have believed possible. NEVER. But they do them. They play 10 hours a day and they perfect little tiny things that we are too spoiled to do. They don't even think there is an option of asking for a balance change. They just do what they can.
I am not saying mech isn't too strong. A setup terran army run by a smart player is a tough nut to crack. However,I defintely think the the majority of zerg advocating this are too passive early game. Why do Zerg HAVE to take a fast expo and eco up. Is it written law? Maybe take a later expo while making the terran's life miserable. I just think that it is far too early to contemplate fixes. Worry about perfecting your own play and then when you can come and say your play was divine in its perfection, and you still lost, we have a problem.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I just think that it is far too early to contemplate fixes. Worry about perfecting your own play and then when you can come and say your play was divine in its perfection, and you still lost, we have a problem.
I disagree with your argument that we must play perfectly before we can decree that there is a problem. Blizzard uses a fairly straight forward system to determine when there is a problem and when there is not. Simply stated it is thus. "Any strategy should be as easy (or hard) to counter as it is to execute."
How easy is it to turtle up as Terran with mech and get fully upgraded? Well, I play Zerg and not Terran so my opinion is biased, but I think it's fair to say that turtling is pretty easy in general. That implies that this strategy is fairly easy to execute.
How hard is it for Zerg to attack a turtling max upgraded Terran mech build? Clearly the evidence suggests that it is very difficult to do so. Thus, the strategy is fairly hard to counter.
Easy to execute, hard to counter, therefore there is a problem.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat. You will never win if you believe you can't win. You may try a 100 games, maybe 200 games (which I doubt anyone here has even come close to doing), and still you can have a positive attitude and say maybe if I tweak this little timing here. I watch games of Broodwar and I see players do phenomenal things that I NEVER would have believed possible. NEVER. But they do them. They play 10 hours a day and they perfect little tiny things that we are too spoiled to do. They don't even think there is an option of asking for a balance change. They just do what they can.
I am not saying mech isn't too strong. A setup terran army run by a smart player is a tough nut to crack. However,I defintely think the the majority of zerg advocating this are too passive early game. Why do Zerg HAVE to take a fast expo and eco up. Is it written law? Maybe take a later expo while making the terran's life miserable. I just think that it is far too early to contemplate fixes. Worry about perfecting your own play and then when you can come and say your play was divine in its perfection, and you still lost, we have a problem.
terran walls almost everytime, this limits your options to 1 base drops, 1 base muta, 1 base baneling bust, 1 base nydus, all of these are basically all in so yeah FE is still the best option
I think the only real thing that can be done early, assuming we are talking about the same thing here, is a baneling bust. That is a very all-in style though, and cannot be a standard build against T.
Early game you have speedlings and maybe roaches, but the terran is walled off. There is no way to "make his life miserable."
Or, you can go one base muta and expand later than usual (which is what I do alot of the time). That is slightly better, but also ends when they turret up and get a couple thors and some marines. At that point in the game, there is nothing major to "abuse." Someone correct me if I'm overlooking something.
Once he expands, you have more options. Drops in his main while he defends natural, etc. I would not call that the early game though. Furthermore, as discussed at length, sensor towers, turrets, etc etc make this difficult as well.
Z has to be pretty passive because Z's aggression doesn't mix too well with how every T walls. 1 base mute is really the only 'pressure' build that I found viable if I were to remain on 1 base for a while. Without an expo it is hard to do anything roach or hydra based, and among the two of them the latter's utility is marginal at best.
Or, you can go one base muta and expand later than usual (which is what I do alot of the time). That is slightly better, but also ends when they turret up and get a couple thors and some marines. At that point in the game, there is nothing major to "abuse." Someone correct me if I'm overlooking something.
By forcing them to thor and turret though, we do get the breather we need to expo, not to mention have mutes to fend off what harassment they might attempt. I don't know if we can call this abusing or exploiting anything though, it is just the natural way both sides kind of have to play.
This thread isn't about walls, it's about late late game terran mech with raven/viking support and its power.
Blizzard is making it abundantly clear with each patch that they want the Ultralisk to be the answer, despite how effective it might be. 90% of the arguments in this thread are completely committed to making roach/hydra work instead of some ultra/ling/infestor action, and hopefully TLO will show us some sweet games of this!
I've also struggled with mech for a while but I tried a couple alternatives (instead of screaming imba and nerf) and I had some very positive results. Unfortunately they all involve some sort of timing push before the terran mech army becomes unbeatable.
- Muta, Corruptor and Overseer. Use the corruptor's ability on the thor so it takes considerably more damage and then you chain contaminate the factory to stop any thor production. There's usually 2-3 turrets but it can be handled pretty easy. It does require a good amount of micro and a perfect unit combination (2-3 corruptor, 2 overseers with ~6 mutas, you make the corruptors and overseer before mutas so they have more energy when the push comes.)
- Roach, Hydra and Infestor. Pretty straight forward you push before he gets too many tanks and thors. Use neural parasite to cut their army in half. Hydra are too often overlooked but with the help of roaches they do an insane amount of damage. Even if the Terran has some hellions the 3 range on roaches makes them alway go in front and buffer any kind of hellions fire instead of the hydras. Alternatively you can poke in the front with tunneling claws to see if he has detection in his base, if not he'll take some pretty heavy damage. Or just use the roach ability to unburrow under the tank and as they draw fire come in with hydras and infestor.
- Fast broodlords. Nothing special just some roach and straight tech to broods.
On June 04 2010 05:01 shiftY803 wrote: I think the only real thing that can be done early, assuming we are talking about the same thing here, is a baneling bust. That is a very all-in style though, and cannot be a standard build against T.
But that is not a Strategy to win against mech because the opponent doesn't really has a mech army.. so it's not a way to balance this specific problem.
But it makes a good point though; you need to win against mech by killing the enemy before he has mech... now thats imba
On June 03 2010 09:27 dethrawr wrote: Its the same in SC1, if zerg lets terran get 200/200 mech zerg will lose.
I don't think its really imbalanced, zerg needs to start using mech's immobility against them with nydus/doom drop play.
Also your 'fix' would be awful :l
Yes, heavily using drop tech (against any siege tank heavy army) and if you have room to breath, nydus canals. You just need to be fast enough and practice them enough to use them correctly.
Nydus + infested terrans to prevent killing the head, shutting down factories, forcing T to siege/unsiege during pushes using advance tumor creep + lings, and proper anti-thor muta micro are probably the next big developments that'll come out of zerg.
Well, and Broodlords. Broodlords are still sick good.
On June 04 2010 04:25 Trok67 wrote: yes I agree but i think there is no chance for blizzard to remove smart AI, theyve worked on it and they are proud of their new AI so i dont see them changing because of players feedback
Assuming we are talking about the siege tanks, it's not smart AI - at least the explanation I got was that siege tank damage is instant now, so there's no target for the other tanks to shoot at by the time the first tanks have killed it.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I just think that it is far too early to contemplate fixes. Worry about perfecting your own play and then when you can come and say your play was divine in its perfection, and you still lost, we have a problem.
I disagree with your argument that we must play perfectly before we can decree that there is a problem. Blizzard uses a fairly straight forward system to determine when there is a problem and when there is not. Simply stated it is thus. "Any strategy should be as easy (or hard) to counter as it is to execute."
How easy is it to turtle up as Terran with mech and get fully upgraded? Well, I play Zerg and not Terran so my opinion is biased, but I think it's fair to say that turtling is pretty easy in general. That implies that this strategy is fairly easy to execute.
How hard is it for Zerg to attack a turtling max upgraded Terran mech build? Clearly the evidence suggests that it is very difficult to do so. Thus, the strategy is fairly hard to counter.
Easy to execute, hard to counter, therefore there is a problem.
I don't believe it is as easy as you think to have a perfect defense against everything a zerg can do in 10 minutes AND take your natural. Mech is not viable without an expo, so the terran need an expo. Several maps have more than one entrance to the base as well.
There are many games where easy strategies are hard to counter, but it doesn't seem to muck the balance too much. Then again, the potency of those strategies is variable depending on the execution as well.
They should make drones half a food count because there's so many games I've lost where I have like 80-90 drones and a million bases and terran still comes and rapes me and my army feels like nothing even though I'm maxed. I lose half my food count and terran's goes down like 20-30. If all my units are gonna snap die at least let me make more of them at once so I can possibly do some kind of damage if I have twice the econ of terran late game.
I don't believe it is as easy as you think to have a perfect defense against everything a zerg can do in 10 minutes AND take your natural. Mech is not viable without an expo, so the terran need an expo. Several maps have more than one entrance to the base as well.
There are many games where easy strategies are hard to counter, but it doesn't seem to muck the balance too much. Then again, the potency of those strategies is variable depending on the execution as well.
I think TLOs sling/infestor build is a perfect example of this. It can be a nightmare on maps like desert oasis and blistering sands, for obvious reasons. See the series versus NonY in HDH.
On the other hand, he was unable to effectively use it against HuK on LT in a game I just watched last night. In case nobody has seen it, HuK basically fends off constant attempts to ling stab and a nidus worm attack, while teching to colossus. Once the colo is out, he pushes TLOs bases with unstoppable force. Lings do not counter zealots, sentries, and colossus.
With no terrain to abuse (destructible rocks, long distance between main and natural, etc), the build basically depends on the opposing player making a blunder. A build that depends on the Toss opponent making a mistake [on certain maps] is probably not a good standard build.
That is why I am extremely curious to see TLOs anti-mech strategy applied against Terran on a variety of maps.
I don't think that removing the AI in this case would totally fix the problem. The new splash mechanic also contributes to the potency of siege tanks, and I don't think that their damage has been adjusted to these two buffs. So I think that instead of removing this AI, that if you nerf the damage that tanks get from upgrades, it would make 3/3 mech beatable.
I don't mean to disrespect anyone, but I still think that this early after the changes that made mech stronger people should try fixing the issue by trying harder to beat it and be more creative, not complaining.
I think proposing a change to tank A.I. is a backwards approach to the issue. I could see changing the food cost of tanks, or doing something more subtle like reducing the splash radius on Thors, but if the match-up really is broken (which I would say needs to be determined by meta data and not by anecdotal replays), I'd imagine the most likely solution is an update to Zerg casting since that seems to have been the factor most in flux for much of the beta.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat.
Exactly.
Pro players don't have that much swagger in this argument because they're still 1a-ing into opponent's armies. When is the last time you saw a pro player split his units up against siege tanks or mutas vs thors? Never. In a few months, we'll start to see that stuff emerge, but right now, nobody has the skill to do it.
Even the pro-level players still have a lot of improvement to do before mistakes have been minimized enough to comment seriously on game balance. When not a single person on the game tries to split units up against tanks or thors it's hard to make judgments on the strength of mech.
I wonder what Tanks being affected by PDD would do for the game. TvT is already really tank focused so such a change would mix that up for the better perhaps. ZvT it would make burrow roaches and Infestors more viable; if you bring out a Raven for detection then you're at risk of it being NPed and putting out a PDD letting ground units overwhelm your tanks more easily (but not 100%). Could be an interesting way to make the change without making a massive upset to balance.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat.
Exactly.
Pro players don't have that much swagger in this argument because they're still 1a-ing into opponent's armies. When is the last time you saw a pro player split his units up against siege tanks or mutas vs thors? Never. In a few months, we'll start to see that stuff emerge, but right now, nobody has the skill to do it.
Even the pro-level players still have a lot of improvement to do before mistakes have been minimized enough to comment seriously on game balance. When not a single person on the game tries to split units up against tanks or thors it's hard to make judgments on the strength of mech.
I see players split their Mutas against Thors. You must not be watching top-level Zergs.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat.
Exactly.
Pro players don't have that much swagger in this argument because they're still 1a-ing into opponent's armies. When is the last time you saw a pro player split his units up against siege tanks or mutas vs thors? Never. In a few months, we'll start to see that stuff emerge, but right now, nobody has the skill to do it.
Even the pro-level players still have a lot of improvement to do before mistakes have been minimized enough to comment seriously on game balance. When not a single person on the game tries to split units up against tanks or thors it's hard to make judgments on the strength of mech.
I see players split their Mutas against Thors. You must not be watching top-level Zergs.
Do you have links? I've watched quite a lot of TvZ and I very very rarely see it.
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat.
Exactly.
Pro players don't have that much swagger in this argument because they're still 1a-ing into opponent's armies. When is the last time you saw a pro player split his units up against siege tanks or mutas vs thors? Never. In a few months, we'll start to see that stuff emerge, but right now, nobody has the skill to do it.
Even the pro-level players still have a lot of improvement to do before mistakes have been minimized enough to comment seriously on game balance. When not a single person on the game tries to split units up against tanks or thors it's hard to make judgments on the strength of mech.
I see players split their Mutas against Thors. You must not be watching top-level Zergs.
Do you have links? I've watched quite a lot of TvZ and I very very rarely see it.
Well first of all your original post said "not a single person in the game" splits Mutas against Thors. That much different than rarely seeing it. Obviously it should be rare, as only very good Zerg players will do it. Anyway, Sen does it in his game featured in Day[9] Daily #125. The first time he does it in the battle at 11:20. Even at mid-level Diamond where I currently play, players sometimes to spread out their Mutas.
Somebody said that the problem isn't walls in an earlier post and I disagree. The entire problem begins with walls preventing any early aggression from Zerg. From that one early game problem it spirals into a huge mech army, but it definitely begins with the inability of zerg to harass in anyway shape or form for the first 5 minutes without going all in.
Why do you see constantly see zerg with huge ground armies in the mid to late game when they know its going to fail miserably versus mech? Why are zerg vs zerg games mass zergling/baneling? Because Zerg is the only race who's mineral line is always open to harass. Zerg is the only race who is always put into a do or die position. If we tech we get overrun, if we don't tech we get destroyed by tech, if we don't build drones we lose the economy war, if we do build drones we risk getting overrun.
Terran is the exact opposite. The moment they wall-off THEY have control of the game. They have control of the game before the game even starts! They can go into the game and before they scout anything zerg is doing they can say I'm rushing banshees. This happens because they don't have to worry about getting attacked. When they build a SCV its safe for 10+ minutes. There will be no hellions, reapers, or banshees harassing them. There will be no vikings sniping their supply depots.
Until terran is forced to balance their army through all stages of the game they will continuously be able to power up the tech tree with no fear of punishment. And unfortunately terrans have realized that if they stop and grab factory units along the way that they auto-win vs zerg.
Playing as zerg is like being in a constant state of fear and paranoia. You know that if you don't build a drone you're going to fall behind in economy, but if you do build that drone and he goes all-in it's over.
If terran is building up the "money composition" then the zerg should have map/expo advantage.
Theoretically, at the 200/200 vs 200/200 zerg will lose. *If* that zerg is spamming spawn larvae properly he should be able to replenish his army decently fast. of course that is situation based.
Only other thing I have to add is broodlords seem to be the only thing that can save me from this.
Z v T @ blistering sands Heres a replay example of me the zerg player continuing to lose to a smaller terran army, but able to replenish my army and then the addition of broods to save the game. The terrans' expo was a bit delayed but he was doing a lot of damage to me.
On June 04 2010 06:14 bakedace wrote: If terran is building up the "money composition" then the zerg should have map/expo advantage.
Ok, but does that matter if you cant break the Terran eventually? You can sit in the center for eternity, the idea should not be you can either wait for the Terran to move out and make a mistake (which is hard considering how good siege tanks are unsieged now, how good thors are, how dominant vikings and ravens can be in covering the tanks) or you can wait for them to leave.
You should be able to win. In BW you can chip away at him and replenish and if youre better you will win eventually. In SC2 that seems almost impossible with the way tanks roflstomp anything on the ground and the thor/viking/raven combination is incredibly hard to break.
Right now ultralisks do not appear to be a viable option. Even with the buff their fundamental problems have not been fixed. You can build a cannon that fires 10 inch rounds but if you cant hit your target its still worthless, same thing is happening with the ultralisk.
In my heart I know that a 200/200 terran mech army vs. a 200/200 zerg ground army is not even close to fair. But that doesn't necessarily mean it requires change.
It takes a long time and multiple bases to be able to build and reinforce a 200/200 army that includes both tanks and Thors as a terran. In my mind, zerg has never been a race that is supposed to let you thrive to that point. Zerg units are weak, numerous, and mobile. Imo, zerg strategy should always include ending the game before this max mech army is even possible. If your terran opponent cannot expand freely, there is no way his mech is going to be strong enough to own the map.
I have seen my share of top level TvZs as well and it seems to me that when zergs win they end it in early or mid game, not late game. Zerg as a race has a macro advantage in their mechanics and cheaper expansions. To me, this is because they are meant to be able to get decent macro going faster than other races and overwhelm them before the other races are able to fill 200 supply with units that are clearly stronger and more expensive than zerg units.
In the early game, Terran has to wall-in their ramp just to stop from losing in the first 5-10 minutes to an aggressive play from a good zerg player, this is annoying, but it is one of the strengths of zerg that terran must deal with. Terrans do this by defending and taking it to the next phase of the game: midgame. I am proposing take ZvT to a different phase of the game: early-mid game, and try to win there. In my mind, in late game, you are playing terran's game with them, why let them get that strong?
I'm sorry but this is kindof retarded. I dont want to flame- but i cant keep my fingers from typing. Stop bitching about mech. Its strong, yes, too strong.... maybe, but probably not. Its slow, and very, very expensive. I used to play T exclusively but started playing random just to improve my mechanics, and now i like zerg best(but im worst with them). Why? because they are SO MUCH FASTER than terran. Everything about them is faster, their units, their macro, their expansions. They require play at a faster pace. A good zerg player should be able to 200/200 by the time a good T player is 100/xxx. Don't believe me? Im at work so i dont have replays, but zerg v terran is all about containment, and even if the T manages to get to 200/200 on 2 bases, he will lose to a 4+ base zerg with 80 larva waiting to spawn. The game balance is not unit balance, its overall balance between the races, which i believe right now exists at least enough to keep the players happy. Im not saying that there arent tweaks that could be made toterran mech, there are, but dont call them broken, cuz they just arent that good.
Because Zerg is the only race who's mineral line is always open to harass. Zerg is the only race who is always put into a do or die position. If we tech we get overrun, if we don't tech we get destroyed by tech, if we don't build drones we lose the economy war
I can't believe this post. lol ALL races deal with EVERY one of these predicaments ALL game long. this is starcraft and these are fundamentals of the game. And zergs mineral line is the same as everyone elses mineral line (except your equivalent of the mule can attack -air and ground).
If "grabbing factory units" was "auto win" like you say, im sure every terran would have a few more wins
Completely removing the new and improved siege-tank AI really isnt the answer here I think. Perhaps just figure out some strategy to get up close to those tank without losing too many units, what about burrowed roaches? Although I hate to go roaches because of the 2-supply nerf, this could be a counter to a terran tank/thor composition that will keep your mutas away.
So maybe you could conclude that economy alone won't win you the game? Maybe Zerg shouldn't always FE and be passive while they keep pumping drones?
Saying that drones should be half food because Zergs build 90 of them is stupid since your playstyle itself causes this very problem. Food for food Terran mech usually rapes Zerg, but it also costs them more time and resources to get to that point. Macro'ing up and clashing maxxed out armies clearly isn't the answer for Zerg against mech, which leaves the options of harrassment and timing pushes.
For this I think muta's are ideal, go for a delayed expansion, gain map control. If he goes mech try and snipe his tanks, harass the mineral line and when a Thor lazily walks up run to their expansion or do a queen transfusion pitstop ... with a good amount of muta's and a good split you can even head-on engage the Thors.
Zerg should swarm over the opponent, not engage mech in even foodcount. Maybe Zerg shouldn't all try to macro like Idra and start becoming a bit more tricksy and aggressive. Get burrow, one scan makes it worth the cost. FG the crap out of everything and burrow. Burrow banelings to punish a lack of Ravens or try and snipe the Raven with muta's/ corrupters.
I don't expect Zergs to autowin like this, but IMO its more viable than just pure macro to max armies. It clearly demonstrates how one playstyle won't fit all scenarios. At the beginning of SC2 beta it was more common for zerg to do one base muta, all terrans countered by going MMM, Zergs then decided that muta's sucked because stimmed marines raped them and started to FE with speedlings and sunkens to economically counter the MMM build. Then Terrans where like "Sweet!" they aren't going to pressure me at all so I guess I'll just tech directly into mech and get a critical mass of damage output and then squash the squishy Zerg units (which rely on superior numbers and a quick repleneshing of forces).
But then again, no-one cares what I think, Terran imba FTW! -_-'
well for starters, it doesn't look like Sheth can Sauron-play at all at any rate. Would love to know what a replay showing a zerg feeding units piece-meal into a tank line has to do with terran being OP. Tbh, looking at that final push that sheth did in the first game, he'd have been able to beat the terran down completely if he'd had another 200/200 wave incoming. He didn't even ever bank larva ffs.
The first two replays of Sheth vs QXC let the situation get out of hand. He didn't put ANY pressure at all. The first time he engaged the terran was when he had 3/2 upgrades for vehicles, and 2/2 upgrades for air. He then proceeded to make all the units that mech counters (i.e. Zerg ground). Both games corruptors + broodlords would have been enough to weather down the air army for Terran (+fungal growth to force engagements).
Although, Steppes of War is pretty forgiving for Terran mobility since its so small, so there isn't much he could have done after about the 20 minute mark.
In the LzGamer vs Moman game, Moman didn't do any pressure until the 15 minute mark! He didn't even handle that siege tank on his cliff for five minutes... He did a pretty sweet push & fake drop, but then started to play really sloppy, running his roaches into tank lines, chasing hellions while tanks got free shots, getting blocked by auto turrets, etc... He could have easily won that game with a transition to muta or better management of his roaches, or just hanging out and waiting for a bit to compound his advantage. Again, he didn't engage Lz until Terran was 2/0 on upgrades, though. Terran mech upgrades scale so amazingly well against all ground units. I think that might be part of the problem as well (+3 x2 for thor, +5 for tank)
There is a HUGE window early game (before 10 minutes) where Terran mech just doesn't have a lot of meat on them bones, and a lot of different play options can slow down the Thor / Tank build up. My favorite (and I think most effective) is doing a roach harass early game (no fast expansion) w/ a quick movement + tunneling claws (comes in at around 7 minutes, about 8 roaches) & burrow, and while the terran is contained & forced to get medivacs, turrets, or ravens, Zerg can easily expand twice and make up for lost economy time. Siege mode is pretty ineffective against this type of harass, and with the increased regen, if the terran isn't prepared for it he can easily get destroyed. It also helps to hide your roach warrens (overlords + generate creep as soon as lair pops up) so he is a little clueless as to what you are doing. I'm pretty sure this strategy is very viable (I'm 550 diamond currently (21-4), was 1750-1800 plat).
