|
On December 09 2011 05:03 drax2000 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 05:02 ceaRshaf wrote:
Having the Vikings and Ghosts on separate control is not positioning. You sure as hell are ignorant, aren't you? A terran has to position his army just as much as a protoss has to and has to micro alot more during the fight aswell, but that's not even the point. I find it interesting that you changed the topic to "bio vs. toss" because you obviously have no arguments in favor of mech in tvp.
Yeah right, you got me. There is nothing to talk about mech because no one is doing it. We can't discuss anything. I don't want discussions on virtual battles. But the statement that it could be viable stands.
Bio will dry out vs protoss or HOTS will be released.
|
And now drax2000 is banned. Not a huge suprise.
|
On December 09 2011 04:23 drax2000 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 01:13 VanGarde wrote:
I am going to have to applaud the few people who replied to my post and thus proved my argument. So I made a long post pointing out that Day9 and Artosis never said mech was actually good but just wanted to discuss if it could be. I also made the point that people get so caught up in arguing a stupid point that did not even exist in the first place that they don't listen to what people say or read what people write.
So four/five people go out to prove the point by instantly replying to me continuing arguing the point I already said I did not care about, and clearly replies without having read my post since you once again state "Well we just don't like it when Artosis sais mech is the best thing in TvP" or more iterations of "this is why mech does not work, here is a pro player who supports my position".
Are people really this fucking stupid in 2011? READ THE GOD DAMN POST BEFORE YOU REPLY TO IT IN A WAY THAT COMPLETELY PROVES MY ARGUMENT. Oh, please.. Artosis said: "Terrans should try Mech, I have no idea what a protoss should do to beat that lategame army". Then people explained why Mech doesn't work and in most cases, if the protoss is even half-competent, doesn't even get to the point of having a maxed mech army. People brought up enough points as to why Mech wouldn't ever work, now you can go on and tell everybody that their combined "theoretical brilliance" (wtf does that even mean, is it just another way of saying that they never tried it so they simply don't know???) is going to make for an interesting discussion. But the discussion is only going to be interesting for people who have never meched in TvP before, because anyone who has ever meched in TvP at least once in their life and at a reasonable level (master+) could tell you that the whole discussion is a waste of time because it simply DOESNT WORK. How can you be so dense to not understand that?
The problem that incontrol and other have said, isn't that mech is necessarily BAD against protoss. It's just it looks nearly impossible to get up to 200/200 with a Terran Mech army against a Protoss, while trying to keep protoss from having 8 bases while you're off of 3-4 bases as terran.
|
incontrol continuing to try too hard to argue for the sake of arguing
|
On December 08 2011 07:41 LambtrOn wrote:Show nested quote +On December 08 2011 07:26 MasterKush wrote:On December 08 2011 06:39 Viperx wrote:
40k Viewer Idea-- (More like how far over 40k will you get idea)
Day[9] Showmatch Day, for CHARITY!
The Idea-- Have Day[9] play all 3 MUs, in a Bo3 format. The rest of the SOTG cast could either play him, or commentate the games. Past 'guests' could be brought on to participate in some way, whether commentating themselves, or being opponents, etc. Basically, if you have contributed to SOTG you are welcome, and encouraged to participate in whatever way you would want!
Why this could work-- Many pros have done WILDLY popular charity events / drives. For example: TLO, Destiny, Sheth (I am sure there are others I am forgetting). Everyone loves starcraft, and could watch Starcraft, watch one of the most popular personalities in Starcraft play 'professionally' for the first time in SC2, ALL WHILE HELPING CHARITY!!! Based on these examples, I think the 40k mark would EASILY be obtained, it is clear the starcraft community loves: Starcraft, Day[9], SOTG members, and charity.
Opponent Ideas for Day[9] to play-- These are not set in stone... just ideas... all have appeared (or were going to appear) on SOTG. I am sure I am forgetting people, Sorry If i am! Nothing personal!!
vZ: Destiny, Idra, Machine, Sheth
vP: Huk, Incontrol, Naniwa, Socke, Tyler, Whitera
vT: Demuslim, Jinro, TLO
Casters: Husky, JP, Tasteosis
-- The important part is the idea. Players / Logistics can be worked out later. The main point-- DAY[9] PLAYING PROS IN STARCRAFT 2!