Doing a fast expand build against Terran is a lot more risky now due to mech being so powerful. Zergs forfeit their right to harass early game. This lets Terran comfortably build up a critical mass unit composition that is really really hard to stop (theres no denying this). It is tough to get anything going with drops due to sensor towers + viking fleet.
Overlord at 10, extractor trick (not sure if this makes it faster or slower, its just something to do for me so I'm not pounding my balls) pool at 14 extractor at 14 overlord at 15 save up larva for 4-6 lings after pool is done + queen continuous drone production until 100 gas, get lair get 2nd gas (at around 24-26) 2nd queen if he is doing a hellion harass to sit on your choke (after lair, at about 4 minute mark) while lair is morphing, send two drones out of base to make roach warrens on generated creep when lair pops up. Better to have two overlords doing this so you don't waste much time. while roach warrens are morphing, save up larva (about 6-8) and supply, extra two overlords does the trick get burrow, tunneling claws, glial reconstitution when roach warrens are done. morph 6-8 roaches (this puts you at around 45-50 supply), less roaches if you've made an extra queen for hellion harass Roaches arrive at Terran base with all three upgrades (i've tested on blistering sands, so any 4 player map will gaurentee this) at 7:15 mark. Macro up + expand while harassing, change tech accordingly.
I think this is a pretty solid build. Even if you don't do much damage, it lets you be a goddamn asshole to the terran. They'll usually have their depot lowered because this is the time where they are moving or expanding. Be patient for the depot to go down. Or if you can bust the front, thats even better (if army composition allows it). Most the times they will have 1 tank out with the 2nd one just finishing, a viking, and 3-4 marines. Not a big deal for 8 roaches, especially with burrowed regeneration. Once you're in his base, tech labs are big targets. Dropping that starport-techlab is huge. If he has a starport and tries switching his factory with it, just burrow a roach under the techlab so he can't land on the add-on. Splitting up the roach army also helps, so he can't really defend it well. If they have an engine bay up, just camp the expansion or go around the turrets. If he scans the burrowed roaches, just unburrowed and move out of the radius, re-burrow. Deny that extra gas that mech desperately needs. I usually tech switch to lings + muta, eventually brood lord + corruptors. Small numbers of tanks have a hard time dealing with the pesky roaches.
If you get in there and you see banshees coming out, quickly grab an extra queen & overseer (probably should cancel your expansion). Maybe grab a hydra den, or spire. Should be hemorrhaging gas at this point, so its easy to grab 2-3 muta and defend against the banshees
Oh, on a side note too, sensor towers don't detect burrowed or burrowed-moving units, so roaches work after the fact, too. if hes not deploying ravens, you can easily surprise a terran or flank them if you're set up properly.
On June 03 2010 11:06 Wayra wrote: I think tanks are underpowered, they should have an alternate fire mode that shoots bullets for close range and air like in halo. They should make missile turrets also attack ground and have +3 armor so Terrans can more easily defend against mutas. In addition give ghost a special ability like...nerve gas that kills any biological unit in range, kinda like the emp except for zergs. In addition have vikings be able to plant aerial mines, that work as spider mines but only affect air units. Oh and have the nuclear bombs dropped by banshees and increase the radius and power of nuclear bombs so that it 1 hit any biological unit. Because common, radiation should be lethal to all biological units...in addition, make nuclear craters radioactive for 273 sec. Meanwhile, no creep can grow on it.
I also think that helions are too week, infernal lighter should come already upgraded. Biological units that get hit are on fire. While on fire, it cannot attack. Units on fire slowly dies. In addition, units that are on fire can spread the flames to adjacent units and structures. I think that will add an interesting aspect to the micro for zergs. Have the helions a larger spread or least attack faster. But that would make it slightly imba, so maybe scratch the last idea. Instead have helions fire do extra dmg buildings. I mean it makes sense cause fire should destroy buildings.
Oh and protoss voidrays are wayyyy too imbalanced, have it's range nerf to 2, and make it slower than the viking by .2112
On June 03 2010 14:58 sadyque wrote: The Moman game only proves balance. Lz actually had better income for the most part of the game. Moman had like 7 bases with no drones and the same income as Lz. If you look at the first battle with the fake drop Lz has a more expensive army than Moman. When lz starts to move down to Mo's expansions 30 speedlings would have wtfpwned all the tanks(either by droppping on them or catching them unsieged). Not to mention that at any time aftert the first battle if the zerg morphed 20 mutas it would have been GG. All the game long Moman uses ONLY 2 UNITS! - roaches and hydras. Lz has tanks, hellions, ravens, vikings and thors. Now what do you expect? A two zerg unit composition army should wtfpwn a well rounded and complete terran army?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
On June 03 2010 11:06 Wayra wrote: I think tanks are underpowered, they should have an alternate fire mode that shoots bullets for close range and air like in halo. They should make missile turrets also attack ground and have +3 armor so Terrans can more easily defend against mutas. In addition give ghost a special ability like...nerve gas that kills any biological unit in range, kinda like the emp except for zergs. In addition have vikings be able to plant aerial mines, that work as spider mines but only affect air units. Oh and have the nuclear bombs dropped by banshees and increase the radius and power of nuclear bombs so that it 1 hit any biological unit. Because common, radiation should be lethal to all biological units...in addition, make nuclear craters radioactive for 273 sec. Meanwhile, no creep can grow on it.
I also think that helions are too week, infernal lighter should come already upgraded. Biological units that get hit are on fire. While on fire, it cannot attack. Units on fire slowly dies. In addition, units that are on fire can spread the flames to adjacent units and structures. I think that will add an interesting aspect to the micro for zergs. Have the helions a larger spread or least attack faster. But that would make it slightly imba, so maybe scratch the last idea. Instead have helions fire do extra dmg buildings. I mean it makes sense cause fire should destroy buildings.
Oh and protoss voidrays are wayyyy too imbalanced, have it's range nerf to 2, and make it slower than the viking by .2112
On June 04 2010 04:49 Uthgar wrote: I don't want to disrespect players who are better than me, but I have to say I dislike this attitude. Its akin to that of a spoiled brat. You will never win if you believe you can't win. You may try a 100 games, maybe 200 games (which I doubt anyone here has even come close to doing), and still you can have a positive attitude and say maybe if I tweak this little timing here.
I have played over 4000 games in the better, so I could probably say that I've played more than 200 ZvT games, considering all 4000 games have been Zv Something.
The problem that I see, and what I believe the OP is talking about, is highlighted in the qxc v sheth game on steppes. Qxc leaves anywhere from 6-10 tanks idle in his base the whole time, meanwhile sheth throws 5-6 200/200 armies, including upgraded ultras, at qxc's army and expansions(not including the tanks defending his main). Qxc loses a tiny amount of food count each time, and once loses nothing at all. A 200/200 zerg army needs to be able to take out 33-50% of a 200/200 protoss or terran army so that their macro can be rewarded when they reproduce that army in 1 round of larva(like sheth was doing).
This would not be a discussion at all if the bases and minerals and all of that mattered, but qxc never needed to use any sort of production capacity to keep up with the zerg macro. He stayed above 180 food the whole time, and didn't use those tanks in his main at all. Any tech switch to corruptors and broodlords leaves a very large window for the terran player to demolish the zerg. Remember also that he has no need for mules since the build is gas locked, so he has near constant scans and with vikings and ravens out he has total map control to scout that tech switch. All theorycrafting aside, there's obviously a problem when a build 100% prevents any ground unit usefullness.
Do we know for sure that the siege tank targetting is an AI function and not a side effect of their attack landing instantly? If there was a travel time and a "missile" effect added to their attacks might that fix a lot of this? It would also change up TvT a lot since ravens would counter siege tanks.
edit: that roach harass build is retarded, skipping ling speed is a good way to lose before they tech past hellions or zealots
Hopefully these showmatches happen if for no other reason than Sen and TLO have been the most innovative players during this beta and it would be great to see them play again before it all goes down.
Just make like 1 defiler and 1a2a with your ultra-crackling army... also proplerly scourged science vessels are the way to go... ex: the most recent flash vs jaedong... oh wait... nvm
could always just baneling all in every game... haha
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
Last time i checked there were 3 reps in the OP of very high level games. 2 containing root players.
Just made 50 +1/+1 roaches with speed attack 15 +2 sieged tanks in unit tester. Ran it a few times and the first time they killed 2 tanks and then they kill 3 tanks. There's at least 10 tanks left with full hp each time.
Did 100 banelings with speed against 10 siege tanks unupgraded and the banelings kill 2 tanks, one has 27 hp left and the rest are at or about full health. I know people are gonna say you need to flank and 'lol use ur mobility it's ez just like sc1 rofl rofl' but what are you going to do when 15 tanks with support are destroying your main. You could trade bases but he'll destroy yours, go back and kill your army, and still have a ton of units left.
The m/u might not even be imba as much as it is broken. Zerg can still win before it gets to late game, but that just feels wrong to me. I understand what people are saying about a maxed terran army should be stronger than a zerg army and I agree, but there have been enough high level games now where we see zerg throw maxed army after maxed army at terran while doing drops and 'lol abusing nydus worms and mobility' and they still don't even make a dent in terran's army after they get their third up.
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
Last time i checked there were 3 reps in the OP of very high level games. 2 containing root players.
Last time i checked that entire clan is yelling "imba!" there's still a lot more to explore zvt (obviously)
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
You're not high level zerg, you never played high level terran and somehow in your infinite wisdom and knowledge you can say what zerg can do against mech in highest tier. Can you be more arrogant?
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
OMGWTFBBQ ... SC2 has hardcounters!? :O
This summary is such a defeatist tactic that it makes me wanna cry. If you can't take it, don't play the game ... or at least change race.
Infestors are never useless, FG is always good for stalling and NP'ing Thors and tanks is delicious. When you're actively spreading creep over the map they can run into a moving mech army, FG and run out without dying (or just get burrow to be annoying).
Mutalisks completely viable for harass and forcing Marine, Turrets and Thors to be built. Plus in good numbers and split correctly they can definately take on Thors. They give you even more map control than before and can fend off harass quite nicely since they rape vikings and practically anything not marine.
Zerglings are great for early base defence and with speed they own hellions on-creep. Also great for runbys and just being annoying. Again, research burrow, the scans will run out eventually
Ultralisks are getting buffed every patch, so I hope they will be viable someday. Ideal as battering rams and base destroyers ... now you just need a way get em there
Broodlords are the ultimate Zerg weapon period, they can really kick mech ass. And sure Vikings will kill them, so you'll have to back em up with muta's a/o corrupters. That's practically the only reason corrupters exist.
Corrupters absolutely don't get raped by vikings, actually it's the oppossite, Vikings just have a superior range which gives them free shots. When you kill the vikings ... there goes the tanks vision and range advantage. After this you can use Corrupt to weaken the ground-mech and follow up with your ground army.
The battle for air superiority is actually very important since mech absolutely needs the vikings.
lol, the problem is that zerg doesnt have ANY OTHER OPTION than those 2 units. We can invent some other super strong units but they dont exist...
infestor = useless against mech mutalisk = completely raped by thors zerglings = raped by hellions and tanks (and also thor since we cant surrond them aswell as before) ultralisk = completely useless (show first 2 replays) broodlords = raped hardly by vikings corruptor = also raped by viking
Did i forget any unit ?
OMGWTFBBQ ... SC2 has hardcounters!? :O
This summary is such a defeatist tactic that it makes me wanna cry. If you can't take it, don't play the game ... or at least change race.
Infestors are never useless, FG is always good for stalling and NP'ing Thors and tanks is delicious. When you're actively spreading creep over the map they can run into a moving mech army, FG and run out without dying (or just get burrow to be annoying).
Mutalisks completely viable for harass and forcing Marine, Turrets and Thors to be built. Plus in good numbers and split correctly they can definately take on Thors. They give you even more map control than before and can fend off harass quite nicely since they rape vikings and practically anything not marine.
Zerglings are great for early base defence and with speed they own hellions on-creep. Also great for runbys and just being annoying. Again, research burrow, the scans will run out eventually
Ultralisks are getting buffed every patch, so I hope they will be viable someday. Ideal as battering rams and base destroyers ... now you just need a way get em there
Broodlords are the ultimate Zerg weapon period, they can really kick mech ass. And sure Vikings will kill them, so you'll have to back em up with muta's a/o corrupters. That's practically the only reason corrupters exist.
Corrupters absolutely don't get raped by vikings, actually it's the oppossite, Vikings just have a superior range which gives them free shots. When you kill the vikings ... there goes the tanks vision and range advantage. After this you can use Corrupt to weaken the ground-mech and follow up with your ground army.
The battle for air superiority is actually very important since mech absolutely needs the vikings.
The only fact you mention NP on thors or tanks shows that you dont know a shit about what youre talking about and you obviously have never played zerg against a mech terran. Therefore I won't reply to your post.
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
You're not high level zerg, you never played high level terran and somehow in your infinite wisdom and knowledge you can say what zerg can do against mech in highest tier. Can you be more arrogant?
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
You're not high level zerg, you never played high level terran and somehow in your infinite wisdom and knowledge you can say what zerg can do against mech in highest tier. Can you be more arrogant?
Re-read my post.
Yup, you know more than all the high level zergs put together.
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
Last time i checked there were 3 reps in the OP of very high level games. 2 containing root players.
Last time i checked that entire clan is yelling "imba!" there's still a lot more to explore zvt (obviously)
Kind of like you did before roaches got a huge nerf? Its imba you won't admit it because its an easy win for you right now but once it gets nerfed a bit you'll be complaining zergs imba again.
I sure can't wait till Blizzard has some kind of fix removing smart AI for the tank that doesn't overkill is such a great solution hopefully blizzard reads that and does it :D
The only fact you mention NP on thors or tanks shows that you dont know a shit about what youre talking about and you obviously have never played zerg against a mech terran. Therefore I won't reply to your post.
I said it was delicious to pull off, not that it was practical But sure, dismiss my other arguments because I made an effort to lighten the spirit in this thread, I guess that's the easy thing to do.
PS.
You should really end your posts with "Terran imba" to really sum up your constructive posts up till now.
ultras absolutely obliterate tanks...but mech is not as imba as people are making out. In above game I lose, but that's mainly because I am still learning Zerg and make 5000 mistakes, but i'm expecting the already experienced Zergs can do 20x better obviously.
fungal growths seem to have a lot of potential, and with everything else like nydus/drops/broodlords, etc. it definitely is do-able, not so "OMG IMPOSSIBLE" as some make out.
obviously if it was a top tier terran it would be even harder, but even then, definitely is no where near impossible like some people are exaggerating.
it'd be nice if the kids from roots, idra, or other good zergs or what not and such would actually post replays as examples, but they all like to hide their replays. sighs.
You're not high level zerg, you never played high level terran and somehow in your infinite wisdom and knowledge you can say what zerg can do against mech in highest tier. Can you be more arrogant?
Re-read my post.
Yup, you know more than all the high level zergs put together.
highest level zergs who posted in this topic are sen and tlo both called out terrans to show their free win "imba" mech, nobody accepted the challenge yet
In my PERSONAL OPINION as a Random player (I prefer Zerg and Terran) that mech is strong, but not impossible to beat, I usually lose when zerg constantly harasses every spot he can with mutas, Thor are slow and if there is one spot that is out of range on the turret it just makes it a nightmare. Alot of zerg I play against in medium~ diamond go muta + burrowed roaches. Harass all weak spots with muta and then go roach+hydra.
With the new overseer spawn infested terran in 200vs200 he throws infested terran at nearly all of my expos making it very annoying and while my army is out of place he hits a base.
On June 04 2010 08:20 lolastic wrote: highest level zergs who posted in this topic are sen and tlo both called out terrans to show their free win "imba" mech, nobody accepted the challenge yet
On June 04 2010 08:20 lolastic wrote: highest level zergs who posted in this topic are sen and tlo both called out terrans to show their free win "imba" mech, nobody accepted the challenge yet
On June 04 2010 08:22 NuKedUFirst wrote: In my PERSONAL OPINION as a Random player (I prefer Zerg and Terran) that mech is strong, but not impossible to beat, I usually lose when zerg constantly harasses every spot he can with mutas, Thor are slow and if there is one spot that is out of range on the turret it just makes it a nightmare. Alot of zerg I play against in medium~ diamond go muta + burrowed roaches. Harass all weak spots with muta and then go roach+hydra.
With the new overseer spawn infested terran in 200vs200 he throws infested terran at nearly all of my expos making it very annoying and while my army is out of place he hits a base.
I believe your problem is getting more than 1 expansion. You only need enough resource to make your 200/200 army then a-move and win. You're spending too much time trying to defend multiple expansions. Just get the one, get 200/200, and then collect your win.
On June 04 2010 08:20 lolastic wrote: highest level zergs who posted in this topic are sen and tlo both called out terrans to show their free win "imba" mech, nobody accepted the challenge yet
Wrong.
whats wrong?
What you said. People have taken the challenge I'm just organizing it.
Don't state FACTS that you don't know. This IS happening I just had to get off work b4 i got all into it.
I didn't see any thors, not enough tanks and such... was not a good game for TLO
He did had 4 thors and lost them all to broodlords and lost nearly all of his tanks from the broodlords as well. Broodlord beat all terran ground units and static defense. Roach counters pretty much all early and mid game mech as well. It is 30 minutes long so I let you pass for that one and no terran is just going mech, they go mech and viking.
That was a quick response to my post. Your on top of this thread.
+1
Idra shows if you know what you're doing, ZvT is imb, except it's not in favor of Terran or Mech LAWL!
BTW what is the challenge, I don't get it? Sen / TLO are challenging that THEIR terran MECH is IMB? Orrrr....
Drewbie challenged top zerg players to a showmatch to prove that mech is overpowered and Sen accepted that challenge. TLO challenged top terran players to a showmatch (where he plays Z) to prove that mech is not overpowered. Not sure if anyone has accepted that challenge yet.
That was a quick response to my post. Your on top of this thread.
+1
Idra shows if you know what you're doing, ZvT is imb, except it's not in favor of Terran or Mech LAWL!
BTW what is the challenge, I don't get it? Sen / TLO are challenging that THEIR terran MECH is IMB? Orrrr....
Drewbie challenged top zerg players to a showmatch to prove that mech is overpowered and Sen accepted that challenge. TLO challenged top terran players to a showmatch (where he plays Z) to prove that mech is not overpowered. Not sure if anyone has accepted that challenge yet.
Idra shows if you know what you're doing, ZvT is imb, except it's not in favor of Terran or Mech LAWL!
BTW what is the challenge, I don't get it? Sen / TLO are challenging that THEIR terran MECH is IMB? Orrrr....
It is a match up that can go either way. It is not imba at all for either side. Just at certain points in the game mech will have advantage and other parts Zerg air will have the advantage. Really it could have gone either way.
Imba is just someone saying that when they themselves lose to that often and have not found a counter to it. Once this strategy is used more people will change their strategies again and find something to counter that and new strategies will continue to exist for quite a while.
It has shown the weak sides of mech and exploiting them so learn from this and use it.
I'm a little concerned. Wasn't tester saying not too long ago that there are few decent terrans anyways? He said maybe Maka was the best but euro / US are not so great. Am I just making this up? I think I remember it from one of Artosis's interviews. So if "lower level" terran players are giving high level zerg players a run for their money, and often beating them, isn't something wrong? I don't play either race, so I'm just on the outside looking in and wondering...
It's very hard to actually test if something is completely imbalanced or gives a higher advantage to one race or the other just because of the wide variety of skill level among players. Maybe I'm crazy...probably.
the tlo vs idra match is a horrible example and does not point out the actual problem the OP stated. it`s the fact that an (almost) maxed out supply mech siege tank / thor army is "impossible" to be beaten. that fancy roach unburrow stuff that works pretty well against a hand full of tanks is just obsolete once the "critical mass" of mech is reached, benefiting hugely from the "no overkill" AI. well what is left ? infestors NP ? it does not work. even if you manage to pick off, well let's say 4 mechunits or let it be 5 which needs pretty decent micro against such a ground force it won't make a difference because your NP will last about 1,5 seconds if you're lucky ... or so -.-. broodlords only work theoretical. don't know what to say about ultras ...
I would call TLO's Terran play more than decent, and since he has succes playing all races (especially Terran and Zerg) he's a pretty good measurement for balance.
The showmatch just seems like a ridiculous idea anyways. If Terran wins, most Z will say "zerg did this wrong, didn't do this..." blah blah blah. Vice versa, if Zerg wins, Terran will say that the Terran player made certain mistakes...etc. It just seems like this won't solve anything.
Although, I shouldn't complain because I enjoy watching high level games
On June 04 2010 08:55 Dog22 wrote: I'm a little concerned. Wasn't tester saying not too long ago that there are few decent terrans anyways? He said maybe Maka was the best but euro / US are not so great. Am I just making this up? I think I remember it from one of Artosis's interviews. So if "lower level" terran players are giving high level zerg players a run for their money, and often beating them, isn't something wrong? I don't play either race, so I'm just on the outside looking in and wondering...
It's very hard to actually test if something is completely imbalanced or gives a higher advantage to one race or the other just because of the wide variety of skill level among players. Maybe I'm crazy...probably.
Tester said that the reason he believes that Zerg do so well on the Korea servers is because no extremely good terran's from the pro leagues were playing terran in SC2. There were however a few pro zerg players from the pro leagues in Korea that played zerg and he believed that why Zerg does so well in Korea.
He also mentions in that interview that Terran would be the best race and would dominate if played by the Korea pros, but that was patch 12. But recently he has changed that stance against Zerg. He now prefers to play Protoss against Zerg at least and Terran against Protoss. That leads me to believe that he believes Protoss is strong against zerg and Terran is strong against Protoss.
On June 04 2010 09:05 Dog22 wrote: The showmatch just seems like a ridiculous idea anyways. If Terran wins, most Z will say "zerg did this wrong, didn't do this..." blah blah blah. Vice versa, if Zerg wins, Terran will say that the Terran player made certain mistakes...etc. It just seems like this won't solve anything.
Although, I shouldn't complain because I enjoy watching high level games
Actually most Zerg willl just go "I told you so, mech was imba", judging by the tone of this and other threads. Agree that it'll be nice set of showmatches to see even if it won't get us out of this quagmire.
On June 04 2010 09:05 Dog22 wrote: The showmatch just seems like a ridiculous idea anyways. If Terran wins, most Z will say "zerg did this wrong, didn't do this..." blah blah blah. Vice versa, if Zerg wins, Terran will say that the Terran player made certain mistakes...etc. It just seems like this won't solve anything.
Although, I shouldn't complain because I enjoy watching high level games
Actually most Zerg willl just go "I told you so, mech was imba", judging by the tone of this and other threads. Agree that it'll be nice set of showmatches to see even if it won't get us out of this quagmire.
Oh yeah, thanks. I guess I meant to say that but confused myself >_>
Haha, it's funny that they took the easy way out and just lowered the damage instead of what was proposed. I bet it's harder to code the AI changes that are asked for (though I have no knowledge on how all that stuff is coded).
Ya... the only reason terran don't win is because everyone playing them are bad....... that is win logic right there.......And the reason why I never get picked in basketball is because I'm not black.
So ... now mech is nerfed we can focus on more important issues like ...
Marauder imba! Remove Concussive Shells ... nerf Viking range! Reapers are sooo OP now! Remove Salvage! Remove Repair! Planetary Fortress spamming is gay. Sensor Towers are nub. Hey!? ... The tanks still kill my units!? nerf their range! PDD unbeatable! HSM too cheap!
Marines? No, those are just fine, i just make zerglings and a1 Except when they have stim, stim's an insta- win button and butt-cheap too.
On June 02 2010 23:43 iCCup.Diamond wrote: I don't know if this means anything but I asked Artosis last night if he wanted to play in the KOTH and he would not even play because of TvZ mech.
TheLittleOne:
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Regardless of the outcome of said games, <3 <3 <3 TLO.
I don't see how this nerf, even as large as it is (17% Damage reduction) is going to affect things all that much...The threshold of damage/splash is still so high in comparison to average unit HP, that I doubt it will take many more shots to kill anything.
On June 04 2010 09:58 Lithose wrote: I don't see how this nerf, even as large as it is (17% Damage reduction) is going to affect things all that much...The threshold of damage/splash is still so high in comparison to average unit HP, that I doubt it will take many more shots to kill anything.
The most significant part of this is that tanks will no longer 2shot roaches when they reach +3a. They will still 2shot hydras, oneshot lings and banelings, and 2shot infestors. They will also take a few more shots to kill ultras, which might be what blizzard intends for this patch.
On June 04 2010 09:58 Lithose wrote: I don't see how this nerf, even as large as it is (17% Damage reduction) is going to affect things all that much...The threshold of damage/splash is still so high in comparison to average unit HP, that I doubt it will take many more shots to kill anything.
The most significant part of this is that tanks will no longer 2shot roaches when they reach +3a. They will still 2shot hydras, oneshot lings and banelings, and 2shot infestors. They will also take a few more shots to kill ultras, which might be what blizzard intends for this patch.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
He's the one who would have his mind changed, after being thoroughly dominated.
Looking at the beginning replay, the problem I see is that Zerg just cannot effectively sink resources into units due to supply cap.
4xSiege Tank: 600/500, 12 supply
2xThor: 600/400, 12 supply
6xRoach 450/150, 12 supply
6xHydralisk 600/300, 12 supply
I'm willing to call this the backbone units of each army. Granted the Hydra difference is not that large, but the Roach is very apparent.
Add this to the fact that Zerg needs to invest more supply into mining (no mules) and it's pretty apparent why lategame Zerg always gets stomped by Terran.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
He's the one who would have his mind changed, after being thoroughly dominated.
even if he gets worked he is still going about it the right way, don't worry about balence changes and qq all day. Play the game your given and see what you can do, mech has only been really popular for a week or two, it might be to strong (personally I think it most likely it is), but its to early to tell for sure
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
He's the one who would have his mind changed, after being thoroughly dominated.
even if he gets worked he is still going about it the right way, don't worry about balence changes and qq all day. Play the game your given and see what you can do, mech has only been really popular for a week or two, it might be to strong (personally I think it most likely it is), but its to early to tell for sure
Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
On June 04 2010 12:44 Lefnui wrote: Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
Complaining is never the "correct" response (though it's certainly logical). Either try to find a way to beat it, or play more games such that it impacts the matchup statistics (either as Terran owning Zergs, or as Zerg getting roflstomped by Terran). Blizzard is going to respond more to statistical reflections of imbalance than people whining about it on the forums.
On June 04 2010 12:44 Lefnui wrote: Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
Complaining is never the "correct" response (though it's certainly logical). Either try to find a way to beat it, or play more games such that it impacts the matchup statistics (either as Terran owning Zergs, or as Zerg getting roflstomped by Terran). Blizzard is going to respond more to statistical reflections of imbalance than people whining about it on the forums.
That's not true at all. Blizzard has time and time again been responding to specific criticisms made on forums. Statistics have little to do with their decisions.
Rather he can beat T mech or not (I believe he could), he's the only person actually going about this in the right manner. Nobody on this game has done sufficient testing to determine if T Mech is overpowered or not.
I sat down with some decent players last night and played 10-15 Mech vs Zerg games and found some solid counters. Not that it matters anymore.
On June 04 2010 12:44 Lefnui wrote: Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
Complaining is never the "correct" response (though it's certainly logical). Either try to find a way to beat it, or play more games such that it impacts the matchup statistics (either as Terran owning Zergs, or as Zerg getting roflstomped by Terran). Blizzard is going to respond more to statistical reflections of imbalance than people whining about it on the forums.
That's not true at all. Blizzard has time and time again been responding to specific criticisms made on forums. Statistics have little to do with their decisions.
and you know this because you have been inside the room when blizzard makes thier balence choices, clearly if something is imba people are going to complain and the stats will also show it. There is no way for you or anyone who isn't part of the conversation on game balence to know how they are deciding to make changes
On June 04 2010 13:02 iEchoic wrote: Just another reason TLO is awesome.
Rather he can beat T mech or not (I believe he could), he's the only person actually going about this in the right manner. Nobody on this game has done sufficient testing to determine if T Mech is overpowered or not.
I sat down with some decent players last night and played 10-15 Mech vs Zerg games and found some solid counters. Not that it matters anymore.
care to share, because I think a lot of people will still be playing mech
On June 04 2010 12:44 Lefnui wrote: Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
Complaining is never the "correct" response (though it's certainly logical). Either try to find a way to beat it, or play more games such that it impacts the matchup statistics (either as Terran owning Zergs, or as Zerg getting roflstomped by Terran). Blizzard is going to respond more to statistical reflections of imbalance than people whining about it on the forums.
That's not true at all. Blizzard has time and time again been responding to specific criticisms made on forums. Statistics have little to do with their decisions.
and you know this because you have been inside the room when blizzard makes thier balence choices, clearly if something is imba people are going to complain and the stats will also show it. There is no way for you or anyone who isn't part of the conversation on game balence to know how they are deciding to make changes
Except the Situation Report they post every patch explaining why they make certain changes x_X
On June 04 2010 13:08 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Can this get closed now? Patch 15 while I dont personally like the changes make this whole shit storm invalid.
"shitstorm"? I am confused as I have heard that term in so many posts of late, is this community about BW/SC2 or scat?
On June 02 2010 23:43 iCCup.Diamond wrote: I don't know if this means anything but I asked Artosis last night if he wanted to play in the KOTH and he would not even play because of TvZ mech.
On June 03 2010 20:04 TheLittleOne wrote: I will accept any challenge by a Top Terran player saying mech is too strong. Lets do some games and I will try to change your mind.
Regardless of the outcome of said games, <3 <3 <3 TLO.
TLO is fundamentally smart and understands principles and potential in concepts, whereas Artosis is an amazing Brood War player that learned the established 'rules' of the game from pros and then did what they did.
I believe TLO, and wish Blizzard wasn't so rash in their patches.
I really do think that Blizzard should have given this a little more time. Regardless of whether or not this was really imbalanced, waiting another week or so wouldn't hurt anything; now, we won't ever know if they made the right decision.
On June 04 2010 13:12 RoieTRS wrote: TLO was a brood war player too...
SC2 TvZ mech is very similar to BW TvZ mech...I think a lot of players were just 1a2a3a into the mech ball and then acting shocked when their army melted. Instead of revisiting their tactical play they focused on unit composition. These players will still have trouble with mech even with the siege tank nerf.
On June 04 2010 12:44 Lefnui wrote: Zerg players aren't 'qqing all day'. They're complaining because there is a matchup which is extremely imbalanced. That's completely logical and the correct response. It's quite frustrating when you dominate a game and still get rolled over by a newb because of tanks. It's not too early to tell, and it's not a case of whether or not mech "might be too strong". It's quite clear.
Complaining is never the "correct" response (though it's certainly logical). Either try to find a way to beat it, or play more games such that it impacts the matchup statistics (either as Terran owning Zergs, or as Zerg getting roflstomped by Terran). Blizzard is going to respond more to statistical reflections of imbalance than people whining about it on the forums.
That's not true at all. Blizzard has time and time again been responding to specific criticisms made on forums. Statistics have little to do with their decisions.
and you know this because you have been inside the room when blizzard makes thier balence choices, clearly if something is imba people are going to complain and the stats will also show it. There is no way for you or anyone who isn't part of the conversation on game balence to know how they are deciding to make changes
Except the Situation Report they post every patch explaining why they make certain changes x_X
And clearly the situation reports read "we heard players whining about this, so we nerfed it."
On June 04 2010 13:12 RoieTRS wrote: TLO was a brood war player too...
SC2 TvZ mech is very similar to BW TvZ mech...I think a lot of players were just 1a2a3a into the mech ball and then acting shocked when their army melted. Instead of revisiting their tactical play they focused on unit composition. These players will still have trouble with mech even with the siege tank nerf.
Of course they will. The tank nerf will have very little effect on tvz.
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
The response "it's too early to tell" can be said about EVERY single nerf or change blizzard has done so far. While it may be right to say that, with that logic you should have been complaining about patches and changes long ago...and on that note, when is the proper time to change, nerf, or buff something?
On June 04 2010 13:32 Dog22 wrote: The response "it's too early to tell" can be said about EVERY single nerf or change blizzard has done so far. While it may be right to say that, with that logic you should have been complaining about patches and changes long ago...and on that note, when is the proper time to change, nerf, or buff something?
To be honest, I really just wanted to see the showmatches in the situation it was presented in (i.e. no new patch) :D
On June 04 2010 13:31 Artosis wrote: TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
calling something completely unbeatable after like max 2 weeks of testing is plain stupid. sorry but i just dont agree with people jumping the "OMG IMBA" gun when people havent even tried to adapt yet.
and just calling a unbiased player wrong cause he speaks against the "OMG OP OPOP " train doesnt help either.
i love what you do for the community but really your balance comments always look abit whiney :/
im simply stating the truth here. idra and i looked into it completely. i did nothing but play vs mech for 2 weeks. i spoke with every top zerg player on the subject. we tested every combo and timing. i am not whining, i know it will be patched, im simply stating the findings of the best players, something else that you should love.
On June 04 2010 13:32 Dog22 wrote: The response "it's too early to tell" can be said about EVERY single nerf or change blizzard has done so far. While it may be right to say that, with that logic you should have been complaining about patches and changes long ago...and on that note, when is the proper time to change, nerf, or buff something?
To be honest, I really just wanted to see the showmatches in the situation it was presented in (i.e. no new patch) :D
On June 04 2010 13:39 Artosis wrote: im simply stating the truth here. idra and i looked into it completely. i did nothing but play vs mech for 2 weeks. i spoke with every top zerg player on the subject. we tested every combo and timing. i am not whining, i know it will be patched, im simply stating the findings of the best players, something else that you should love.
Will the tank + thor nerf make much of a difference then? Or is it a question of buffing zerg in some way instead of nerfing terran?
On June 04 2010 13:31 Artosis wrote: TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
replay or it didn't happen. did you get rolled over by pubs laddering? name who can do it then. no one?
Artosis there are 9 zerg combat units 10 if you include drops/overlords and 11 if you count nydus as a "unit" strategy. that means that there are hundreds upon hundreds of different combos, not including timings you tested ALL of them?
On June 04 2010 13:43 PrinceXizor wrote: Artosis there are 9 zerg combat units 10 if you include drops/overlords and 11 if you count nydus as a "unit" strategy. that means that there are hundreds upon hundreds of different combos, not including timings you tested ALL of them?
Lol!! Are you serious? Thanks for scaring away one few known players to post in this thread.
On June 04 2010 13:43 PrinceXizor wrote: Artosis there are 9 zerg combat units 10 if you include drops/overlords and 11 if you count nydus as a "unit" strategy. that means that there are hundreds upon hundreds of different combos, not including timings you tested ALL of them?
Lol!! Are you serious? Thanks for scaring away one few good players to post in this thread.
I wouldn't say anything artosis because i love your zerg and i think you're real good, but i've been beating mech, with difficulty, but i've been beating it, and i'm not near as good as you and idra are.
EDIT: also you shouldn't say you've tested every combination of unit and timing possible when really you haven't. if he was some random scrub i'd be applauded for calling him on a clear overexaggeration.
On June 04 2010 13:43 PrinceXizor wrote: Artosis there are 9 zerg combat units 10 if you include drops/overlords and 11 if you count nydus as a "unit" strategy. that means that there are hundreds upon hundreds of different combos, not including timings you tested ALL of them?
Lol!! Are you serious? Thanks for scaring away one few good players to post in this thread.
lol he's obv trolling
Honestly its hard to tell sometimes. I forgot about the previous unit counting business*..but still you never know given the quality of some of these posts..
*I think this was the thread on why zerg is dominant on Asia
On June 04 2010 13:45 Artosis wrote: ok done posting in sc2 forum once again lmfao.
Don't leave us >.> Would you mind sharing some of the information you came across? I'm interested in the opinions of some of the top players, beyond that of just "lolimba" or "lolnotimba"; I want to see what they actually think, in full.
im simply stating the truth here. idra and i looked into it completely. i did nothing but play vs mech for 2 weeks. i spoke with every top zerg player on the subject. we tested every combo and timing. i am not whining, i know it will be patched, im simply stating the findings of the best players, something else that you should love.
The rhetorical question is: is a 10 point damage decrease enough? I think Blizzard again adressed the problem in the wrong way. I don't want tanks to do 10 less dmg (that changed nothing to the initial hit just reduced the splash a bit), i want a slower atackrate or "dumbed" targeting AI...
Yeah he shouldn't leave just because of that. i mean really? He could post something about the various unit combinations he's tried and why he doesn't think the other likely solutions are viable and we could hardly argue with him. i mean he plays better quality mech players than i do but he's also a better quality zerg player than i am.
If artosis says hes has been playing mech for 2 weeks, and talk to all the top zergs in asia and they cant even come up with something that sort of works im going to go ahead and say it needed to be nerfed
still like TLO's way of believing he can do anything though
each race has 15 units. blizzard said in an interview shortly after sc2 beta started they wanted each race to have 15 units before expansions so things wouldnt be too complicated
i counted and damn, there really is 15 units. blizzard counts a unit as anything that costs minerals and/or gas and has no timed life and isnt a attachment of an already existing unit and could somehow effect combat in some way other than just tanking damage
whats depressing is i am not making this crap up. blizzard really views game balance like this
and whats retarded here is that the spells on the queen, chrono boost, and BOTH planetary fortress and orbital commands are counted as macro mechanics (and not units). which is pretty gay because this gives terran essentially 2 bonus units (scan and PF) while zerg loses one of their combat units to be a macro mechanic and protoss gets their macro mechanic for free without losing a unit
you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
each race has 15 units. blizzard said in an interview shortly after sc2 beta started they wanted each race to have 15 units before expansions so things wouldnt be too complicated
i counted and damn, there really is 15 units. blizzard counts a unit as anything that costs minerals and/or gas and has no timed life and isnt a attachment of an already existing unit and could somehow effect combat in some way other than just tanking damage
whats depressing is i am not making this crap up. blizzard really views game balance like this
and whats retarded here is that the spells on the queen, chrono boost, and BOTH planetary fortress and orbital commands are counted as macro mechanics (and not units). which is pretty gay because this gives terran essentially 2 bonus units (scan and PF) while zerg loses one of their combat units to be a macro mechanic and protoss gets their macro mechanic for free without losing a unit
spoilered cause of size. but are you srsly counting scan as a unit? i mean wtf?
I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
each race has 15 units. blizzard said in an interview shortly after sc2 beta started they wanted each race to have 15 units before expansions so things wouldnt be too complicated
i counted and damn, there really is 15 units. blizzard counts a unit as anything that costs minerals and/or gas and has no timed life and isnt a attachment of an already existing unit and could somehow effect combat in some way other than just tanking damage
whats depressing is i am not making this crap up. blizzard really views game balance like this
and whats retarded here is that the spells on the queen, chrono boost, and BOTH planetary fortress and orbital commands are counted as macro mechanics (and not units). which is pretty gay because this gives terran essentially 2 bonus units (scan and PF) while zerg loses one of their combat units to be a macro mechanic and protoss gets their macro mechanic for free without losing a unit
spoilered cause of size. but are you srsly counting scan as a unit? i mean wtf?
orbitals and PF and sensor towers can effect combat
and im saying scan is like a bonus unit. obviously in my list scan is not being counted as a unit since blizzard does not count scan as a unit. but it still effects combat like a unit can.
blizzard counts PF and orbitals as macro mechanics as shown how blizzard talks about having to sacrifice mules to get the PF which to them is part of the macro mechanic even though pf's can be spammed around the map blocking every choke for basically the price of a thor+mule each and costs no food and can nuetralize 100 food of your army if attacking near one. o well whatever
no im not counting scan as a unit. im saying its sorta like a bonus unit though
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
plz show us REPLAY of you killing mech terran with mutas, seriously DO IT and you will see by yourself.
He only talked to idra, who is also very opinionated. hell gamers are some of the most stubborn opinionated groups of people, it makes some of us extremely good at what we do that way (like artosis and idra) but it makes them also very unwilling to try random crazy stuff, like what TLO does.
Thing's i've tried that failed; Base race: terran floats building along with army and wins.
Roach/hydra: roaches get killed by detection or just tank fire, and hydras melt.|
Zergling Ultralisk: ultralisks get buggy when surrounded with lings and for some reason tanks target the lings with any overflow AI instead of a 2nd ultralisk, which kills that.
Brood Lord support: Terran gets vikings to compensate and splits them into a couple groups and dominates
Baneling drops: Vikings end Overlords (though effective mid game definitely not enough to win though)
Mass infestor: attempted to make loads of infestor to NP tanks simultaenously which failed because no human can possible target 16 + tanks instantly with 40ish infestors knowing exactly which infestors will be killed by tank fire and which tank they were targetting.
8 hatch zergling: LOL yeah i tried 3 basing and getting 8 hatches w/ queens and pumping retarded amounts of zerglings. worked for a little bit but tanks advanced in between waves and overpowered me
roach bombing: doesn't do enough overflow splash to kill the tanks and the overloads die quickly after. not cost effective enough.
Literally one game i killed all my drones and got 33 ultralisks and that wiped the terran force. but really at that point you are all in and unless you have crazy amounts of static defense including AA it won't work, and really no terran is going to see that happening, and let it happen.
Finding out that ultralisks at least can pierce the line of tanks in large enough numbers i slowly reduced the amount of ultralisks needed, i found that 20 ultralisks will kill mech lines effectively. this only leaves 80 food for non ultralisks, which while possible is way to expensive to get 20 ultralisks, so i tried different combinations WITH ultralisks, ling ultra didn't work, ultra infestor was bad, ultra hydra while good vs toss sucked vs mech, ultra brood lord, effective but too branched out and vikings dominated. tried ultralisk muta, didn't work because of thor and too gas heavy. so i decided i needed a moderately high cost mineralwise unit that uses low amounts of gas, came up with the roach or the zergling. knew zergling didn't work so i got roaches, did okay with it, except it was failing me miserably when it comes to efficiency i thought about how to up this efficiency, played around with gas heavy infestors, did the trick but couldn't get enough ultralisks out. so i decided on corruptors, corruption + anti air attack worked, it was cheaper on gas than infestors so it worked into the build pretty effectively, so i tried burrowed roaches underneath charging ultralisks with corruptors corrupting the tanks and taking out air. it worked, i had to replenish ultralisks after every attack, and if they had enoough factories and stuff it wasn't sustainable, but it was enough to eliminate an army and then charge the base and take out an expo, which pretty much always gave me the GG. thats how i've beaten mech. ultra/roach/corruptor. 3 high hp armored units each using their unique ability to gain an advantage.
You know, even if it's balanced, it's really boring to watch. Maybe zerg players will figure out how to have some aggression in the first twenty minutes of the game, and maybe it's just a matter of taste, but I think it's sort of a style that's not very fun to play, definitely not fun to play against, and not fun to watch.
As long as they don't nerf the biomech stuff, which makes for a dynamic match-up, I definitely don't have a problem with Blizzard making pure, turtling mech weak. Make the ultralisk hard-counter tanks. Like, make "frenzy" give a unit an immortal-like ability where there's a maximum damage threshold.
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
plz show us REPLAY of you killing mech terran with mutas, seriously DO IT and you will see by yourself.
Well as the server is down and nobody can view replays (edit: forgot offline viewer), I'd like to hear your opinion on why I'm wrong.
I will give you that this won't work on small maps. But on larger maps, speed always wins base races.
On June 04 2010 14:09 PrinceXizor wrote: Base race: terran floats building along with army and wins.
Just tried 35 1/1 roaches with speed against 10 2/0 tanks in unit tester and there's still 7 tanks left against the roaches. The roaches still melt to the tanks. I tried using burrow and tunneling claws and terran still has 3-4 tanks left. You can kill them all if you position the roaches absolutely perfectly but I tried to recreate what would happen in a real game and you're never going to have a perfect position.