No offence to Day9 (and I am sure he would admit this himself) but he wouldn't have a chance against any of those guys I highlighted above. They are all professional players that train for 8+ hours a day... Day9 is a caster & internet personality. Would be interesting to see him play against another caster though, like Artosis or the above. Have you ever seen him play SC2? So many people just jump to conclusions without any evidence at all. He said that he has GM with all three races, but doesn't have to time to play enough to stay in GM. You can choose not to believe him, I guess. But you really have no reason to. Also, +1 to incontrol. Please make that show match happen. I would donate for sure.
Day9 was a A level zerg ... nobody touch hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiim
Btw I love how nobody discussed Predy's statement, who was, if I remember correctly, one of the only terran trying mech against toss.
|
On December 09 2011 04:01 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 03:48 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
day9 is really smart and im constantly impressed with how well he keeps up with strategies, and even sees new strats coming before they hit mainstream. but i think the thing that gave him the extra oomph that made him american champion of BW so many times was his own personal testing and re-testing and re-testing and re-testing. he talks about this method all the time in his dailies, where you essentially make a hypothesis on how to play a certain strat, play it until it fails, then adjust it, play it until it fails, adjust it, as many times as you can before you have to use it in competition. i think that process is something he has very little time for nowadays, so his own personal concrete contributions to strategy are extremely limited. he still comes up with great hypotheses, but without inhuman genius, it's a fact that most hypotheses are going to be simply wrong or in need of a ton of refinement through that process. so he's in an awkward position where he can hardly ever prove anything he says but he's still worth listening to, even though a lot of what he says is going to be (to some extent) wrong. artosis is in a similar boat
and hell, as long me and incontrol are losing, we're in a similar boat too. i think that unless you can point to a pro game where the thing you're saying will work works, you're kinda stuck. either it's proven in competition or it's not No doubt day9 is really smart. But i have a question out of curiousity: What strategies/trends has he predicted?
I remember Day9 talking about Infestor/Broodlord quite some time before it was very prevalent in the competitive scene. Can't remember the exact episode, but he was discussing it with Idra, who (iirc, not sure) was somewhat skeptical of it at the time.
|
Normally I'm supportive of Incontrol but I find it shocking that a former Brood War player, of all people, is convinced 1.5 years into the life of SC2 that mech will never be viable. Weren't BW players convinced 1.5 years after that game was released that playing Terran wasn't viable? We all know how that turned out. I started reading BW forums in 2002 (4 years after release) and I can tell you what people thought about strategies back then:
-Mech will never work in TvZ
-Queens are useless
-Devourers and valkyries are also useless
-DTs are only good vs Terran and Protoss
-Vultures are only good vs Protoss
-Zerg must tech on 2 hatch because 3 hatch will always lose to fast tanks (standard Terran build at the time)
-Defilers will never be standard because they take too many clicks to use
-Carriers are better than arbiters in PvT
-Forge FE is an unorthodox build
-Protoss is weak against Zerg due to being unable to scout the tech path
-Lost temple is a really good map
-2 barracks CC in TvZ is considered an insanely fast expo
-Expanding before 2 factories in TvP is considered early
-Every single game of TvP had a fast dragoon attacking Terran's 2 supply + 1 barracks wall, followed by a tank popping out to scare it away
-Zerg cannot lose to Protoss upon reaching crackling/ultra
-Island maps are suitable for use in competitive play
-When Boxer expanded as his main mineral patches had 500 minerals left each, this was not considered a late expansion
-If Protoss scouts Terran making multiple than 2 marines, the build is likely a gundam rush
-You can gundam rush every TvP and do pretty well
So I think the discussion would've been more interesting if they stuck to the original topic about what ways people might be able to make mech work in the future, not whether it can work at all based on 1.5 years of games where Terrans just go bio.
|
United Kingdom14464 Posts
On December 09 2011 06:03 iamke55 wrote:
Normally I'm supportive of Incontrol but I find it shocking that a former Brood War player, of all people, is convinced 1.5 years into the life of SC2 that mech will never be viable. Weren't BW players convinced 1.5 years after that game was released that playing Terran wasn't viable? We all know how that turned out. I started reading BW forums in 2002 (4 years after release) and I can tell you what people thought about strategies back then:
-Mech will never work in TvZ
-Queens are useless
-Devourers and valkyries are also useless
-DTs are only good vs Terran and Protoss
-Vultures are only good vs Protoss
-Zerg must tech on 2 hatch because 3 hatch will always lose to fast tanks (standard Terran build at the time)
-Defilers will never be standard because they take too many clicks to use
-Carriers are better than arbiters in PvT
-Forge FE is an unorthodox build
-Protoss is weak against Zerg due to being unable to scout the tech path
-Lost temple is a really good map
-2 barracks CC in TvZ is considered an insanely fast expo
-Expanding before 2 factories in TvP is considered early
-Every single game of TvP had a fast dragoon attacking Terran's 2 supply + 1 barracks wall, followed by a tank popping out to scare it away
-Zerg cannot lose to Protoss upon reaching crackling/ultra
-Island maps are suitable for use in competitive play
-When Boxer expanded as his main mineral patches had 500 minerals left each, this was not considered a late expansion
-If Protoss scouts Terran making multiple than 2 marines, the build is likely a gundam rush
-You can gundam rush every TvP and do pretty well
So I think the discussion would've been more interesting if they stuck to the original topic about what ways people might be able to make mech work in the future, not whether it can work at all based on 1.5 years of games where Terrans just go bio.