I still don't see how zerg is supposed to defend against tanks with anything other than bl's because nothing on the ground can even touch tanks. All terran has to do is get a crit mass of tanks and vikings for bl's and I think if they don't win it's terran's fault at that point because it's impossible to pick off the tanks and harassing their bases at that point is delaying the inevitable. This patch doesn't have an answer to mech for zerg late game although it'll be easier for zerg to win before late game so on paper it might look ok.
On June 04 2010 14:09 PrinceXizor wrote: so i tried burrowed roaches underneath charging ultralisks with corruptors corrupting the tanks and taking out air. it worked, i had to replenish ultralisks after every attack, and if they had enoough factories and stuff it wasn't sustainable, but it was enough to eliminate an army and then charge the base and take out an expo, which pretty much always gave me the GG. thats how i've beaten mech. ultra/roach/corruptor. 3 high hp armored units each using their unique ability to gain an advantage.
So the Terran player didn't have Ravens or Scans or Thors?
While you have a solution, you seem to only have a solution against one type of composition and playstyle: tanks+air. Terran mech I imagine can be more diversified than that even including tanks. My brother plays Terran and he's beaten almost every Zerg opponent he's gone against not even using tanks. He admitted that Zerg don't seem to have a viable anti-mech composition based on his experiences. A Terran admitting this... whoa...
So, while you found a solution, that comp shouldn't be able to be hit assuming the terran is also good at harassment, which mech can also be good at pre-patch.
Too conditional in my mind to really cease the complaint of Terran mech dominance.
If Terran mech truly dominates all you'd think it would show in rankings and tournaments ... but I can't even remember having seen a terran finalist for a while (except TLO as random).
And when you consider proper Terran mech unbeatable as Zerg, how could a nerf from 60 to 50 sieged damage suddenly make a completely imbalanced MU stable? I feel Blizzard just wants to lure terran into more bio-based play like before the Marauder nerfs ... since mech shouldn't be the best solution in every MU.
@Artosis: c'mon, don't be annoyed by this mere mortal, he knows you'd kick his ass any day I was wondering wether you and Idra experimented with aggressive one base muta styles instead of the passive FE wich is currently the trend? It seems muta's would do a good job at harassing and keeping tank/ viking numbers low, whilst giving Zerg total map-control. When split the muta's can even handle Thors quite well, which leaves the terran having to turret all his bases and get marines to move out. Especially on larger maps (which are bound to come in larger numbers) this huge difference in mobility should render the terran unable to defend all his expos.
Edit: I see Idra has just replied to a similar question, but it still doesn't answer why muta's aren't viable vs mecchans? Why dammit!? Explain it to us noobs
On June 04 2010 13:59 IdrA wrote: you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
Excuuusse me? "You people"? What do you mean "you people"?
ignore the guy babbling about base races, ya mutas can take on turrets but if you have even 1 thor there + scvs on autorepair theyre just all gonna melt, and you're never gonna be able to fight head on with an army thats even close to your resource value if you're going mass muta.
1 base muta is a cheese, or an anti cheese. if theyre playing standard/safe you have to catch them very off guard. if they have turrets up, or a thor out, or even enough marines you're way way behind economically. however if theyre cheesing, depending on what build, you defend whatever it is with the mutas and then double expand while keeping them in their base, then transition to a real army.
On June 04 2010 13:59 IdrA wrote: you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
Excuuusse me? "You people"? What do you mean "you people"?
... the people who are acting like its hard to test something like this thoroughly you know the words right after "you people"
So the Terran player didn't have Ravens or Scans or Thors?
While you have a solution, you seem to only have a solution against one type of composition and playstyle: tanks+air. Terran mech I imagine can be more diversified than that even including tanks. My brother plays Terran and he's beaten almost every Zerg opponent he's gone against not even using tanks. He admitted that Zerg don't seem to have a viable anti-mech composition based on his experiences. A Terran admitting this... whoa...
So, while you found a solution, that comp shouldn't be able to be hit assuming the terran is also good at harassment, which mech can also be good at pre-patch.
Too conditional in my mind to really cease the complaint of Terran mech dominance.
Er.... did i say i only played vs tank + vikings? no i even said the opposite. BTW the "mech" composition i was testing against was about 10 hellions, 15 vikings 2 ravens 5 thors and 15 tanks. that's about 130 food worth of army, which i'd consider more than a typical terran will employ, but i might be wrong on that point. you send the corruptors in to die and kill off the ravens and then go in with your force.
Also i found just attacking this way gets your force killed you kind of have to micro with burrow and your roaches. unburrow get off a volley each then burrow to regen ect. the plan fails when the enemy has mass ravens, i figured the corruptor number is variable to the number of ravens you need to eliminate, but having ALOT of ravens makes the build unfeasible as well as it being easy to split up ravens (IE keep one in the base) and move it over the army after i take out the ones with your army. it's alot less common though so i figured it wasn't a big deal having that as your achilles heel.
This really does seem impossibly hard to break. However, I think the removal of smart targeting reaches far and beyond the scope of TvZ and it may not be the best idea, unless some other buff was placed into mech. However, that would also buff non-maxed terran mech army, so I have reservations about it too. The only thing I can think of is buffing tier 3 of zerg, but broodlords can't be buffed too much because of zvp, and blizzard doesn't seem to know what to do about ultras.
On June 04 2010 14:41 PrinceXizor wrote: Er.... did i say i only played vs tank + vikings? no i even said the opposite. BTW the "mech" composition i was testing against was about 10 hellions, 15 vikings 2 ravens 5 thors and 15 tanks. that's about 130 food worth of army, which i'd consider more than a typical terran will employ, but i might be wrong on that point. you send the corruptors in to die and kill off the ravens and then go in with your force.
Also i found just attacking this way gets your force killed you kind of have to micro with burrow and your roaches. unburrow get off a volley each then burrow to regen ect. the plan fails when the enemy has mass ravens, i figured the corruptor number is variable to the number of ravens you need to eliminate, but having ALOT of ravens makes the build unfeasible as well as it being easy to split up ravens (IE keep one in the base) and move it over the army after i take out the ones with your army. it's alot less common though so i figured it wasn't a big deal having that as your achilles heel.
But you said you only had to replace Ultras in your post above. Now it sounds like you have to replace Ultras AND Corruptors.
Your explaination had just pieces of the Terran puzzle listed so it was difficult to extract the rest of the composition. No where did it say that he had Ravens, or even Hellions.
But wouldn't your plan also fail if he had even a couple Scans? If he saw the Roaches, I would be hard pressed to believe he wasn't scanning the area to nail such close range Roaches.
So the Terran player didn't have Ravens or Scans or Thors?
While you have a solution, you seem to only have a solution against one type of composition and playstyle: tanks+air. Terran mech I imagine can be more diversified than that even including tanks. My brother plays Terran and he's beaten almost every Zerg opponent he's gone against not even using tanks. He admitted that Zerg don't seem to have a viable anti-mech composition based on his experiences. A Terran admitting this... whoa...
So, while you found a solution, that comp shouldn't be able to be hit assuming the terran is also good at harassment, which mech can also be good at pre-patch.
Too conditional in my mind to really cease the complaint of Terran mech dominance.
Er.... did i say i only played vs tank + vikings? no i even said the opposite. BTW the "mech" composition i was testing against was about 10 hellions, 15 vikings 2 ravens 5 thors and 15 tanks. that's about 130 food worth of army, which i'd consider more than a typical terran will employ, but i might be wrong on that point. you send the corruptors in to die and kill off the ravens and then go in with your force.
Also i found just attacking this way gets your force killed you kind of have to micro with burrow and your roaches. unburrow get off a volley each then burrow to regen ect. the plan fails when the enemy has mass ravens, i figured the corruptor number is variable to the number of ravens you need to eliminate, but having ALOT of ravens makes the build unfeasible as well as it being easy to split up ravens (IE keep one in the base) and move it over the army after i take out the ones with your army. it's alot less common though so i figured it wasn't a big deal having that as your achilles heel.
Sounds very interesting. Could you post some replays of your success with said strategy?
On June 04 2010 14:14 guitarizt wrote: Just tried 35 1/1 roaches with speed against 10 2/0 tanks in unit tester and there's still 7 tanks left against the roaches. The roaches still melt to the tanks. I tried using burrow and tunneling claws and terran still has 3-4 tanks left. You can kill them all if you position the roaches absolutely perfectly but I tried to recreate what would happen in a real game and you're never going to have a perfect position.
I still don't see how zerg is supposed to defend against tanks with anything other than bl's because nothing on the ground can even touch tanks. All terran has to do is get a crit mass of tanks and vikings for bl's and I think if they don't win it's terran's fault at that point because it's impossible to pick off the tanks and harassing their bases at that point is delaying the inevitable. This patch doesn't have an answer to mech for zerg late game although it'll be easier for zerg to win before late game so on paper it might look ok.
So what is your point? As a Zerg you will have your Roaches back in 27 seconds ... ALL OF THEM, while the Terran needs 45 seconds for one in each of his factories. I doubt there are 10 factories around to replenish everything in one go.
Please keep your race-mechanics in mind before posting such comparisons, because it is utterly ridiculous how Zerg are able to replenish a 200/200 army in one go, while the other two races are limited by the number of their MULTIPLE production facilities of several types.
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
plz show us REPLAY of you killing mech terran with mutas, seriously DO IT and you will see by yourself.
Why in the world would you try it with mutas? Because Brood Lords didnt exist in SC1? Air is the way to go if you want to kill Terran mech, but not Mutas. You need to remove the spotters for the tanks in any case, so Corruptors are required and its only a small step to having a few Brood Lords then. IdrA showed how few BLs you actually need, so dont start about cost.
So the Terran player didn't have Ravens or Scans or Thors?
While you have a solution, you seem to only have a solution against one type of composition and playstyle: tanks+air. Terran mech I imagine can be more diversified than that even including tanks. My brother plays Terran and he's beaten almost every Zerg opponent he's gone against not even using tanks. He admitted that Zerg don't seem to have a viable anti-mech composition based on his experiences. A Terran admitting this... whoa...
So, while you found a solution, that comp shouldn't be able to be hit assuming the terran is also good at harassment, which mech can also be good at pre-patch.
Too conditional in my mind to really cease the complaint of Terran mech dominance.
Er.... did i say i only played vs tank + vikings? no i even said the opposite. BTW the "mech" composition i was testing against was about 10 hellions, 15 vikings 2 ravens 5 thors and 15 tanks. that's about 130 food worth of army, which i'd consider more than a typical terran will employ, but i might be wrong on that point. you send the corruptors in to die and kill off the ravens and then go in with your force.
Also i found just attacking this way gets your force killed you kind of have to micro with burrow and your roaches. unburrow get off a volley each then burrow to regen ect. the plan fails when the enemy has mass ravens, i figured the corruptor number is variable to the number of ravens you need to eliminate, but having ALOT of ravens makes the build unfeasible as well as it being easy to split up ravens (IE keep one in the base) and move it over the army after i take out the ones with your army. it's alot less common though so i figured it wasn't a big deal having that as your achilles heel.
I want to believe it works but there's no way unless I see a rep. I tried this in unit tester and while it's not the perfect setting, trying to micro the roaches and get them to pick off the tanks is like throwing paper into a fire. It's also not cost effective to take out the ravens with corrupters if there's that many vikings around. Even if this is viable terran can just scan the roaches if he loses his ravens and that's the end of that.
On June 04 2010 13:59 IdrA wrote: you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
Excuuusse me? "You people"? What do you mean "you people"?
... the people who are acting like its hard to test something like this thoroughly you know the words right after "you people"
IdrA you know casual players can't balance the game or even test it correctly. I include myself in the casual group along with most diamond league players or anyone who doesn't play competitively in tournaments, leagues etc.
Heres stomp, Last two terran units (that share same upgrades) are unbeatable (with equal skill), the almighty synergy of doom, called Terran Mech. But actually its just Thor is broken, as unlike any other unit Thor completely eliminates whole class, whole class called air, meanwhile doing some serious ground damage as well. Tanks are dominating ground, thats fine, thats what air units for. But there cannot be two units that are dominating everything. But still, problem is Thor, why Thor and not Tank? Read the Half's post .
With a very little support Thor does not have any counter at all, allowing Tank seem to be OP, while actually Tank is unit that makes Starcraft to be Starcraft and not C&C whatever. It brings some very specific and unique dynamic in game, not just ball on ball stuff. Tank is fine, really.
Thor plus Turrets plus Raven abosrb is what makes mech to be OP. It's OP because being the strongest ground synergy (like it should, at cost of mobility) mech in same time completely invulnerable to air, thats the problem. Thor is broken.
On June 04 2010 14:14 guitarizt wrote: Just tried 35 1/1 roaches with speed against 10 2/0 tanks in unit tester and there's still 7 tanks left against the roaches.
Uhh, 2/0 tanks are pretty much 0/0 tanks pre-patch 15. Wouldn't it be more neutral and revealing test if you just done it without any upgrades? Naturally, the damage scaling is far in favor of the tanks and it'll get still get harder for the zerg as the game drags on. But really, you shouldn't be expecting to do much against Siege Tanks with pure Roaches at this point (maybe in the past, the less than ideal splash damage gave more leeway in this matchup).
On June 04 2010 14:41 PrinceXizor wrote: Er.... did i say i only played vs tank + vikings? no i even said the opposite. BTW the "mech" composition i was testing against was about 10 hellions, 15 vikings 2 ravens 5 thors and 15 tanks. that's about 130 food worth of army, which i'd consider more than a typical terran will employ, but i might be wrong on that point. you send the corruptors in to die and kill off the ravens and then go in with your force.
Also i found just attacking this way gets your force killed you kind of have to micro with burrow and your roaches. unburrow get off a volley each then burrow to regen ect. the plan fails when the enemy has mass ravens, i figured the corruptor number is variable to the number of ravens you need to eliminate, but having ALOT of ravens makes the build unfeasible as well as it being easy to split up ravens (IE keep one in the base) and move it over the army after i take out the ones with your army. it's alot less common though so i figured it wasn't a big deal having that as your achilles heel.
But you said you only had to replace Ultras in your post above. Now it sounds like you have to replace Ultras AND Corruptors.
Your explaination had just pieces of the Terran puzzle listed so it was difficult to extract the rest of the composition. No where did it say that he had Ravens, or even Hellions.
But wouldn't your plan also fail if he had even a couple Scans? If he saw the Roaches, I would be hard pressed to believe he wasn't scanning the area to nail such close range Roaches.
You have to replace corruptors yeah, but replacing corruptors doesn't create a gaping timing window in your build the way ultralisks do with them taking so damn long to complete.
and Yeah scans are an issue and to be honest the only way i can think of dealing with that, is some brilliant timing with overseers contaminating the orbitals so they can't cast for 30 seconds.
I mentioned detection in the roach/hydra fail, and i assumed hellions would be a part as a mineral dump + added protection vs lings.
I'll get Reps up as soon as i have some in the new patch since it should work a hell of alot better in the new patch and be less "well if the terran just went into hold mode what would you have to defend a counter" kind of thing. the attack tends to be all in, in waves. if that makes sense. you all in, and then you have about two minutes game time where you are vulnerable, and then you can break it again. which is why i said you will do fine unless terran has a ton of factories pumping units. it's full of holes and better players obviously change it up alot. but i think idra and artosis and other top zerg definitely can fill in some of those holes with better play.
EDIT: guitars yeah it's not cost effective to kill ravens that way but hell it's the only way you can deal with the tanks that i've found outside of rediculous amounts of ultralisks. its TIME effective to kill their army that way though, and i figure zergs can get better economies up than terran and time is really the deciding factor in the matchup.
I love playing z with my t. I haven't lost a game to z in past 8 games, cept when lings slipped choke during fact/rax lift-switch. Lings v SCVs is unfair. Plz nerf lings.
Anyway, at 2nd-place plat, I can't lose to z. Wonder what they doing in diamond.
On June 04 2010 13:59 IdrA wrote: you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
Excuuusse me? "You people"? What do you mean "you people"?
... the people who are acting like its hard to test something like this thoroughly you know the words right after "you people"
IdrA you know casual players can't balance the game or even test it correctly. I include myself in the casual group along with most diamond league players or anyone who doesn't play competitively in tournaments, leagues etc.
then casual players should recognize their shortcomings and shut up and listen to the people who know what theyre talking about instead of filling threads like this with bullshit.
mech is not imba cause you can't beat it. stop qq'ing about everything you get beat by, figure it out ffs. people are freaking amazing at whining when they lose too shit. rather rage and whine than get better.
On June 04 2010 14:14 guitarizt wrote: Just tried 35 1/1 roaches with speed against 10 2/0 tanks in unit tester and there's still 7 tanks left against the roaches. The roaches still melt to the tanks. I tried using burrow and tunneling claws and terran still has 3-4 tanks left. You can kill them all if you position the roaches absolutely perfectly but I tried to recreate what would happen in a real game and you're never going to have a perfect position.
I still don't see how zerg is supposed to defend against tanks with anything other than bl's because nothing on the ground can even touch tanks. All terran has to do is get a crit mass of tanks and vikings for bl's and I think if they don't win it's terran's fault at that point because it's impossible to pick off the tanks and harassing their bases at that point is delaying the inevitable. This patch doesn't have an answer to mech for zerg late game although it'll be easier for zerg to win before late game so on paper it might look ok.
So what is your point? As a Zerg you will have your Roaches back in 27 seconds ... ALL OF THEM, while the Terran needs 45 seconds for one in each of his factories. I doubt there are 10 factories around to replenish everything in one go.
Please keep your race-mechanics in mind before posting such comparisons, because it is utterly ridiculous how Zerg are able to replenish a 200/200 army in one go, while the other two races are limited by the number of their MULTIPLE production facilities of several types.
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
plz show us REPLAY of you killing mech terran with mutas, seriously DO IT and you will see by yourself.
Why in the world would you try it with mutas? Because Brood Lords didnt exist in SC1? Air is the way to go if you want to kill Terran mech, but not Mutas.
Did you not read my post about zerg throwing multiple armies at terran yet they still can't even really make a dent in their army? I forget who it was that played a game on steppes of war but zerg threw three maxed armies at terran and didn't even make a dent. I think it was casted by iccup.
Zerg can have 70 2/2 roaches that lose to 20 2/0 tanks and there's still 16 tanks left. How many armies do you want zerg to throw at that? So zerg is forced to go bl corrupter but I haven't seen anyone get that to work in any high level game.
Completely agreed about the thor point. I'd prefer that the thor was placed into a more goliath type role, without splash or the anti-light bonus. that way mutas could help a little more. But of course that would force zerg to make mutas, which would, in turn make terran stop going mech all together. Ugh, there's such a thin line between useful and OP.
EDIT: although i would be really interested to see how hard of a time TLO has beating mech.
On June 04 2010 15:13 KMK wrote: mech is not imba cause you can't beat it. stop qq'ing about everything you get beat by, figure it out ffs. people are freaking amazing at whining when they lose too shit. rather rage and whine than get better.
It's beatable but the way to beat it is stupid atm because zerg has to end the game early by either opening roach and going muta back to roach or opening muta and going roach. We have to rely on stupid tactics like hoping terran screws up and we can drop or nydus them and they lose too much econ while letting us double expo. It reminds me of early beta where all the tosses loved the mid game push because as the game went longer it was hard to beat zerg. They started figuring out how to fast expo but for zerg that doesn't even matter because we can have more bases and I still can't get out enough stuff. If you start out a platinum terran player with 3 bases 20 tanks against a zerg with all his hive tech ready, 5 mins to build and two more expos the terran player will win more even though he's a worse player. That doesn't seem right to me.
I actually want to hear what idrA wants for balance. If you do read this, I'd be interested in hearing you SC2 balance thoughts at high level. Or did he make a post on it specifically already?
I still feel the answer lies in mutalisks, thors are just so incredibly slow and hard to mass ...I don't see them fending off something like split up groups of three muta's each attacking different places. Your muta's should always outnumber Thors and these simply can't be everywhere ...
Muta's could also be efficient at sniping ravens, giving burrowed units a lot more room to play. Plus replacing ravens is a lot of gas that doesn't get pumped into tanks/ thor. Scanning also means a lot less minerals for turret spamming. Terrans should definately be hurt economically as straight up engaging maxxed out mech doesn't work without Dark Swarm.
I am tempted to play Zerg for a while to figure this out ... beating something dubbed unbeatable makes it all the more jummy to pull off. Hmm ... will def. return with more crazy theorycraft for you to shoot down
On June 04 2010 15:30 DooMDash wrote: I actually want to hear what idrA wants for balance. If you do read this, I'd be interested in hearing you SC2 balance thoughts at high level. Or did he make a post on it specifically already?
Increasing brood lord speed or reducing thor speed would allow brood lords to hard counter mech by kiting thors and having broodlings wreak havoc with tank friendly fire.
Either of these changes could have dangerous repercussions vs protoss though;
Fungal growth's range of 9 doesn't allow the infestor to get within range of tanks, but possibly within range of thors which could let the brood lords dip in and out of range, shooting at the offending tanks/thors as needed. Maybe increasing range of fungal growth would be a fair change...sac an overlord getting vision, send an infestor to snare them->brood lord(s) dip(s) into and out of range of thors shooting broodlings (also provides friendly fire dmg from tanks, assuming sieged), should be able to either attack tanks and kill them quickly or do a little dmg to the thors (400 hp is quite a mountain tho)
New forum goer here: You supposed pros are suuch idiots. Lets break it down. If tank's splash is owning up your army then don't send them in all at once plain in simple. What i do is send 2 roaches at a to distract the tanks then roll over their army and kill their base its literally THAT SIMPLE. I'll post some replays later.
On June 04 2010 13:59 IdrA wrote: you people act like its hard to test something like this thoroughly.. tanks obliterate everything except roaches, kind of, on the ground and sensor towers make any kind of drop, nydus, harass-based play worthless. doesnt give you many options, you figure out that overwhelming them with roaches is impractical, ultras still suck, mutas can run around being gay but ultimately you're gonna have to deal with an army that... you cant deal with, and pdd + vikings > heavy air.
the only way to win was to either have your opponent not execute it correctly, either in terms of mechanics or not using sensor towers or ravens, or to simply be way better than them.
Excuuusse me? "You people"? What do you mean "you people"?
... the people who are acting like its hard to test something like this thoroughly you know the words right after "you people"
Oh, those people. Jeeeez TL, no need for a warning. Can't a guy post an overused black joke anymore? You people? I bet if Chris Rock would've said it, it would've been just fine.