I wanted to post a rebuttal... but I have none. You are completely right, we just don't know. At all. But, thats not really a good enough argument for mech either. In the end, we will just have to wait for someone to grind it out for thousands of hours to see if it can work. Until then though, the default position should be that mech is terrible vs Protoss, because despite what Artosis says, tanks are really bad vs Protoss as far as I can tell. They beat sentries, and pre-blink Stalkers, and thats it.
Also: Why does Artosis never talk about mech vs Zerg? It seems really viable, really powerful, and massively underdeveloped.
|
iamke, to be fair 1 year in Sc2 =/= 1 year in Sc1.
Think about how long it took multiple base play to become the norm in Sc1 and think about how fast it took in Sc2.
We can't assume the growth of each game is linear because the growth of Sc2 strategy (at least a majority of it) is based off a decade of Sc1 strategy thus Sc2 strategy is developing exponentially faster.
|
I don't know why more people don't play Ghost Mech vs Zerg. I really, really don't. Because if they did I'd lose every ZvT.
edit: this was a response to MCDay, not a balance whine =p
|
On December 09 2011 06:12 Condor Hero wrote:
iamke, to be fair 1 year in Sc2 =/= 1 year in Sc1.
Think about how long it took multiple base play to become the norm in Sc1 and think about how fast it took in Sc2.
We can't assume the growth of each game is linear because the growth of Sc2 strategy (at least a majority of it) is based off a decade of Sc1 strategy thus Sc2 strategy is developing exponentially faster.
That's true, but that's not a sufficient enough rebuttal. Faster advancement =/= faster skill ceiling or BO cap. If I may make a terrible and awfully stretched analogy, compare it to the human race. Really slow advancement at first, now rapid technological advancement, and yet we still have SO MUCH MORE to uncover. SO MUCH. There's still two expansions, there's still the inevitable BW --> SC2 transition, I honestly cannot wait to see what happens with SC2. I am not writing off ANY strategies or play styles for another few years.
|
On December 09 2011 03:48 Liquid`Tyler wrote:
day9 is really smart and im constantly impressed with how well he keeps up with strategies, and even sees new strats coming before they hit mainstream. but i think the thing that gave him the extra oomph that made him american champion of BW so many times was his own personal testing and re-testing and re-testing and re-testing. he talks about this method all the time in his dailies, where you essentially make a hypothesis on how to play a certain strat, play it until it fails, then adjust it, play it until it fails, adjust it, as many times as you can before you have to use it in competition. i think that process is something he has very little time for nowadays, so his own personal concrete contributions to strategy are extremely limited. he still comes up with great hypotheses, but without inhuman genius, it's a fact that most hypotheses are going to be simply wrong or in need of a ton of refinement through that process. so he's in an awkward position where he can hardly ever prove anything he says but he's still worth listening to, even though a lot of what he says is going to be (to some extent) wrong. artosis is in a similar boat
and hell, as long me and incontrol are losing, we're in a similar boat too. i think that unless you can point to a pro game where the thing you're saying will work works, you're kinda stuck. either it's proven in competition or it's not
And thus Tyler spake and it was true and good, and the masses thence realized their limits: for if their very Gods be fallible and may not lay claim to truth without testing, and may not even agree amongst themselves, and their mere disagreement shakes the foundations of the liquid land upon which mortals tread, from whence comes the right for mere mortals to argue as though they were not?
And the mortals realized that as their Gods were fallible, so too were they a thousandfold more, and the mortals saw that their arguments were but pale shadows of those of their Gods and they fell silent and repented their presumptuousness.
|
BW is nothing like SC2.. developments happened in BW because it's extremely hard mechanically. Your list is just completely disingenuous to the real situation. People simply mechanically could NOT do those strategies, or their opponents could not do the strategies they were intended to counter. In SC2 this is not the problem, mech is not 'too hard'.. it just fucking sucks, it's plain as day.
If you're familiar with BW it should be even more obvious that this is the case, because tanks/hellion is far far worse than bw tanks/vulture. Sorry but it's just awful for so many reasons, it's not something you can just argue around and say that it will be worked out to try and look open-minded or something. In the current state of the game full mech will never work in TvP. If you think otherwise try it yourself, lose 95% of your games doing it and stop talking theoretical bullshit after that.
Not everything has to be viable.
|
On December 09 2011 06:03 iamke55 wrote:
Normally I'm supportive of Incontrol but I find it shocking that a former Brood War player, of all people, is convinced 1.5 years into the life of SC2 that mech will never be viable. Weren't BW players convinced 1.5 years after that game was released that playing Terran wasn't viable? We all know how that turned out. I started reading BW forums in 2002 (4 years after release) and I can tell you what people thought about strategies back then:
-Mech will never work in TvZ
-Queens are useless
-Devourers and valkyries are also useless
-DTs are only good vs Terran and Protoss
-Vultures are only good vs Protoss
-Zerg must tech on 2 hatch because 3 hatch will always lose to fast tanks (standard Terran build at the time)
-Defilers will never be standard because they take too many clicks to use
-Carriers are better than arbiters in PvT
-Forge FE is an unorthodox build
-Protoss is weak against Zerg due to being unable to scout the tech path
-Lost temple is a really good map
-2 barracks CC in TvZ is considered an insanely fast expo
-Expanding before 2 factories in TvP is considered early
-Every single game of TvP had a fast dragoon attacking Terran's 2 supply + 1 barracks wall, followed by a tank popping out to scare it away
-Zerg cannot lose to Protoss upon reaching crackling/ultra
-Island maps are suitable for use in competitive play
-When Boxer expanded as his main mineral patches had 500 minerals left each, this was not considered a late expansion
-If Protoss scouts Terran making multiple than 2 marines, the build is likely a gundam rush
-You can gundam rush every TvP and do pretty well
So I think the discussion would've been more interesting if they stuck to the original topic about what ways people might be able to make mech work in the future, not whether it can work at all based on 1.5 years of games where Terrans just go bio.
Should highlight this so more people can see it.
|
On December 09 2011 05:10 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 04:23 drax2000 wrote:On December 09 2011 01:13 VanGarde wrote:
I am going to have to applaud the few people who replied to my post and thus proved my argument. So I made a long post pointing out that Day9 and Artosis never said mech was actually good but just wanted to discuss if it could be. I also made the point that people get so caught up in arguing a stupid point that did not even exist in the first place that they don't listen to what people say or read what people write.
So four/five people go out to prove the point by instantly replying to me continuing arguing the point I already said I did not care about, and clearly replies without having read my post since you once again state "Well we just don't like it when Artosis sais mech is the best thing in TvP" or more iterations of "this is why mech does not work, here is a pro player who supports my position".
Are people really this fucking stupid in 2011? READ THE GOD DAMN POST BEFORE YOU REPLY TO IT IN A WAY THAT COMPLETELY PROVES MY ARGUMENT. Oh, please.. Artosis said: "Terrans should try Mech, I have no idea what a protoss should do to beat that lategame army". Then people explained why Mech doesn't work and in most cases, if the protoss is even half-competent, doesn't even get to the point of having a maxed mech army. People brought up enough points as to why Mech wouldn't ever work, now you can go on and tell everybody that their combined "theoretical brilliance" (wtf does that even mean, is it just another way of saying that they never tried it so they simply don't know???) is going to make for an interesting discussion. But the discussion is only going to be interesting for people who have never meched in TvP before, because anyone who has ever meched in TvP at least once in their life and at a reasonable level (master+) could tell you that the whole discussion is a waste of time because it simply DOESNT WORK. How can you be so dense to not understand that? The problem that incontrol and other have said, isn't that mech is necessarily BAD against protoss. It's just it looks nearly impossible to get up to 200/200 with a Terran Mech army against a Protoss, while trying to keep protoss from having 8 bases while you're off of 3-4 bases as terran.