Personally, I am in agreement with the idea that Terran mech was imba. Whether or not this patch will make much of a difference in TvZ, I guess we'll find out...and it will be interesting to see what this does to PvT as well. Tanks were definitely OP though and needed to be nerfed somehow. A tier 2 armored unit that has the capability to do 60 damage (without upgrades) with splash at a range of 13...idk about you, but it sounds a bit OP to me. Yes, it is a costly unit, but with their effectiveness it damn well should be.
i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
I just love how your comment doesn't contribute in any way to this thread and actually seems to be a comment from the official bnet forums.
You're the kind of person that thinks "blank known gamer said Terran mech is imba, so it must be true". Just like some people think the world will end in 2012. Luckily there are still people that try to overcome obstacles rather than lying in front of them and complaining that they're there. And that's where TLO gains a little credit for offering to do showmatches Zerg vs mech (even though he might be steamrollered anyway). Idra and Artosis deserve equal credit for at least trying to find a decent counter, which I'm sure will happen eventually (muta's for sure )
You on the other hand write posts which suggests that everyone besides the absolute #1 Diamond pro's don't know shit and shouldn't make suggestions. And what's just so damn funny is that you don't even know us or our rankings to begin with.
On June 04 2010 14:14 guitarizt wrote: Just tried 35 1/1 roaches with speed against 10 2/0 tanks in unit tester and there's still 7 tanks left against the roaches. The roaches still melt to the tanks. I tried using burrow and tunneling claws and terran still has 3-4 tanks left. You can kill them all if you position the roaches absolutely perfectly but I tried to recreate what would happen in a real game and you're never going to have a perfect position.
I still don't see how zerg is supposed to defend against tanks with anything other than bl's because nothing on the ground can even touch tanks. All terran has to do is get a crit mass of tanks and vikings for bl's and I think if they don't win it's terran's fault at that point because it's impossible to pick off the tanks and harassing their bases at that point is delaying the inevitable. This patch doesn't have an answer to mech for zerg late game although it'll be easier for zerg to win before late game so on paper it might look ok.
So what is your point? As a Zerg you will have your Roaches back in 27 seconds ... ALL OF THEM, while the Terran needs 45 seconds for one in each of his factories. I doubt there are 10 factories around to replenish everything in one go.
Please keep your race-mechanics in mind before posting such comparisons, because it is utterly ridiculous how Zerg are able to replenish a 200/200 army in one go, while the other two races are limited by the number of their MULTIPLE production facilities of several types.
On June 04 2010 14:06 Trok67 wrote:
On June 04 2010 14:03 iEchoic wrote: I fail to see how mutas don't work vs terran mech. I think that a majority of Zerg players make the following mistakes with their mutas:
1) They directly engage multiple thors 2) They are afraid of killing missile turrets (more on this below) 3) When the opponent's army attacks, they run back and fight it
The conclusion I came to from testing was that Mutas are the answer to terran Mech. If the Terran player attacks, just have a base race. You will both end up losing your base, but the mutas can fly around the map preventing terran from expoing while zerg can continue to expo and stay alive while thors are too slow to prevent it.
Zerg players throw a panic fit when the Terran places missile turrets and then attacks. Once you get 6+ mutas, you can drop missile turrets without a scratch. Just drop the turrets. Zerg players are WAY too scared of missile turrets.
You can win a fight vs mutas with thors but if the fight doesn't occur that advantage is completely negated.
plz show us REPLAY of you killing mech terran with mutas, seriously DO IT and you will see by yourself.
Why in the world would you try it with mutas? Because Brood Lords didnt exist in SC1? Air is the way to go if you want to kill Terran mech, but not Mutas.
Did you not read my post about zerg throwing multiple armies at terran yet they still can't even really make a dent in their army? I forget who it was that played a game on steppes of war but zerg threw three maxed armies at terran and didn't even make a dent. I think it was casted by iccup.
Zerg can have 70 2/2 roaches that lose to 20 2/0 tanks and there's still 16 tanks left. How many armies do you want zerg to throw at that? So zerg is forced to go bl corrupter but I haven't seen anyone get that to work in any high level game.
Did YOU bother reading my post? "Throw army at tanks" ... of course he gets toasted. Sieged tanks are immobile and CANT SHOOT AIR, so you are supposed to NOT attack with ground armies but with air. No matter what anyone saiys a ton of corruptors and a few Brood Lords (plus maybe a queen for Transfusion on BLs?) will get rid of a mech army. Stop whining and figure it out the same way that Terrans have figured out that Depots against Zerg are vulnerable to Baneling bust and that Barracks/Factories work much better.
Ok welp make up your minds then someone said zerg has it easy cause they can just macro up another army implying that should be the answer. I never said to fight tanks head on but at some point you have to deal with 15 tanks with support heading towards your nat.
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
I promise you. After I found some new builds together with Jinro I had no problem beating some high level Terrans anymore at all. (not that I had too much trouble dealing with mech before, but now it seemed like my win ratio sky rocketed, of course that is only because they havent played it before and didnt react with the perfect counter, but it shows that the current mech build wasnt not rofloverpowered)
Just because you and Idra didnt come up with a solution, doesnt mean there is none. You should open your mind for new solutions. I am sure you have not tested everything possible. I dont like your whole attitude, even if some races dominates for a few months with a bo, it doesnt mean it is imbalanced, it might only show that i.e Zerg hasnt found a proper counter yet. You sir seem to be biased by your favourite race
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
On June 04 2010 13:39 Artosis wrote: im simply stating the truth here. idra and i looked into it completely. i did nothing but play vs mech for 2 weeks. i spoke with every top zerg player on the subject. we tested every combo and timing. i am not whining, i know it will be patched, im simply stating the findings of the best players, something else that you should love.
No matter how good you could be you're quite arrogant to think you'll be able to think about and try out ALL the possibilites in a game of this complexity.
Beside, the bias is very strong in here.
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
Fuck, I thought he was ? Or well, I thought he was more like McGyver
Please make my day and confirm it involves muta's TLO
And I'm kinda curious whether you'll still be taking on Mecchan challengers as Zerg, since the siege tanks already got nerfed? Would be awesome nonetheless.
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
I promise you. After I found some new builds together with Jinro I had no problem beating some high level Terrans anymore at all. (not that I had too much trouble dealing with mech before, but now it seemed like my win ratio sky rocketed, of course that is only because they havent played it before and didnt react with the perfect counter, but it shows that the current mech build wasnt not rofloverpowered)
Just because you and Idra didnt come up with a solution, doesnt mean there is none. You should open your mind for new solutions. I am sure you have not tested everything possible. I dont like your whole attitude, even if some races dominates for a few months with a bo, it doesnt mean it is imbalanced, it might only show that i.e Zerg hasnt found a proper counter yet. You sir seem to be biased by your favourite race
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
TLO is officially my favorite SC2 player....(sorry LZ!!)
The guy played random for 9/10 of the beta so ill take his word on balance over any 1 race master at this point.
2 weeks is hardly enough time for people to start calling a strat OP. Anyone remember when the fantasy build started getting popular in BW for a while?
the word "build" is just out of place. it's raw facts: mass mech vs Z ... army vs army. how do you beat it. you don't beat it. ofc you can nydus etc to a certain point (let's say sensor towers are an illusion) and do dmg to his "immobile mech left alone base. but that's not the point .... it's about raw muscle power. army vs army.
In the beginning everyone agreed that Terran mech was unplayable. Then they got two tiny changes (splash damage center change and + 10 hp for siege tank) and now all of a sudden its overpowered?
I find this slightly irritating and the "we tried everything and we are the best to check it and no one else can succeed if we didnt" attitude of two prominent Zerg players here shockingly biased. Wasnt there a quote thrown around in the beginning that there is no imbalance, but rather that you just had to figure out how to beat something?
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
I promise you. After I found some new builds together with Jinro I had no problem beating some high level Terrans anymore at all. (not that I had too much trouble dealing with mech before, but now it seemed like my win ratio sky rocketed, of course that is only because they havent played it before and didnt react with the perfect counter, but it shows that the current mech build wasnt not rofloverpowered)
Just because you and Idra didnt come up with a solution, doesnt mean there is none. You should open your mind for new solutions. I am sure you have not tested everything possible. I dont like your whole attitude, even if some races dominates for a few months with a bo, it doesnt mean it is imbalanced, it might only show that i.e Zerg hasnt found a proper counter yet. You sir seem to be biased by your favourite race
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
Would you share this BO of yours anytime soon? Not saying I don't believe you, but you know, examples, BO are needed not reassurances that "there is a way".
The patch surprised me too. With the numbers of games played over the course of 1 day alone however, Blizz should be able to generate a hole lot of data. Enough to compare this to the data of patch 14. So lets all get back into the game and give them what they need shall we?
mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
I promise you. After I found some new builds together with Jinro I had no problem beating some high level Terrans anymore at all. (not that I had too much trouble dealing with mech before, but now it seemed like my win ratio sky rocketed, of course that is only because they havent played it before and didnt react with the perfect counter, but it shows that the current mech build wasnt not rofloverpowered)
Just because you and Idra didnt come up with a solution, doesnt mean there is none. You should open your mind for new solutions. I am sure you have not tested everything possible. I dont like your whole attitude, even if some races dominates for a few months with a bo, it doesnt mean it is imbalanced, it might only show that i.e Zerg hasnt found a proper counter yet. You sir seem to be biased by your favourite race
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
Would you share this BO of yours anytime soon? Not saying I don't believe you, but you know, examples, BO are needed not reassurances that "there is a way".
The patch surprised me too. With the numbers of games played over the course of 1 day alone however, Blizz should be able to generate a hole lot of data. Enough to compare this to the data of patch 14. So lets all get back into the game and give them what they need shall we?
Yes but are you winning late game? Isn't it bad for the game if one race is heavily favored to win late game and another has to end the game before it gets there in order to have a chance?
TLO is completely wrong. pre-this-patch (havent tried this patch yet), properly played mech is completely unbeatable by zerg. if he's been winning vs it, he's been playing people who have no idea how to mech.
I promise you. After I found some new builds together with Jinro I had no problem beating some high level Terrans anymore at all. (not that I had too much trouble dealing with mech before, but now it seemed like my win ratio sky rocketed, of course that is only because they havent played it before and didnt react with the perfect counter, but it shows that the current mech build wasnt not rofloverpowered)
Just because you and Idra didnt come up with a solution, doesnt mean there is none. You should open your mind for new solutions. I am sure you have not tested everything possible. I dont like your whole attitude, even if some races dominates for a few months with a bo, it doesnt mean it is imbalanced, it might only show that i.e Zerg hasnt found a proper counter yet. You sir seem to be biased by your favourite race
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
Would you share this BO of yours anytime soon? Not saying I don't believe you, but you know, examples, BO are needed not reassurances that "there is a way".
The patch surprised me too. With the numbers of games played over the course of 1 day alone however, Blizz should be able to generate a hole lot of data. Enough to compare this to the data of patch 14. So lets all get back into the game and give them what they need shall we?
Yes but are you winning late game? Isn't it bad for the game if one race is heavily favored to win late game and another has to end the game before it gets there in order to have a chance?
Terran isn't heavily favored late game unless you allow him to get equal or more bases than you, which was the same in broodwar.....
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode)
I totally agree on this.. The "normal" usage of banelings is so stupid. There are nice usages of this unit with overlord or burrow but the "run and explode no matter what" thing is just dumb. It's not interresting for the player who is playing the banelings and the player who is playing against.
They should be patched in order to make them more interresting to play. For example, lurkers were a success in term of micro for both players..
But, since Blizzard didn't change them in 15 patches, i guess they have no plan to do it in the future
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
Best post in here and I completely agree.
I must say though that the point of the whole terran mech vs Z discussion is skewed in my mind, it should not be about if its unbeatable or not (its not) but how hard or easy the resp. builds/strats are to execute. In this case its extremely easy to play terran mech, and insanly hard for Z to win.
That translate into; At a higher lvl where players are really good about all aspects of the game, this MU is not unbalanced. But at lower lvl, like mid-diamond and lower where the players are less accomplished, Z-players have a really hard time doing all that is required to compete with T-mech, while the T players have a much easier time. THAT is the problem imo.
Fixing the ZvT MU could simply have been done by increasing supplycap to 300/300 for instance. The tanknerf, well not that big of a deal really. Dont think the before mentioned players(me included) will be helped much by it, because the easy T vs hard Z approach still applies.
The tank-nerf I thought would be coming was a significantly longer sieging-time for tanks, but I guess they went another route.
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
On June 04 2010 21:28 TheLittleOne wrote: I actually AIM for the lategame. I hate the early game vs Terran.
Mind uploading 2-3 replays of your games ZvTmech ??
cause... right now all I see is words and words and words.... not that I don't trust you or anything, just that I'm septical about it!
You could always play him if your skeptical.
I'm not a big fan of terrans eventho my terran account is currently in diamond with a much higher win rate than my zerg account I just don't feel the race at all, but I'd just like to see TLO back up his saying. Right now he's been saying in every page of this post that he could beat almost any Tmech or at least have some kind of superior win:lose ratio against it.
Like I said, not that I don't want to say that he's right, cause I would like to be proven wrong... and understand HOW and WHY most of the pros didn't find the solution (but him)... but right now he's staying vague about it.
It's like.... I'm telling you I'm millionaire... but I live in a small house with my dog. Do you trust me? I might be millionaire anyways and tell the truth, but my house and my dog just don't seems right. Now if I open my garage door and you see a FERARI F1, you'll say ahhh ok I trust you, you're a millionnaire.
Same thing, I'd like to beleive that there is a solution, but it doesn't look like there is one. If TLO REALLY found one, than... he might be able to show us 2-3 replays to prove it and than we'll be able to say... WoW TLO you're really a god of SC2 !
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
Sure. Skill follows a normal distribution. Meaning, there are a few who suck really hard, and a few who rule. The majority of players is somewhere in between.
People like Idra are right when they say the game is balanced if a certain strategy can be countered on the top level (read: by people like him). However, the question is, if pro-level balance is the only thing Blizzard should go for. eSports needs an audience. Without it no sponsor is going to invest money in tournaments etc. Now, imagine how beneficial a game would be for eSports if only high-skilled players would find it balanced? If you can't get the newbs to play (and enjoy) the game who'll end up with a competitive game that noone will bother to learn, because its no fun from the get-go.
But this is too much OT now, sry, but what the heck
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
Excellent post :C Only thing I'm unsure about is the 40+20 for siege tanks, but I guess that would make zealots better TvP which is ok since they kinda suck right now (hellions own them, tanks own them....).
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
The contradiction is going to make my head explode!
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
I think he means that people treat TLO as better than every other player. Like how a bunch of people applauded TLO for that post where he said he'd play any Terran to show that mech isn't imbalanced, but when drewbie said he'd play any Zerg to show mech IS imbalanced 20 pages ago it gets overlooked :p
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
i think the mech nerf was pretty justified but those would all be good changes, especially the baneling one though if you nerf marauders and banelings the matchup would become really roach centric which tends to be pretty boring
and they need to do somethin about frenzy, either make it more mana and aoe or just get rid of it and put the infested back on infestors
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
i think the mech nerf was pretty justified but those would all be good changes, especially the baneling one though if you nerf marauders and banelings the matchup would become really roach centric which tends to be pretty boring
and they need to do somethin about frenzy, either make it more mana and aoe or just get rid of it and put the infested back on infestors
Yeah i miss infested terrans from infestors, they were actually useful then. I wouldn't mind another swap. putting frenzy on overseers (making it 100 energy and AOE)
On June 04 2010 15:13 KMK wrote: mech is not imba cause you can't beat it. stop qq'ing about everything you get beat by, figure it out ffs. people are freaking amazing at whining when they lose too shit. rather rage and whine than get better.
It's beatable but the way to beat it is stupid atm because zerg has to end the game early by either opening roach and going muta back to roach or opening muta and going roach. We have to rely on stupid tactics like hoping terran screws up and we can drop or nydus them and they lose too much econ while letting us double expo. It reminds me of early beta where all the tosses loved the mid game push because as the game went longer it was hard to beat zerg. They started figuring out how to fast expo but for zerg that doesn't even matter because we can have more bases and I still can't get out enough stuff. If you start out a platinum terran player with 3 bases 20 tanks against a zerg with all his hive tech ready, 5 mins to build and two more expos the terran player will win more even though he's a worse player. That doesn't seem right to me.
i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
Just look at the SC2 World Cup final, the best Terrans plaid in it and it still ended up with a Zerg mirror final. And that other Korean tournament plaid 1-2 months ago, TOP3=3 Zergs. There's nothing to suggest that mech is imba once the Zerg player is thinking further than a moving a bunch of roaches hydra.
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
Well, he's offered to take on any good Terran and beat his mech while playing as Zerg himself. That's why I don't understand why he doesn't just describe his BO/strategy here. If he's going to show it ingame we'll get to see it anyway.
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
who ever said i was "complaining"? i just find it funny ppl agree with TLO purely and only because he is TLO while ignoring any other player that is of equal lvl to him
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
Well, he's offered to take on any good Terran and beat his mech while playing as Zerg himself. That's why I don't understand why he doesn't just describe his BO/strategy here. If he's going to show it ingame we'll get to see it anyway.
the problem with mech is late game BO is early game you wont beat mech with some magic BO thats why
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
who ever said i was "complaining"? i just find it funny ppl agree with TLO purely and only because he is TLO while ignoring any other player that is of equal lvl to him
What races are these "other players" using ? 100% Zerg huh ?
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
who ever said i was "complaining"? i just find it funny ppl agree with TLO purely and only because he is TLO while ignoring any other player that is of equal lvl to him
What races are these "other players" using ? 100% Zerg huh ?
this is exactly my point. artosis and idra are not just any random zerg players.
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
wat? terran is hard to play so its OP? what kinda of logic is that?
blizzard was too quick with this patch indeed, and i am glad that certain people in korea or not balance designers or this game would be horrible to play.
terran hard to play ? bio terran maybe, but nech terran definitely not. Turtle into his base make 2-3 thors power rangers and 10 tanks and then a-move to the zerg base isnt really hard
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
Excellent post :C Only thing I'm unsure about is the 40+20 for siege tanks, but I guess that would make zealots better TvP which is ok since they kinda suck right now (hellions own them, tanks own them....).
Zealots just need a lategame buff. They are pretty good against zerg early game, but against Terran they almost have no use. If charge were made cheaper, marauders might not be so OP (they just counter all toss ground - all toss needs is a good counter). Also, having 40+20 siege tanks would make them useful meat shields. I think both of those would make zealots vs terran more viable, and marauders less OP.
On the other hand, if carriers or mothership weren't so worthless, this could be another counter that would force a terran not to focus so much on marauder. (Just having void ray be the only toss air, made really annoying ladder games where for a time all toss would do is VR rush.)
On June 05 2010 05:00 TeWy wrote: There's nothing to suggest that mech is imba once the Zerg player is thinking further than a moving a bunch of roaches hydra.
Well... there's a lot of room between attack-moving a roach/hydra ball and playing in the SC2 world cup final and, judging from what people are saying, mech is a problem even in the presence of some tactical pianification and ingenuity.
Some people tend to agree with TLO since he plays both Zerg and Terran and therefore has little reason to be biased in favor of a specific race. But that some people share the same opinion as TLO doesn't mean that's a consequence of it being TLO's opinion, people just tend to have differing thoughts. I could say you're just siding with mech imba because Idra and Artosist think it is, but I won't since such comments lead nowhere.
It's just hard to believe Mech owns everything when it doesn't show in the ladders and tournaments. And with the huge race diversity it's also hard to imagine one strategy to be completely unstoppable, especially since there hasn't even been sufficient time to work out all possible counters, BO's and strategies. So there's a couple of reasons why I question Mech being totally OP, pick one.
Also I don't remember giving Idra or Artosis any lip, they've gotten the respect they deserve for being great gamers. I'm just trying to be constructive and flexible when it comes to SC2, because the game is far from being figured out ... hell, it isn't even released yet.
Hrm...althought 40+20 for tanks would be bad for tvz, because tanks are supposed to counter hydra. Without tanks, there is almost no way for terran to deal with hydras. There really needs to be medium armor, so hydras can take 50, with zealots taking only 40. Ah well.
On June 05 2010 05:33 Saechiis wrote: Some people tend to agree with TLO since he plays both Zerg and Terran and therefore has little reason to be biased in favor of a specific race. But that some people share the same opinion as TLO doesn't mean that's a consequence of it being TLO's opinion, people just tend to have differing thoughts. I could say you're just siding with mech imba because Idra and Artosist think it is, but I won't since such comments lead nowhere.
It's just hard to believe Mech owns everything when it doesn't show in the ladders and tournaments. And with the huge race diversity it's also hard to imagine one strategy to be completely unstoppable, especially since there hasn't even been sufficient time to work out all possible counters, BO's and strategies. So there's a couple of reasons why I question Mech being totally OP, pick one.
Also I don't remember giving Idra or Artosis any lip, they've gotten the respect they deserve for being great gamers. I'm just trying to be constructive and flexible when it comes to SC2, because the game is far from being figured out ... it isn't even released yet.
The main people that thought mech was imba were the stubborn people that were having trouble with it. So yes, that'd be a few people that were very vocal about it being too strong yet rather than finding ways around it gameplay wise, they went cnc style forum raging to get blizz to nerf it.
The entire rootz clan apparently claimed they all thought it was imba and should be nerfed. I don't think they realized they are a small sample size of the entire world that is playing sc2 beta and the two games posted in the OP of this thread and other games were not enough games played to claim "mech imba." oh well, blizzard "listened" to the whining, ala EA style cnc patches, and nerfed tanks some.
The changes themselves are not "OMG HORRIBLE" but it's the fact that blizzard didn't wait long enough to see how things panned out that is "OMG HORRIBLE."
and qft, the game is far from being figured out, yet a few hotheads in the community are arrogant enough to think they have it entirely figured out. There's always more options to try.
I said this from the beginning and I *still* say it's the best fix. Give Corrupters "Spawn Broodling". Doesn't break anything just gives a small initiation option for ground-based Zerg mid-game armies while making for a sensible transition into late-game BLords.
It also makes sense to me from a "lore" perspective since Corrupters are there to "corrupt" and they evolve into BLords anyway.
Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
Every unit that damages instantly doesn't overkill. Any unit with a projectile attack will overkill as in BW. I think stalkers are in the 2nd category.
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
units that has projectiles can overkill such as marauders and stalkers but units that hit instantly like tank which would be the best example or like colossus simply just dont overkill because theres no time between the attack and the hit. all units in sc2 are just as smart when it comes to overkilling but the some units still do it because of the projectiles being slow in the air
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
Well, he's offered to take on any good Terran and beat his mech while playing as Zerg himself. That's why I don't understand why he doesn't just describe his BO/strategy here. If he's going to show it ingame we'll get to see it anyway.
the problem with mech is late game BO is early game you wont beat mech with some magic BO thats why
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
Any unit that has an instant attack doesn't over kill. Things like tanks, marines, vikings in ground mode where there isn't a missile animation. Units that have missile animations like stalkers and marauders can still overkill. Tanks just happen to be the most noteable of the non overkill units because of their high damage and low fire rate.
On June 05 2010 05:56 lew wrote: So after the big nerf, tanks are still imba? I do not agree
tanks will always own the living shit out of zerglings banelings and hydra before they reach the terran army as long as they deal normal dmg and thats the purpose of them. now maybe u dont wanna pump as many tanks as before since they wont own the shit out of roaches like they did before or upgrade mech like u did before but the idea is still the same. the only difference now is that terrans r gonna upgrade their bio and go with mech + bio army where the tanks purpose is to destroy all non-roach thor kill all muta easily with support by marines and the rest can be marauders in ur army that will own roach. sounds easy in theory but in practical it can be quite hard to get this death ball,
however my point is just that tanks r insanily good at killing 1 type of units (small) while its not so strong against others and this is enough to make it "imba"
thats why i want them to make the tank not such a hardcounter unit vs small units that clump up by giving it a small dmg against them while it has a decent dmg vs larger units. generally ud say not normal attack dmg is hardcounter-style but in this case its the opposite, just because of how the firerate and splashdmg is made
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
Every unit that damages instantly doesn't overkill. Any unit with a projectile attack will overkill as in BW. I think stalkers are in the 2nd category.
I believe this is correct. IIRC, Tanks also fell in that category in SC1 (there was a 1-frame delay between the explosion animation and a unit actually dying, or something like that), but in SC2, they fire instantly.
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
Every unit that damages instantly doesn't overkill. Any unit with a projectile attack will overkill as in BW. I think stalkers are in the 2nd category.
I believe this is correct. IIRC, Tanks also fell in that category in SC1 (there was a 1-frame delay between the explosion animation and a unit actually dying, or something like that), but in SC2, they fire instantly.
Bring this back . It was cool seeing tanks firing on a reaver that made it into the shuttle JUST in time!
you can still kite ultras around with stim micro..marauders are excellent vs ultras if they have some room to move. of course if they got fungaled then theyre toast. they still kill them fairly fast tho
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
There's no motive for him to make this up though. What's more likely? He has found a way to beat mech and maybe it's not as imba as we thought or he just likes to be a contrarian?
On June 05 2010 04:56 zergporn wrote: i respect TLO for creativity and random, but now he falls down in my eyes while he keep saying mech is fine whatever without any proof. these are just words, words words words from a guy who in addition plays terran in tourneys lately.
There's no motive for him to make this up though. What's more likely? He has found a way to beat mech and maybe it's not as imba as we thought or he just likes to be a contrarian?
he also issued an open challenge to any top terran who thought mech was imba to tvz him. i think it got patched before there were any takers though. and honestly i think TLO is far ahead of anyone on the list in this thread in terms of skill. though i may be wrong, i haven't followed many tournaments but TLO seems to be everywhere.
On June 05 2010 07:41 MassAirUnits wrote: In case anyone is wondering if Blizzard was looking into dumbing down AI, here's a blue post that directly addresses that:
Someone needs to ask if the SC1 targeting could be reproduced simply by treating the tank as a unit that fires a very fast-moving projectile instead of an instant-firing unit.
On June 05 2010 05:46 FabledIntegral wrote: Are tanks theonly ones that don't overkill? Or do units like Stalkers refuse to overkill as well? I think there's no reason tanks shouldn't overkill if other units don't either.
In fact, I feel like "overkill" is one of the fundamental features all ranged units have always had in an RTS, for the sole reason of keeping melee units viable when ranged is massed.
Everyone complains about how much ranged focus exists in SC2... why not have every unit overkill? We'd see more zealots/lings at least... probably have to redo Terran a little bit but it's not like we aren't still in teh beta and shouldn't be experimenting wiht changes anyways.
Every unit that damages instantly doesn't overkill. Any unit with a projectile attack will overkill as in BW. I think stalkers are in the 2nd category.
I believe this is correct. IIRC, Tanks also fell in that category in SC1 (there was a 1-frame delay between the explosion animation and a unit actually dying, or something like that), but in SC2, they fire instantly.
Bring this back . It was cool seeing tanks firing on a reaver that made it into the shuttle JUST in time!
That made for some of the most awesome moments in SC1.
On June 05 2010 07:52 TheYango wrote: Someone needs to ask if the SC1 targeting could be reproduced simply by treating the tank as a unit that fires a very fast-moving projectile instead of an instant-firing unit.
This would allow stalkers to blink dodge tanks as well as PDDs to block them.
On June 04 2010 16:20 Ballistixz wrote: i just love how all these gold/silver or lower players that have no idea how certain match ups work are trying to argue against highly reputable and top ranking players in the world. i find that just so damn funny.
also love how some peeps are treating TLO as the chuck norris of SC2. this forums is slowly turning into the official bnet forums. slowly but surely.
First you complain about people not listening to high level players, then you complain about people treating TLO (high level player) like he's... good at SC2? I don't get this post.
I think he means that people treat TLO as better than every other player. Like how a bunch of people applauded TLO for that post where he said he'd play any Terran to show that mech isn't imbalanced, but when drewbie said he'd play any Zerg to show mech IS imbalanced 20 pages ago it gets overlooked :p
Overlooked like how sen said he would like to play vs his "100% win" mech?
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
I'm not talking about battle micro, I'm talking more about general gameflow. It's simply not necessary for terran to try to gain the initiative in a game. Look at game 5 in the OP, qxc was totally passive the entire game. Good strategy games reward the player that is able to seize the initiative in the game and force the opponent to respond rather than implementing the strategy they would prefer instead. It's easy to be passive. It's easy to just turtle up in your base and just watch the bars as your units are made, it requires almost no mechanics and can be done with 50 APM. That's why this type of play needs to be inferior to an aggressive playstyle that seizes the initiative in a game. Seizing the initiative requires better mechanics. For this reason, good players with good mechanics and high APM should want the defensive and passive play that qxc did to be less effective than the dynamic and aggressive play of Sheth.
On June 05 2010 07:52 TheYango wrote: Someone needs to ask if the SC1 targeting could be reproduced simply by treating the tank as a unit that fires a very fast-moving projectile instead of an instant-firing unit.
This would allow stalkers to blink dodge tanks as well as PDDs to block them.
Blink-dodging tank shots would be awesome, and PDDs absorbing tank rounds can only help the current state of TvT (at the very least, it would help non-Tank ground units be a little more viable).
On June 05 2010 07:52 TheYango wrote: Someone needs to ask if the SC1 targeting could be reproduced simply by treating the tank as a unit that fires a very fast-moving projectile instead of an instant-firing unit.
This would allow stalkers to blink dodge tanks as well as PDDs to block them.
PDD blocking them would probably HELP the MU more than hurt it, and wouldn't that be good if stalkers could dodge it, despite it being almost impossible to time properly?
EDIT: Wow.... TheYango beat me to it by seconds apparently
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
I'm not talking about battle micro, I'm talking more about general gameflow. It's simply not necessary for terran to try to gain the initiative in a game. Look at game 5 in the OP, qxc was totally passive the entire game. Good strategy games reward the player that is able to seize the initiative in the game and force the opponent to respond rather than implementing the strategy they would prefer instead. It's easy to be passive. It's easy to just turtle up in your base and just watch the bars as your units are made, it requires almost no mechanics and can be done with 50 APM. That's why this type of play needs to be inferior to an aggressive playstyle that seizes the initiative in a game. Seizing the initiative requires better mechanics. For this reason, good players with good mechanics and high APM should want the defensive and passive play that qxc did to be less effective than the dynamic and aggressive play of Sheth.
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
I'm not talking about battle micro, I'm talking more about general gameflow. It's simply not necessary for terran to try to gain the initiative in a game. Look at game 5 in the OP, qxc was totally passive the entire game. Good strategy games reward the player that is able to seize the initiative in the game and force the opponent to respond rather than implementing the strategy they would prefer instead. It's easy to be passive. It's easy to just turtle up in your base and just watch the bars as your units are made, it requires almost no mechanics and can be done with 50 APM. That's why this type of play needs to be inferior to an aggressive playstyle that seizes the initiative in a game. Seizing the initiative requires better mechanics. For this reason, good players with good mechanics and high APM should want the defensive and passive play that qxc did to be less effective than the dynamic and aggressive play of Sheth.
Didn't Terran Mech worked that way in BW, too? Staying passive in the beginning and smashing the opponent afterwards?
Please dont rush things, but well blizzard already did. Kinda weird to do it a few days before beta break. I dont think they will get anything out of from it in such a short time.
They've said that they wanted the game to be balanced on all levels, in the past. Maybe there is a counter for professional-level gaming, but I think that the problem lies (or used to lie) in the casual gamer range. Let's say in the 60-70 APM range and without a deep knowledge of terran (of course, against a 60-70 APM opponent who doesn't have a deep knowledge of zerg, either).
This is a good point. Even if the matchup is balanced at high levels as TLO says it is, I think things can be quite different at low and mid level play where most of the playerbase is. The slow, defensive, and reactionary nature of terran mech means it has a much lower APM requirement to play effectively. So at 50 APM, you can play a pretty strong mech game. In contrast, zerg requires more multibase play with lots of drops, nydus, and harass, which requires a pretty hefty APM. So for zerg, 50 APM is going to going to result in a much weaker game. I think this might be the reason for some of the disconnect between average players and high-level players such as TLO.
I disagree. I think Terran requires much more apm to play effectively. Aside from marines, every terran unit is a hard damage counter to something else, meaning you have to choose who to attack appropriately. Secondly, almost every terran unit has some kind of ability, sometimes many. Spells are in all bio units, except reaper which is so fragile it has to be microed properly. Siege tanks must siege/unsiege. Vikings change mode, Thors have their assault cannons (admitedly really only used for base sieging or countering immortals). Hellions have to line up their splash effectively. banshees are fairly fragile, but do terrible damage, and cloak. Ravens have a million abilities. etc.
Not to mention macroing is much more complicated, as a zerg just needs to strike two keys followed by spamming whatever they want to build. Terran has to have 9 hotkeys for each addon/building combo, or attempt to tab through when building.
IMO, this makes Terran overpowered at the high level, and even at lower levels. (Because blizzard appears to have been balancing on mid-range player skill for the most part)
I'm not talking about battle micro, I'm talking more about general gameflow. It's simply not necessary for terran to try to gain the initiative in a game. Look at game 5 in the OP, qxc was totally passive the entire game. Good strategy games reward the player that is able to seize the initiative in the game and force the opponent to respond rather than implementing the strategy they would prefer instead. It's easy to be passive. It's easy to just turtle up in your base and just watch the bars as your units are made, it requires almost no mechanics and can be done with 50 APM. That's why this type of play needs to be inferior to an aggressive playstyle that seizes the initiative in a game. Seizing the initiative requires better mechanics. For this reason, good players with good mechanics and high APM should want the defensive and passive play that qxc did to be less effective than the dynamic and aggressive play of Sheth.
Didn't Terran Mech worked that way in BW, too? Staying passive in the beginning and smashing the opponent afterwards?
Qxc wasn't just passive in the beginning, he basically hid in his base the entire game until he finally emerged from it with 200/200. I'm pretty sure that strategy would be pretty easily beaten in BW.
I don't know how "dynamic and aggressive" Sheth was. He didn't really attack until about twenty minutes into the game, well after he had maxed out. For the most part, qxc had about 150 apm to Sheth's 100ish.
But, yeah, that style of qxc is viable, but really boring to watch, to play, and to play against. There were definitely opportunities where Sheth could have won all of the games he lost that series--or at least made them less one-sided--but still. If games like that become the norm, Starcraft II is not going to do well as an e-sport.
I wouldn't describe the current Zerg play as agressive either, FE into mass drone pumping into 3 roaches and 6 speedlings into more expansions till max food. As I said before, when Zerg acts passive Terran will happily do the same since their 200/200 food mech army will have critical damage output and dominate. It seems up to Zerg to do some economic damage before it gets to that point, I still think burrowed Roaches and muta's would be great for these purposes
On June 04 2010 21:09 MorroW wrote: mech wasnt that imba before, i think it was pretty fair but the majority of maps in the mappool will always lean towards terran just like desert oasis like maps will always lean towards the zerg in favor
i think the change was pretty fair but very unlogical
this patch will not make it impossible for terran to win like many ppl have said but it will make it slightly harder
im ok with this patch but i disagree not giving the siege tank 40+20 dmg vs armored instead of now giving it straight up -10 dmg
i still really hold my thumbs for a banshee(nerf) and marauder(nerf) and baneling(stronger but die upon death instead of explode) so bio will be possible again and also so baneling micro would be hard to master. also hoping for a raven remake on the raven missile so it actually is worth upgrading. atm the drone is far better than the missile imo
cheaper carrier tech, bc range buff would also be things id approve of to see alittle more unit variety
i really think blizzard are giving us too many patches atm, they rnt giving us proper time to experiment and figure out whats imba before they make these rational decisions, like the hellion nerf now was completely uncalled for
edit: oh sorry thought this was the patch discussion thread :p i guess some of it is relevant tho )
i think the mech nerf was pretty justified but those would all be good changes, especially the baneling one though if you nerf marauders and banelings the matchup would become really roach centric which tends to be pretty boring
and they need to do somethin about frenzy, either make it more mana and aoe or just get rid of it and put the infested back on infestors
so... when are you and Artosis gonna switch back to Terrans?
haven't been able to play the latest patch recently, but still i doubt that nerfing siege mode dmg will fix the mech imba against zerg.
On June 05 2010 10:30 Saechiis wrote: I wouldn't describe the current Zerg play as agressive either, FE into mass drone pumping into 3 roaches and 6 speedlings into more expansions till max food. As I said before, when Zerg acts passive Terran will happily do the same since their 200/200 food mech army will have critical damage output and dominate. It seems up to Zerg to do some economic damage before it gets to that point, I still think burrowed Roaches and muta's would be great for these purposes
what's wrong with you guys.... how is it possible to not understand that burrowed roach and mutas doesnt work ?
and against somebody who plays super defensivly with thor turrets and tanks, the solution should be to completely out macro him and to get 15436 expos, but it just doesnt work
what's wrong with you guys.... how is it possible to not understand that burrowed roach and mutas doesnt work ?
and against somebody who plays super defensivly with thor turrets and tanks, the solution should be to completely out macro him and to get 15436 expos, but it just doesnt work
Since you're all-knowing I'm going to ask you why it wouldn't work? Burrowed Roaches keep Terrans at bay since they need the Ravens to move out, burrowed units (even lings) can deny expo's forcing scans and thus economic damage. Muta's are pretty damn fast and can harass without getting insta slaughtered. They can also effectively deny the Terrans third expo, forcing them to spread their mech thin, lowering their critical mass.
In the late-game I've seen Corrupter/ Broodlord tear through mech armies. And since Vikings in a straight up battle lose to both Muta and Corrupter it could leave BL's the room to mop up tanks and give hydra/ roach a change at a direct engagement. Even if just the Ravens get taken down by muta/corrupter, the terran will likely retreat.
Stop pretending like macro should be the definite hardcounter and if that doesn't work nothing ever will. It's just so useless to assume A should be the answer never to explore B till Z.
What's wrong with me? I like winning better than whining
Here are some potential changes that I think would make for more interesting gameplay, more so than merely juggling some numbers for damage and the like:
Implement a mechanic on the siege tank turret that adds a rotation speed to its facing, in other words, it takes .xx seconds to turn xx degrees to fire at another target. This would make flanking far more effective in the right situations, and maybe make up for the lack of overkill with the SC2 tank AI.
Also implement something similar for the Thor, as it actually had a turning speed mechanic in an earlier alpha version of the game, which seems like a very logical flaw for an otherwise awesome unit. Thus mutalisk micro can be more effective if you circle around and hit the Thor from behind, but as Thors have range 10 vs air, multiple Thors should still be able to support each other well enough to not make mutas overpowered against them.
Lastly, make burrowed zerg units take reduced damage from splash, since they have all that cushioning dirt between them to absorb impacts.
Yeah. Siegetanks haven't been "Fucked sideways." They're still ubersuperpowerfulstompyouintothegroundroflbbqwtfpwnage. Terran is still majorly imba : P They should have nerfed tanks another 5 points in damage, kinda dissapointed by the nerf to be honest. Thought it would be much more of a nerf.
What the hell is wrong with all those people crying for an AI nerf or fire rate nerf or some other weird things. Dumbing down the AI would just make tanks completely worthless as they were before the AoE change, send like 3 zerglings to take all the first shots from the tanks then A-move your way to victory onto tanks.
Blizzard nerfed it already, leave it there, it's already noticeable and way enough.
On June 05 2010 11:02 cArn- wrote: What the hell is wrong with all those people crying for an AI nerf or fire rate nerf or some other weird things. Dumbing down the AI would just make tanks completely worthless as they were before the AoE change, send like 3 zerglings to take all the first shots from the tanks then A-move your way to victory onto tanks.
Blizzard nerfed it already, leave it there, it's already noticeable and way enough.
Because clearly tanks sucked in SC1.
The other thing about an AI nerf (or equivalent nerf such as making the siege mode shot non-instant like it was in SC1) is that it encourages more clever positioning. You can circumvent the "send one unit to soak 10 shots" simply by staggering your tanks a bit, so that the unit is dead before the tanks in back shoot at it. It also means that you get punished more for having your tanks in 1 giant ball (which really should not be a valid way to play with tanks to begin with, anyway).
Tanks will be tanks, they're slow and apparantly need 4 seconds to morph into a stationary cannon. If they didn't do splash or some kind of critical damage, what use would they be?
Funny thing is that 60 to 50 damage nerf primarily affects TvP and TvT, in ZvT critical splash will still do the melting trick. Only frenzied Ultra's become more viable, try and use those to make them unsiege ... then attack move
On June 05 2010 10:08 koppik wrote: I don't know how "dynamic and aggressive" Sheth was. He didn't really attack until about twenty minutes into the game, well after he had maxed out. For the most part, qxc had about 150 apm to Sheth's 100ish.
But, yeah, that style of qxc is viable, but really boring to watch, to play, and to play against. There were definitely opportunities where Sheth could have won all of the games he lost that series--or at least made them less one-sided--but still. If games like that become the norm, Starcraft II is not going to do well as an e-sport.
After his cookie-cutter opening, qxc just turtled up in his base the whole game and didn't even make an effort to control the game. Sheth was doing drops, roach burrows, and nydases left and right. Almost every fight in that game was on his terms, but the terran turtle was too strong. I didn't look at the actual APM, but as far as making tactical maneuvers, Sheth was much more active and qxc was on his heels reacting. If conceding the initiative and playing passively in your base until 200/200 is allowed to be an effective strategy, then I agree, things will get pretty boring.
On June 05 2010 10:53 GreatestThreat wrote: Here are some potential changes that I think would make for more interesting gameplay, more so than merely juggling some numbers for damage and the like:
Implement a mechanic on the siege tank turret that adds a rotation speed to its facing, in other words, it takes .xx seconds to turn xx degrees to fire at another target. This would make flanking far more effective in the right situations, and maybe make up for the lack of overkill with the SC2 tank AI.
Also implement something similar for the Thor, as it actually had a turning speed mechanic in an earlier alpha version of the game, which seems like a very logical flaw for an otherwise awesome unit. Thus mutalisk micro can be more effective if you circle around and hit the Thor from behind, but as Thors have range 10 vs air, multiple Thors should still be able to support each other well enough to not make mutas overpowered against them.
Lastly, make burrowed zerg units take reduced damage from splash, since they have all that cushioning dirt between them to absorb impacts.
Shameless self bump because I would like to know what people think of these ideas. If you think they're terrible don't be afraid to say so (I wouldn't expect anyone on TL to be anyway), just be prepared to back up your opinion with reasons why.
On June 05 2010 10:53 GreatestThreat wrote: Here are some potential changes that I think would make for more interesting gameplay, more so than merely juggling some numbers for damage and the like:
Implement a mechanic on the siege tank turret that adds a rotation speed to its facing, in other words, it takes .xx seconds to turn xx degrees to fire at another target. This would make flanking far more effective in the right situations, and maybe make up for the lack of overkill with the SC2 tank AI.
Also implement something similar for the Thor, as it actually had a turning speed mechanic in an earlier alpha version of the game, which seems like a very logical flaw for an otherwise awesome unit. Thus mutalisk micro can be more effective if you circle around and hit the Thor from behind, but as Thors have range 10 vs air, multiple Thors should still be able to support each other well enough to not make mutas overpowered against them.
Lastly, make burrowed zerg units take reduced damage from splash, since they have all that cushioning dirt between them to absorb impacts.
Shameless self bump because I would like to know what people think of these ideas. If you think they're terrible don't be afraid to say so (I wouldn't expect anyone on TL to be anyway), just be prepared to back up your opinion with reasons why.
The first two seem needlessly complicated for unit-specific mechanics. I would think there are much more elegant ways to deal with the siege tank.
Is the third one not already the case? Burrowed units take NO splash damage in Brood War, and I wasn't aware that they changed this.
On June 05 2010 10:53 GreatestThreat wrote: Here are some potential changes that I think would make for more interesting gameplay, more so than merely juggling some numbers for damage and the like:
Implement a mechanic on the siege tank turret that adds a rotation speed to its facing, in other words, it takes .xx seconds to turn xx degrees to fire at another target. This would make flanking far more effective in the right situations, and maybe make up for the lack of overkill with the SC2 tank AI.
Also implement something similar for the Thor, as it actually had a turning speed mechanic in an earlier alpha version of the game, which seems like a very logical flaw for an otherwise awesome unit. Thus mutalisk micro can be more effective if you circle around and hit the Thor from behind, but as Thors have range 10 vs air, multiple Thors should still be able to support each other well enough to not make mutas overpowered against them.
Lastly, make burrowed zerg units take reduced damage from splash, since they have all that cushioning dirt between them to absorb impacts.
Shameless self bump because I would like to know what people think of these ideas. If you think they're terrible don't be afraid to say so (I wouldn't expect anyone on TL to be anyway), just be prepared to back up your opinion with reasons why.
The first two seem needlessly complicated for unit-specific mechanics. I would think there are much more elegant ways to deal with the siege tank.
Is the third one not already the case? Burrowed units take NO splash damage in Brood War, and I wasn't aware that they changed this.
burrowed units definitely took splash in bw. burrowed units in swarm would take ONLY splash damage from tank fire though which somehow made 1 lurker invincible as long as nothing was around to draw tank fire and splash it.
On June 05 2010 10:53 GreatestThreat wrote: Here are some potential changes that I think would make for more interesting gameplay, more so than merely juggling some numbers for damage and the like:
Implement a mechanic on the siege tank turret that adds a rotation speed to its facing, in other words, it takes .xx seconds to turn xx degrees to fire at another target. This would make flanking far more effective in the right situations, and maybe make up for the lack of overkill with the SC2 tank AI.
Also implement something similar for the Thor, as it actually had a turning speed mechanic in an earlier alpha version of the game, which seems like a very logical flaw for an otherwise awesome unit. Thus mutalisk micro can be more effective if you circle around and hit the Thor from behind, but as Thors have range 10 vs air, multiple Thors should still be able to support each other well enough to not make mutas overpowered against them.
Lastly, make burrowed zerg units take reduced damage from splash, since they have all that cushioning dirt between them to absorb impacts.
Shameless self bump because I would like to know what people think of these ideas. If you think they're terrible don't be afraid to say so (I wouldn't expect anyone on TL to be anyway), just be prepared to back up your opinion with reasons why.
The first two seem needlessly complicated for unit-specific mechanics. I would think there are much more elegant ways to deal with the siege tank.
Is the third one not already the case? Burrowed units take NO splash damage in Brood War, and I wasn't aware that they changed this.
Honestly I think the balance changes could use a little more complexity. Something that plays to the flavor of the race is more desirable in my opinion than simple number swapping. The turning speed mechanic for sieged tank turrets and thors would reward zerg players more for flanking and microing, while allowing terran players to mitigate the effects by backing their tanks against a wall or spreading their thors out to cover each other.
And if the third one is indeed already the case, that's news to me... I assumed it wasn't so, seeing as burrow-move roaches seem to melt just as fast against mass tanks as above ground roaches once they're detected.
On June 05 2010 12:19 mahnini wrote: burrowed units definitely took splash in bw. burrowed units in swarm would take ONLY splash damage from tank fire though which somehow made 1 lurker invincible as long as nothing was around to draw tank fire and splash it.
Oh right, I'm dumb. It was because of Dark Swarm.
On June 05 2010 12:21 GreatestThreat wrote: Honestly I think the balance changes could use a little more complexity. Something that plays to the flavor of the race is more desirable in my opinion than simple number swapping. The turning speed mechanic for sieged tank turrets and thors would reward zerg players more for flanking and microing, while allowing terran players to mitigate the effects by backing their tanks against a wall or spreading their thors out to cover each other.
It just feels gimmicky. It's a unit that controls differently from other units just for the sake of being different. From a spectator perspective, too many of those kinds of things can get confusing quickly.
Having tanks overkill seems like a perfectly sensible solution that is completely intuitive with regard to the game mechanics (other projectile-firing units do overkill, and tanks did so in SC1--they just need to treat the tank shot as a projectile and not as an instant shot animation), and that similarly plays into the race's flavor, but does so more subtlely (e.g. you need to spread out your tanks so they don't splash each other, and stagger them so they don't all waste their shots on the first target). It encourages you to focus on positioning without having a mechanic that MAKES you focus on positioning.
On June 05 2010 12:19 mahnini wrote: burrowed units definitely took splash in bw. burrowed units in swarm would take ONLY splash damage from tank fire though which somehow made 1 lurker invincible as long as nothing was around to draw tank fire and splash it.
On June 05 2010 12:21 GreatestThreat wrote: Honestly I think the balance changes could use a little more complexity. Something that plays to the flavor of the race is more desirable in my opinion than simple number swapping. The turning speed mechanic for sieged tank turrets and thors would reward zerg players more for flanking and microing, while allowing terran players to mitigate the effects by backing their tanks against a wall or spreading their thors out to cover each other.
It just feels gimmicky. It's a unit that controls differently from other units just for the sake of being different. From a spectator perspective, too many of those kinds of things can get confusing quickly.
Having tanks overkill seems like a perfectly sensible solution that is completely intuitive with regard to the game mechanics (other projectile-firing units do overkill, and tanks did so in SC1--they just need to treat the tank shot as a projectile and not as an instant shot animation), and that similarly plays into the race's flavor, but does so more subtlely (e.g. you need to spread out your tanks so they don't splash each other, and stagger them so they don't all waste their shots on the first target). It encourages you to focus on positioning without having a mechanic that MAKES you focus on positioning.
Fair enough. Also on a practical note, I think overkill would be easier and more likely for Blizz to implement if they do decide to nerf the tank further. But I stand by my idea for the Thor, because that was a mechanic that was actually originally part of the unit, and later removed for no particular reason I can think of than consistency with other units...
On June 05 2010 12:22 TheYango wrote: Having tanks overkill seems like a perfectly sensible solution that is completely intuitive with regard to the game mechanics (other projectile-firing units do overkill, and tanks did so in SC1--they just need to treat the tank shot as a projectile and not as an instant shot animation), and that similarly plays into the race's flavor, but does so more subtlely (e.g. you need to spread out your tanks so they don't splash each other, and stagger them so they don't all waste their shots on the first target). It encourages you to focus on positioning without having a mechanic that MAKES you focus on positioning.
This does look like the perfect solution, in fact. Wider spreads would mean that skill would become a large factor in using mech, just like it is in fighting against it; it would probably be fair to revert the damage changes to the tank, under this proposal. Specifically for the ZvT matchup, this would also mean that mutalisks would recover a little bit of usefulness. They'd still horribly hard-countered by thors, but at least now they could try to snipe off tanks or hellions which got out of position without turrets placed to cover them.
However... how would such a change impact the pro scene? Fixing it for plat-diamond and breaking it for pro would not be good.
what's wrong with you guys.... how is it possible to not understand that burrowed roach and mutas doesnt work ?
and against somebody who plays super defensivly with thor turrets and tanks, the solution should be to completely out macro him and to get 15436 expos, but it just doesnt work
Since you're all-knowing I'm going to ask you why it wouldn't work? Burrowed Roaches keep Terrans at bay since they need the Ravens to move out, burrowed units (even lings) can deny expo's forcing scans and thus economic damage. Muta's are pretty damn fast and can harass without getting insta slaughtered. They can also effectively deny the Terrans third expo, forcing them to spread their mech thin, lowering their critical mass.
In the late-game I've seen Corrupter/ Broodlord tear through mech armies. And since Vikings in a straight up battle lose to both Muta and Corrupter it could leave BL's the room to mop up tanks and give hydra/ roach a change at a direct engagement. Even if just the Ravens get taken down by muta/corrupter, the terran will likely retreat.
Stop pretending like macro should be the definite hardcounter and if that doesn't work nothing ever will. It's just so useless to assume A should be the answer never to explore B till Z.
What's wrong with me? I like winning better than whining
He doesn't need to expand or move out. He can just sit back and defend against harassment until he mines out his main and natural, hits 200/200, and roflstomps any possible unit composition that Zerg could throw at him. Only a totally perfect, flawless unit mix, perfect burrowed unit positioning, and catching the Tanks off guard can let a Zerg 200/200 army beat a Terran 200/200 army. A good player won't let you do any of those things. It just isn't in the cards.
It is easy to say "harass", but Zerg lacks a way to apply pressure to Terran in the early/mid game, especially on maps where the natural is easy to take. Roaches can be defended against, and set you back so far in tech that you'll then lose, Baneling busts don't really pan out well, Mutas only have a tiny window until a Thor comes out (and that assumes he doesn't scan the spire and prepare, which he will), etc etc etc. If the Terran doesn't make any huge mistakes he'll make it to 200/200 and rickroll the Zerg.
A lot a people is whining about blizzard listening to zergs players complains. Look at their post on bnet it is funny
Actually Zerg are slightly favored in TvZ matchups, in every league. The differential in win/loss ratio is almost always within 5% regardless of league or race. It's pretty even across the board. In Diamond it's almost a straight up 50/50 for all of them. I know that's a very large-scale view, but it's still pretty exciting to see.
Things are looking pretty good for where we are right now in beta. We aren't looking to make make too many changes and upset that before release. Strategies are still evolving, and will continue to evolve for a long time. It's important that we ensure those evolutions can continue and there isn't anything that's just a straight up road block, but unless something like that pops up we're taking a light approach.
We didn't feel like a sitrep was necessary since the changes were so few and so minor.
Generally the tank change was a simple nerf to make them less powerful in all match-ups, but specifically in Terran vs Terran where they're far more dominant.
The suggestion to change the way targeting works across the entire game was a much bigger change than we were willing to make at this time (though we will look into it). We don't want to do it “just for siege tanks”, at least not without further investigation.
They thought that the tank was too strong, but the main issue for them was TvT matchup I checked all patch reports, and all the changes that i think are good ones were made for a total different reason
Please blizzard change the baneling (to follow Morrow's idea) for the ZvZ !
Wasn't MorroWs idea to make banelings stronger but not explode upon being killed by enemy units? I'm sorry, but that just sounds completely nonsensical to me - I realize ZvZ needs some changes but I can't see how shooting an engorged sac of acid would cause it to just stop and go inert. It would be far too much of a nerf to banelings to make them cost effective seeing as they're suicide units, unless you made them quite a bit more powerful, which would then result in them having voidray syndrome - underpowered in some situations, overpowered in others, causing everyone on both sides of the argument to bitch about them equally.
I think the problem with ZvZ might in fact be the metagame. I would suggest waiting for it to evolve a little bit before pronouncing banelings broken...
Just lost a game as a terran going mech vs a zerg going hydra and infestors (neutral parasiting my tanks). He did a few drops and he won quite easy. Stop 1a'ing.
On June 06 2010 02:03 lew wrote: Just lost a game as a terran going mech vs a zerg going hydra and infestors (neutral parasiting my tanks). He did a few drops and he won quite easy. Stop 1a'ing.
You have a replay? Sounds like an interesting game but your two sentence description doesn't really say much.
They didnt really fix the problem with the damage nerf. The problem really is that the smart fire makes tanks reach a critical mass way too easily imo.
On June 06 2010 02:03 lew wrote: Just lost a game as a terran going mech vs a zerg going hydra and infestors (neutral parasiting my tanks). He did a few drops and he won quite easy. Stop 1a'ing.
1) So you let your 13 range siege get NP'd by 9 range infestors?......Infestors and hydra is possibly the WORST you could do vs tanks.
2) If you let him drop/nydus into your base you failed because it is easly prevented. Just watch the first replay, a good example. Mech is gas heavy, and the extra minerals are pumped into additional expo + turrets your base. Mech hardly needs any units to defend main gate so you can safely invest in turrets while you build CC for island expos.
If you really think he did something extraordinary post a replay.
EDIT: and as Ruthless said, the "no overkill" AI makes tanks just insane.
On June 06 2010 02:03 lew wrote: Just lost a game as a terran going mech vs a zerg going hydra and infestors (neutral parasiting my tanks). He did a few drops and he won quite easy. Stop 1a'ing.
I'm sorry but if you loose with mech terran to hydra + infestor you're probably really really bad. Upagrade your tank with siege tank and it's over for the zerg. Hydra+infestor is probably the worst idea against mech terran.
Otherwise, is the TLO/sen showmatch still in the air ?
Actually Zerg are slightly favored in TvZ matchups, in every league. The differential in win/loss ratio is almost always within 5% regardless of league or race. It's pretty even across the board. In Diamond it's almost a straight up 50/50 for all of them. I know that's a very large-scale view, but it's still pretty exciting to see.
Things are looking pretty good for where we are right now in beta. We aren't looking to make make too many changes and upset that before release. Strategies are still evolving, and will continue to evolve for a long time. It's important that we ensure those evolutions can continue and there isn't anything that's just a straight up road block, but unless something like that pops up we're taking a light approach.
Actually Zerg are slightly favored in TvZ matchups, in every league. The differential in win/loss ratio is almost always within 5% regardless of league or race. It's pretty even across the board. In Diamond it's almost a straight up 50/50 for all of them. I know that's a very large-scale view, but it's still pretty exciting to see.
Things are looking pretty good for where we are right now in beta. We aren't looking to make make too many changes and upset that before release. Strategies are still evolving, and will continue to evolve for a long time. It's important that we ensure those evolutions can continue and there isn't anything that's just a straight up road block, but unless something like that pops up we're taking a light approach.
Actually Zerg are slightly favored in TvZ matchups, in every league. The differential in win/loss ratio is almost always within 5% regardless of league or race. It's pretty even across the board. In Diamond it's almost a straight up 50/50 for all of them. I know that's a very large-scale view, but it's still pretty exciting to see.
Things are looking pretty good for where we are right now in beta. We aren't looking to make make too many changes and upset that before release. Strategies are still evolving, and will continue to evolve for a long time. It's important that we ensure those evolutions can continue and there isn't anything that's just a straight up road block, but unless something like that pops up we're taking a light approach.
Sadly it doesn't matter whats said because most Zerg won't be happy until they can A-move straight into a siege tank line and win.
Actually Zerg are slightly favored in TvZ matchups, in every league. The differential in win/loss ratio is almost always within 5% regardless of league or race. It's pretty even across the board. In Diamond it's almost a straight up 50/50 for all of them. I know that's a very large-scale view, but it's still pretty exciting to see.
Things are looking pretty good for where we are right now in beta. We aren't looking to make make too many changes and upset that before release. Strategies are still evolving, and will continue to evolve for a long time. It's important that we ensure those evolutions can continue and there isn't anything that's just a straight up road block, but unless something like that pops up we're taking a light approach.
link?
Yeah there's just no way if terran mechs without really screwing up that it's close to 50/50 without zerg doing something stupid like baneling busting or 6 pooling on steppes. No diamond terrans are complaining that zerg is too hard to beat.
Yeah there's just no way if terran mechs without really screwing up that it's close to 50/50 without zerg doing something stupid like baneling busting or 6 pooling on steppes. No diamond terrans are complaining that zerg is too hard to beat.
If you don't 1a move then mech is not unbeatable. The MMM days where you could 1a move (aka ball vs ball play, people complained a lot how boring it was) are OVER. Get over it and adapt.
I think the point of been zerg is not letting the oppnets reach 200/200 fully upgraded.
consider the eralier advantages u get as a zerg players and how easy u can reinforced the lost units it doesnt make much sense at least for me to been able to win a 200/200 terran or protoss full upgraded army.
I mean is realy easy to macro and keep attacking the terran player as a zrg one and if the terran player wall in is pretty much gg.
Since you fond of replays heres one zerg player won vs mech one and is a sen vs tlo game ( care to find me a better terran player atm btw ? )
Yeah there's just no way if terran mechs without really screwing up that it's close to 50/50 without zerg doing something stupid like baneling busting or 6 pooling on steppes. No diamond terrans are complaining that zerg is too hard to beat.
If you don't 1a move then mech is not unbeatable. The MMM days where you could 1a move (aka ball vs ball play, people complained a lot how boring it was) are OVER. Get over it and adapt.
Reminds me of yesterday watching Trumps Stream, He played like 4 Zerg in a row an went Marine/Marauder vs all of them an you wanna guess the one thing all the Zerg had in common??? EVERYONE of them went Hydra/Rouch, 1 control group and not a single infestor was ever used... Was pretty damn sad to watch.
Yeah that's exactly what we're all doing is 1a moving. Maybe you can posts some reps where you're raping mech since you obv have it all figured out. Or probably not and you're one of the other million theorycrafters in silver league who posts too much on forums and needs to improve. I hope the former.
On June 08 2010 02:05 st3roids wrote: I think the point of been zerg is not letting the oppnets reach 200/200 fully upgraded.
consider the eralier advantages u get as a zerg players and how easy u can reinforced the lost units it doesnt make much sense at least for me to been able to win a 200/200 terran or protoss full upgraded army.
I mean is realy easy to macro and keep attacking the terran player as a zrg one and if the terran player wall in is pretty much gg.
Since you fond of replays heres one zerg player won vs mech one and is a sen vs tlo game ( care to find me a better terran player atm btw ? )
I don't even know why I respond to these anymore but if people would actually read some of the posts in the thread a lot of people are complaining about the game being broken since there's no way for zerg to win past mid game which isn't good for the game if it's just zerg trying to win early and if they dont they lose. Most of us have seen the sen vs tlo, cool vs maka, and demuslim vs sen. They're the only two zergs I know of that are having some success but I haven't seen anyone win consistently in late game yet. All the zerg players complain about not being able to touch mech then it sounds like a bunch of non diamond league people or people who don't play zerg say to abuse mobility which is what you can say for any matchup on nearly any map and no one's posting any reps or vods of them actually doing it which doesn't help my perception of them.
On June 08 2010 02:07 guitarizt wrote: Yeah that's exactly what we're all doing is 1a moving. Maybe you can posts some reps where you're raping mech since you obv have it all figured out. Or probably not and you're one of the other million theorycrafters in silver league who posts too much on forums and needs to improve. I hope the former.
I said four were doing it but if you wanna take that as me saying all Zerg are thats up to you but oh aren't you Mr.Tough guy calling me a Silver leaguer an saying I must just post for the sake of posting. Which of course ignores the fact you have 6 times the amount of posts as I do but thats besides the point. My point is that this thread is pretty pointless due to the fact it isn't "How to fix TvZ Mech" its just people crying about how overpowered it is without really adding anything to the discussion.
On June 08 2010 02:07 guitarizt wrote: Yeah that's exactly what we're all doing is 1a moving. Maybe you can posts some reps where you're raping mech since you obv have it all figured out. Or probably not and you're one of the other million theorycrafters in silver league who posts too much on forums and needs to improve. I hope the former.
I am a terran player, diamond (which says nothing ofcourse). A bluepost said the stats are 50/50, and that's just because TvZ is sooo imba (sarcasm)... If you lose to mech then: 1) you are 1a-moving 2) your opponent is better, which is actually possible...
I lost against a lot vs zergs who just dropped their army into my main or zergs who catched my army moving (with borred roaches for example and me forgetting my raven) or zergs expanding a lot and just outmacro me (I wonder how many zergs actually know how beastly that larve injection mechanic is...). But it's okay, keep on believing that tvz is imba and that it's not you playing bad.
The only thing I don't like about mech is the "if you don't go spire you lose" part. I've played so many games where I gained a giant advantage, but my advantage was all in ground units. As soon as you see tanks that entire ground army becomes worthless and you have to scramble to get a buttload of muta out. I mean I understand that you can stall the terran and try to abuse tank's immobility, but with the maps as tiny as they are you really can't stall for very long. I just want to have more than one viable opener against terran, and currently it feels like "muta or get out" =(. Either that or hope you can get drop/ovie speed/roach speed/ling speed/banelings and maybe burrow/tunneling claws all researched before terran decides it's time to roll over you. It may be one of those "balanced at high levels of play" things like terran/toss was in SC1, but consistantly beating terran mech as zerg is beyond my abilities. Beating a Zerg WITH mech is absolutely trivial when I play terran though, so I really don't think any of this "stop a-moving noob" applies. Stopping mech is definitely alot harder than playing mech.
Another thing: did you knew that zerg should always stay 1 base ahead of the terran? This was also the case in sc1. I see a lot of zergs just staying on 2 or 3 bases and then complaining if they lose to a terran having the same amount of bases as them.
I don't care how many posts someone has if they make any sense or can post reps instead of theorycrafting. The opposite is also true of people with a ton of posts. I don't even look at the post count and I watched that idiotic rep the other guy posted of some guy drone rushing right when the game started and I went back to the thread and saw it was his first post.
The blue post about the m/u being 50/50 is really deceptive because obviously zerg can baneling bust or sneak a nydus and win a lot of games until people figure out how to deal with it. Also like you said burrowed roaches are winning some games and they've helped me win my fair share but it's really just terran screwing up and they'll figure out how to deal with this in the future on ladder even at the lower levels.
Another thing: did you knew that zerg should always stay 1 base ahead of the terran? This was also the case in sc1. I see a lot of zergs just staying on 2 or 3 bases and then complaining if they lose to a terran having the same amount of bases as them.
Yes I've lost a lot of games where I was two bases ahead although not saturated yet. I greatly favored a macro game before and I pretty much always take my third asap if t or p takes their second. I'm starting to lean towards being more aggro and ending the game earlier though just because I haven't seen many games where zerg was able to beat terran able to get to a 200/200 army on two bases than games where zerg went for muta roach.
It may be one of those "balanced at high levels of play" things like terran/toss was in SC1, but consistantly beating terran mech as zerg is beyond my abilities. Beating a Zerg WITH mech is absolutely trivial when I play terran though, so I really don't think any of this "stop a-moving noob" applies. Stopping mech is definitely alot harder than playing mech.
I can totally accept this if it was the precedent set my blizzard in the first place, but they keep doing stupid s@#t like nerfing void rays, queen speed, roach burrow movement speed (although they made them faster again), and lol at mind controlling ultras because they want to balance the game at lower levels. Maybe it's balanced at the highest and lowest levels of play and everyone else in plat/diamond is screwed until we hopefully figure it out. Maybe the maps are just good for tanks like other people have said and it's more of a map issue. I'll try to shut up until after the tlo thing though.
Zergs are also screwing up by 1a moving. Provide me 1 replay where a zerg loses while not 1a moving and I would be surprised. I can provide 1000 replays of zergs losing because they 1a'ed into a siegetank line.
On June 08 2010 02:05 st3roids wrote: I think the point of been zerg is not letting the oppnets reach 200/200 fully upgraded.
consider the eralier advantages u get as a zerg players and how easy u can reinforced the lost units it doesnt make much sense at least for me to been able to win a 200/200 terran or protoss full upgraded army.
I mean is realy easy to macro and keep attacking the terran player as a zrg one and if the terran player wall in is pretty much gg.
Since you fond of replays heres one zerg player won vs mech one and is a sen vs tlo game ( care to find me a better terran player atm btw ? )
I don't even know why I respond to these anymore but if people would actually read some of the posts in the thread a lot of people are complaining about the game being broken since there's no way for zerg to win past mid game which isn't good for the game if it's just zerg trying to win early and if they dont they lose. Most of us have seen the sen vs tlo, cool vs maka, and demuslim vs sen. They're the only two zergs I know of that are having some success but I haven't seen anyone win consistently in late game yet. All the zerg players complain about not being able to touch mech then it sounds like a bunch of non diamond league people or people who don't play zerg say to abuse mobility which is what you can say for any matchup on nearly any map and no one's posting any reps or vods of them actually doing it which doesn't help my perception of them.
Im all for balance , to the degree this can be acheived , however since you watch these games you can clearly see that sen is nothing special at least in these games.
It makes so many mistakes like suicide blind drops that fail , not having a single observer to kill the ghost and win ( in the later games ) been 1a , never i mean NEVER takes initiative and plays defensive all the time , never deviates from the same build and so on , yet hes manage fine vs the best terran player atm.
Like i said i dont think the point of been a zerg player is giving too much space to terran or toss players to go 200/200 fully upgrade.
Heck even idra who loves macro games doesnt let his opponets go 200/200 most of the times attacks and keeps pushing after 100/100 non stop.
again im not claiming that everything is balance but it does seem that the best players have picked zerg or toss to play and this is a factor as well.
On June 08 2010 02:24 lew wrote: Zergs are also screwing up by 1a moving. Provide me 1 replay where a zerg loses while not 1a moving and I would be surprised. I can provide 1000 replays of zergs losing because they 1a'ed into a siegetank line.
Would people stop saying that?^^; You make it sound like the zerg sees sieged up tanks with bio up front and just runs in his army while going back to his base. I'm sure it LOOKS like a-moving but that's because there isn't much a zerg can do with roaches and hydralisks that doesn't involve at some point engaging the army. I flank and dance back and forth every game against mech. All it does is make me lose units gradually without killing any of his tanks. Yes you can try to turn it into a base race by running around the tanks and hope he doesn't have 3 more tanks behind his wall, yes you can try to stall him with air units, but I'd love for you to show me how to micro my ground army to kill tank/bio. I'm not even being sarcastic. If you really know how to micro what kinds of units to kill off a tank/bio army I'll shut up immediately and play said style. So far people know of broodlords. It's not that hard of a question: Terran has tanks and bio -> he's creeping up to your base -> how do you kill that army? "you can never engage that army" is a pretty silly answer for an RTS.
That's not really mech. It's an heavy air opening, followed by marines to hold off the mutas for a while, with a transition into mech once the game is already lost. As far as I can tell, the final push has two hellions (without preigniter), four thors, two tanks, eighteen marines, one medivac and three vikings.
On June 08 2010 02:15 lew wrote: I am a terran player, diamond (which says nothing ofcourse). A bluepost said the stats are 50/50, and that's just because TvZ is sooo imba (sarcasm)... If you lose to mech then: 1) you are 1a-moving 2) your opponent is better, which is actually possible...
First off: a stat such as win ratio does not mean that a matchup is balanced. Suppose, for the sake of argument, that terran had a strategy that was overpowered against zerg and one that was overpowered against protoss. This means that they'd raise in ranks (thanks to the power of the race, not thanks to their skill) until the matchmaking system (which is designed to keep everybody at 50% WR) put them against opponents that are so much better than them that the win rates stay at 50%. I'm not claiming that this is what is happening, I'm just saying that extracting balance information out of that particular stat is a misuse of statistics.
On June 08 2010 04:02 lew wrote: It's okay for me if they nerf tanks. Ball vs Ball will just return.
As if those little nerfs will do anything...
Really, how much has been changed from where everyone said Mech is totally useless to the point where everyone said it's totally IMBA?
It's definitely more about ppl learning how to get away with certain BO's, so I'm sure if TLO is sayin' he found a way to beat Mech with Zerg, it's easily possible...
On June 08 2010 04:02 lew wrote: It's okay for me if they nerf tanks. Ball vs Ball will just return.
As if those little nerfs will do anything...
Really, how much has been changed from where everyone said Mech is totally useless to the point where everyone said it's totally IMBA?
It's definitely more about ppl learning how to get away with certain BO's, so I'm sure if TLO is sayin' he found a way to beat Mech with Zerg, it's easily possible...
Just learn to play instead of whining.
Err, tank splash changed, terran anti-air changed and most importantly roaches changed. I'm not saying that there isn't a way to deal with tanks, but saying that it's people "learning how to play" that all of a sudden made mech viable is silly. I've been trying mech every patch. It went from useless to "overpowered" without me improving my skill much.
Mech is still slightly overpowered against zerg on most map. On desert oasis and scrap station, zerg has an advance though.
I used to be a low diamond terran player, but lately I have been praciticing other races. Protoss came very easy to me, and while I still think I make a lot of mistakes, this race is so easy to play. Im like 7-0 with protoss against plat/gold players in patch 15. With zerg however I am around 10-20. And I struggle against both prtoss and terran. It seems to me the only way I can win with zerg is to have twice as many expansions as the terran player, and even then I have trouble taking out his base when he has a few Siege tanks to defend.
I would like to see the siege tank splash dmg nerfed from 50% to 35 % or something like that. This could be combined with a reduce in the time it takes to siege/unsige from 4 sec to 3 sec, so that they would still be usefull. This will slightly increase the mobility of the tanks, but make them weaker in a battle. They will still be extremely strong and terran will win most of the even battles. But when zerg is like 25%+ food ahead he will likely be the favoruite to win.
Ultra should get a slight health boost so they would not get countered by units like mauruders and zealots. Probably to around 550 + a reduce in unit size. This should make zerg have much better chances against both protoss and terrans. Maps like desert oasis or scrap station should be changed or removed though, as it is too difficult for terran to defend the muta harass.
So Day9 is currently doing episode 131 on TLO's macro zerg versus Jinro's terran mech. Both play late game 200/200 supply on prenerf tank patch. That's right - on the patch this whiney thread was complaining about.
And TLO just rapes. Big difference is that instead of how Sheth had 90-100 supply in workers, TLO only had around 60-70 supply, giving TLO a larger 200 supply army. He also cut queens (didn't have a queen at every hatch) to free up more supply for his army. Finally at some expansions he only saturated gas workers and didn't bother saturating minerals. That freed up more supply for his army.
He didn't bother with nydus worms. Didn't really worry too much about drops. Just straight up fought a war of attrition on multiple fronts, weeding down the terran army until he won.
Anybody watching it should note that Jinro made nearly the maximum number of tanks and thors possibly with his 200/200 supply. If he made air such as vikings, he would have had even less tanks and the ultralisks that TLO kept massing would have even been stronger versus his expansions.
On June 08 2010 11:57 tubs wrote: So Day9 is currently doing episode 131 on TLO's macro zerg versus Jinro's terran mech. Both play late game 200/200 supply on prenerf tank patch. That's right - on the patch this whiney thread was complaining about.
And TLO just rapes. Big difference is that instead of how Sheth had 90-100 supply in workers, TLO only had around 60-70 supply, giving TLO a larger 200 supply army. He also cut queens (didn't have a queen at every hatch) to free up more supply for his army. Finally at some expansions he only saturated gas workers and didn't bother saturating minerals. That freed up more supply for his army.
He didn't bother with nydus worms. Didn't really worry too much about drops. Just straight up fought a war of attrition on multiple fronts, weeding down the terran army until he won.
Anybody watching it should note that Jinro made nearly the maximum number of tanks and thors possibly with his 200/200 supply. If he made air such as vikings, he would have had even less tanks and the ultralisks that TLO kept massing would have even been stronger versus his expansions.
So TLO beat Jinro once. Grats to TLO now maybe we should look at the bigger picture eh?
On June 08 2010 12:10 DooMDash wrote: The bigger picture being people complaining about a match up thats fine? How do we fix this?
it never about balance is about i want my cookie back , always .
Its so retarted because a build is considered op the "top" uber leet zerg players switching to terrans i wonder for how many patches till they switch back to zerg or toss .
Aint that funny or what.
ps now that terran mech strat is beatable how terrans will win vs zerg ?
On June 08 2010 12:27 Trok67 wrote: terran mech is beatable ? that's new
It's maybe a new SC2 concept, but think about all the crazy things that were considered good back in SC1 early days... most of them don't even exist anymore. It had nothing to do with balance, and everything to do with new things / a different way of playing the game.
tlo did some things that seemed a bit counterintuitive to me like defending against helions for so long with just lings and crawlers and getting hive early for ultras. That advice about not getting more than about 70 drones was really really good because I've always complained that I have so many drones and not enough of an army and it's one of those subtle elusive obvious changes that aren't so obvious until someone points it out. Overall it still looks like mech will give me trouble for a while and this wasn't the magic bullet I was hoping for as it still looks like it's pretty tough to execute, but at least I have something to shoot for now and I have a rough gameplan on what to do/not do and now I just need to figure out the little details to deal with the other variations that come up.
did jinro have any motivation to win in that game vs TLO? cause i wouldnt try too hard to win a game which would only increase the imba discussion about my own race. on the other hand is TLO who has played terran quite alot recently and probably has an interest in showing that you cant autowin with terran. to determine if terran has indeed a slight advantage over zerg i would rather check some games which were played in late tournament stages where it really mattered to win. it might not be the best example but i was rather surprised how drafter could handle dimaga in the last zotac semi final.
Tanks got nerfed enough so that beating mech is still diffcult but it's much more doable now, can a mod please kill this thread? Cuz its people arguing about a point that was only valid 2 patches ago.
On June 10 2010 00:31 CoMMoDuS wrote: did jinro have any motivation to win in that game vs TLO? cause i wouldnt try too hard to win a game which would only increase the imba discussion about my own race. on the other hand is TLO who has played terran quite alot recently and probably has an interest in showing that you cant autowin with terran.
So ... what you are basically predicting is that there is some kind of conspiracy going on. That they are broadcasting this game to pretend that TvZ is fine. Sry such thoughts really carry things to far.
Of course it was just a match between teammates, surely no tournament conditions. But really i do not get why people keep crying while a) there was not sooo much time to test the tank nerf before the beta went down b) the beta IS down atm c) if people are not able to adept to certain tactics during a short and rapidly changing beta metagame that imho does not mean it has to be overpowered
did jinro have any motivation to win in that game vs TLO? cause i wouldnt try too hard to win a game which would only increase the imba discussion about my own race. on the other hand is TLO who has played terran quite alot recently and probably has an interest in showing that you cant autowin with terran. to determine if terran has indeed a slight advantage over zerg i would rather check some games which were played in late tournament stages where it really mattered to win. it might not be the best example but i was rather surprised how drafter could handle dimaga in the last zotac semi final.
We did not play this to show it on the daily it was a practice game for both us and I didnt even know sean was planning to have me on the show then. Of course you can argue that it was not a competitive game. But I know Jinro he doesnt like losing, so I am sure he did not play on purpose to make his race look weaker than it is. What a silly thought.
okl i just reread my post and i gotta admit that it sounds like one of those "elvis is alive" conspiracies, my bad. the fact that just surprised me was the you (TLO) apparently pressured him so much that he never made any serious attemps of attacking you besides harrassing one of your later expos. when you played the game did you feel like you had pretty good control or would you have feared a real push by his main army? in my personal experince during the beta there was always a moment where i felt very vulnerable to a terran push but somehow you did prevent any attempt of this. also as mentioned map and spawning were pretty nice from a zerg perspective so i was wondering if you have specific adaptions to a more aggressive style of play like a thor drop on LT or when it is harder to mass expand (2 player maps like steps of war)
On June 10 2010 02:45 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tanks got nerfed enough so that beating mech is still diffcult but it's much more doable now, can a mod please kill this thread? Cuz its people arguing about a point that was only valid 2 patches ago.
/agreed
Given the short duration of play time from the most recent patch "How to fix tvz mech" isn't accurate or warranted. Maybe when the beta goes back up and its newly demonstrated zerg players are unable to come up with strategies to beat nerfed tanks and that mech tvz needs fixing we can then start a new thread that doesn't have 40+ pages of old discussion.
well since this is semi-related to mech. What would happen if they removed the HSM from Ravens and replaced it with spider mines to give mech some more survivability while changing up tank's smart targeting?
On June 10 2010 06:02 wolfe wrote: well since this is semi-related to mech. What would happen if they removed the HSM from Ravens and replaced it with spider mines to give mech some more survivability while changing up tank's smart targeting?
Spider mines for "just energy" are too IMBA, because you could have an unlimited amount of them ... unless you make the mines have limited duration, but then they would not serve their purpose and wouldnt really be spider mines. The Raven already has some "limited duration damage dealing" in the turret, so it would be doubling that.
On June 10 2010 06:02 wolfe wrote: well since this is semi-related to mech. What would happen if they removed the HSM from Ravens and replaced it with spider mines to give mech some more survivability while changing up tank's smart targeting?
Spider mines for "just energy" are too IMBA, because you could have an unlimited amount of them ... unless you make the mines have limited duration, but then they would not serve their purpose and wouldnt really be spider mines. The Raven already has some "limited duration damage dealing" in the turret, so it would be doubling that.
What about making it much more similar to SC1 style in that a single raven can only deploy... 3 or maybe 6 mines total rather than being energy based. Frankly maybe I'm just a noob but I don't use HSM very much in play and even then only can pop a few off per Raven.
Edit: You would also reduce a Raven's total energy cap a bit I guess with the removal of a significant energy cost spell.
On June 10 2010 06:10 wolfe wrote: Edit: You would also reduce a Raven's total energy cap a bit I guess with the removal of a significant energy cost spell.
I seriously doubt they will do that, since they screwed up the Thor by making the 250mm cannon cost 150 energy now, so it very very rarely gets used now and the energy on the Thor is just an easy target for Feedback from a High Templar. Reducing the energy maximum is a tool too, but Blizzard rather screws with the cost.
On June 10 2010 02:45 iCCup.Raelcun wrote: Tanks got nerfed enough so that beating mech is still diffcult but it's much more doable now, can a mod please kill this thread? Cuz its people arguing about a point that was only valid 2 patches ago.
Juggernaut Description: These gargantuan beasts are morphed by the fusion of two of the most formidable units in the Zerg arsenal, Hydralisks. The Hydralisks’ sensitive, electro-charged skins beneath their large, helmet-like exoskeletal heads make it easy for these slothien to merge their near-identical DNA. Though the process isn’t completed quickly, the end result is so demonic, it’s difficult not to deploy onto the battlefield.
Once morphed, the Juggernaut looks like you would imagine: like that from which it came. It has a large, armor-plated exoskeletal head. But, since its ribonucleic fusion, there are more protective guards, tentacles and teeth surrounding its slippery surface. The Juggernaut has a powerful jaw to hurl out multiple needle spines at a high rate of speed, damaging not only the primary target, but nearby targets as well.
The Juggernaut also has, thanks to the nucleic fusion of two slothien hydralisk beasts, an extremely large and muscular underhalf that slithers and whips, able to move its large upper body with ease. Additionally, the Juggernaut has four arms (from the hydralisk’s two), giving it the unique ability to heave and dig into the hard soil of the earth and sprint short distances. This, above all else, makes this unit a dreadful opponent for any warrior, valiant or otherwise, to face on the battlefield.
The fusion of the hydralisks is an evolutionary response to the armor piercing rounds of the Terrans and the increasingly-powerful psi blades and energy-intense technologies of the Protoss. The Juggernaut’s skin has adapted to the advanced weaponry of its enemies, and answers with a vastly more durable outer-skin.
‘Morph Juggernaut’ ability is researchable at the Hydralisk den for 100/100. Takes 60 seconds to complete.
Wow, this is an interesting thread. I'm not going to go into balance, though I don't think mech is overpowered. But what I find most interesting is that people seem to think Tanks should be attacked head on. They're called TANKS for a reason. It also takes quite a few of them to cover territorial locations of importance. It's also difficult to be able to actually move your ball of tanks against an aggresive player fighting you for map control
The damage nerf was also interesting, because it has almost no effect on TvZ. It affects TvP heavily, and TvT somewhat, but definitely much less TvZ. Almost all of the units will still die to the same number of tank shots, and if you go thinking "oh roaches with lvl 3 armor won't die anymore", there is still splash damage, so it's pretty much the same, just slightly weaker in overall splash damage.
As Sun Tzu would say, attack where your enemy is weak and you are strong.
Meaning you should never ever attack where your enemy wants you to. And even in Brood War, Tanks could completely obliterate a 200/200 army, this is not new. I'm reminded of the EPIC epic game of FireBatHero vs Savior on Lost Temple, (FBH 1 o' clock, Savior 7 o'clock) where FireBatHero has his main overrun with ultras, and he relocates his entire base to the opposite side of the map and takes the 8 o clock main, floats an EBay over the ramp and blocks it (more imba than sc2 mech ever could be, since you can't manually target the units there is no way to get past this), and then Savior's play stagnated horribly and he just suicided the whole map worth of forces at FBH head on, quite pointlessly, and kept doing bad plays until he ran out of resources and lost.
Again, they're called TANKS. Attacking head on is supposed to be suicide.
I also find it interesting that people consider Zerg air to consist entirely of Mutalisks. Also, the notion that the Thor is end-all be-all against air, when in fact, it functions much like Corsairs and Valkyries did in BW, which were good against mutas/wraiths/scouts. but much worse against BC/Carrier/Guardian. Thors are exploitable, though the power of repair should be rightly feared. Thors shoot extremely slow, at the speed of sieged tanks, and the splash is a pretty small radius (0.5). Fully half of thor damage is bonus, so their strength decreases dramatically against non-light flyers that have armor. A Thor does 4 attacks times 6+1 (+6 to light +1), or 48 (+12 total) to a mutalisk, but does 20 damage to a broodlord (1 starting armor vs 4 attacks times 6), and usually ends up attacking the broodlings anyway, absorbing even more damage.
I read somewhere else on the forums that the tank nerf didn't affect TvZ very much at all because tanks still take the exact same number of hits to kill almost every zerg unit as they did before.
Judging from many of the comments in this thread this must be inaccurate. Can someone who is good please explain?
The nerf does affect overall damage output somewhat, but the most notable features of the damage nerf I find are that Zealots, Stalkers, and Marines with shield all take an extra hit. Tanks can still reach a critical mass, so the nerf, while having some effect, really doesn't quite pan out to be a humongous impact.,
I just want to point one thing out, people overlook this 99% of the time when discussing balance, the current map pool is heavy terran favored, with a few exceptions. Sorry , when I say terran play, I mean mechplay specificlly. Take a map like Desert oasis, if this was the only map in the beta, people would be asking for a mechbuff, because its horribly bad on this map..you see my logic? and I think we can agree that most maps except DO and and blistering sands are heavy mech maps. Even a map lke scrap station benefits mechplay imo, people say the distances are long as hell, but in reality its shorter base-to-base than blistering sands. Also there is not much space to manevour on this map at all for Zerg, save the middle @ watchtower.
I think this is important to think about before we scream tank imbalance
The whole "balance" issue has much to do with the maps. On some maps some tactics by some races will work better than on other maps, but the opponent must realize this and change accordingly.
If on map A the Terran can have his sieged tanks on lots of high grounds with a good view of the apporaching pathways it is ridiculous to think that you can win there by rushing him with Zerglings. If you stick to "your standard strategy" and do not adapt it isnt the fault of the units or the map, but rather the fault of the player. No one would build only ground units on a pure island map is the extreme example for this, but there are subtle advantages to certain units on every map. Kulas Ravine for example favors the useage of Reapers, so you have to expect them; it is also nice for Colossi, blinking Stalkers or sieged Tanks. Expect them to be used and steer away from Zerglings or other stuff that is weak against them and change your strategy accordingly.
Here Artosis - in his now closed topic of "Map balance - the worst of the worst" - is giving a good example of completely deviating from a usual build in order to counter the expected Terran behaviour:
2) you are actually saying to me over and over that mech isn't that good on Desert, and thus its a zerg map. IdrA and I directly disagree with Desert being a Zerg map vs Terran, due to the reasons we put. NOT because of any mech garbage, as mech wasn't even thought about in the creation of this article. Notice we even explained that SEn went 1 hatch mutalisk here because of how ridiculous it is to fight off a thor drop. In fact, so many people are trying to counter our well thought out arguments by saying "its a big map, thats good for zerg, its a zerg map." YES, big maps are good for Zerg. NO, Desert is not one of them vs Terran.
From a spectators point of view it is a good thing that such "totally different and weird maps" exist, because you get to see something completely different. And for the competitors it is good, because you get ripped from the monotony of practicing the one winning build for your race over and over and you need to think about matchups from a different angle.
On June 22 2010 21:50 FrozenArbiter wrote: Why is this locked? Feel free to re-lock whoever did it but post reason plz.
Is this topic still even relevant? I know this was made before the Seige Tank nerf...
IMO it was irrelevant when it was begun ... see the above. The nerf just made everyone panic, but "Terran mech" is more than just sieged tanks and so only a part was nerfed. Running a ton of ground units into a bunch of 10 sieged tanks is never going to be wise unless they shoot with wads of cotton wool. So all the whining about mech was a bit too much IMO, because it doesnt figure in how hard it is to manage and to get the right mix of units. With 2 of the three mech units being unable to shoot air there is a huge vulnerability and the question is only how if the opponent is able to use that or not. So the mix of units is the key and not really the individual firepower.
In Brood War the Zerg could assault a sieged position with Dark Swarm, but that spell is not in the game in SC2, so the Zerg have to get rid of that way of thinking. Sadly too many Zerg players seem unable to cope with that and whine on and on. They should try to find new strategies to cope with that absence instead of whining constantly.
There is a nice saying for all those whine threads about overpowered units or imbalanced maps or whatnot: "Dont bring a sword to a gunfight."
EPT
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dNA17.jpg)
)
we're going to see the Zs win and show theres no imba in mech right? :D
![[image loading]](http://img64.imageshack.us/img64/5787/zergjuggernaut.jpg)