yes mech is BAD vs protoss. A 200 vs 200 mech vs pretty much anything protoss army is heavily protoss favored. On paper, mass tank should kill everything on the ground, but it just isn't the case. Chargelots, archons, immortals, colossi.. all these things will obliterate a mech army in a straight up fight. Terran has to spam PFs all over the place for their army to not straight up die, but even then protoss can abuse their mobility and resupply rate (gates make chargelots and archons, after all)
I wish people would stop with the "there's no data on mech because no one is doing it" bullshit. There has been attempts to make mech work since the beta - and it actually worked for a while back then, thanks to tanks not being worse than colossi and ghosts doing full damage to shields and energy. Now mech is beyond the point of saving with all the nerfs to terran. There really should be no suggestions of "going mech" from protoss players, and unfortunately there isn't really any point in discussing tvp mech any longer either. Mech just isn't viable because of how the protoss army is designed - get over it.
|
On December 09 2011 06:03 iamke55 wrote:
Normally I'm supportive of Incontrol but I find it shocking that a former Brood War player, of all people, is convinced 1.5 years into the life of SC2 that mech will never be viable. Weren't BW players convinced 1.5 years after that game was released that playing Terran wasn't viable? We all know how that turned out. I started reading BW forums in 2002 (4 years after release) and I can tell you what people thought about strategies back then:
-Mech will never work in TvZ
-Queens are useless
-Devourers and valkyries are also useless
-DTs are only good vs Terran and Protoss
-Vultures are only good vs Protoss
-Zerg must tech on 2 hatch because 3 hatch will always lose to fast tanks (standard Terran build at the time)
-Defilers will never be standard because they take too many clicks to use
-Carriers are better than arbiters in PvT
-Forge FE is an unorthodox build
-Protoss is weak against Zerg due to being unable to scout the tech path
-Lost temple is a really good map
-2 barracks CC in TvZ is considered an insanely fast expo
-Expanding before 2 factories in TvP is considered early
-Every single game of TvP had a fast dragoon attacking Terran's 2 supply + 1 barracks wall, followed by a tank popping out to scare it away
-Zerg cannot lose to Protoss upon reaching crackling/ultra
-Island maps are suitable for use in competitive play
-When Boxer expanded as his main mineral patches had 500 minerals left each, this was not considered a late expansion
-If Protoss scouts Terran making multiple than 2 marines, the build is likely a gundam rush
-You can gundam rush every TvP and do pretty well
So I think the discussion would've been more interesting if they stuck to the original topic about what ways people might be able to make mech work in the future, not whether it can work at all based on 1.5 years of games where Terrans just go bio.
The difference between current sc2 play and what it will be in the future is way way way less different than 2002 BW to current BW. In 02, people had as much competence as current diamond level players, simply because BW was so difficult. In the past 6 months, sc2 has evolved more than what BW evolved in (first) 3 years.
Also, look at your examples. You are talking to certain builds and certain units. In 02, it was still bio vs Z, mech vs P and T.
|
On December 09 2011 06:52 Quotidian wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 05:10 wei2coolman wrote:On December 09 2011 04:23 drax2000 wrote:On December 09 2011 01:13 VanGarde wrote:
I am going to have to applaud the few people who replied to my post and thus proved my argument. So I made a long post pointing out that Day9 and Artosis never said mech was actually good but just wanted to discuss if it could be. I also made the point that people get so caught up in arguing a stupid point that did not even exist in the first place that they don't listen to what people say or read what people write.
So four/five people go out to prove the point by instantly replying to me continuing arguing the point I already said I did not care about, and clearly replies without having read my post since you once again state "Well we just don't like it when Artosis sais mech is the best thing in TvP" or more iterations of "this is why mech does not work, here is a pro player who supports my position".
Are people really this fucking stupid in 2011? READ THE GOD DAMN POST BEFORE YOU REPLY TO IT IN A WAY THAT COMPLETELY PROVES MY ARGUMENT. Oh, please.. Artosis said: "Terrans should try Mech, I have no idea what a protoss should do to beat that lategame army". Then people explained why Mech doesn't work and in most cases, if the protoss is even half-competent, doesn't even get to the point of having a maxed mech army. People brought up enough points as to why Mech wouldn't ever work, now you can go on and tell everybody that their combined "theoretical brilliance" (wtf does that even mean, is it just another way of saying that they never tried it so they simply don't know???) is going to make for an interesting discussion. But the discussion is only going to be interesting for people who have never meched in TvP before, because anyone who has ever meched in TvP at least once in their life and at a reasonable level (master+) could tell you that the whole discussion is a waste of time because it simply DOESNT WORK. How can you be so dense to not understand that? The problem that incontrol and other have said, isn't that mech is necessarily BAD against protoss. It's just it looks nearly impossible to get up to 200/200 with a Terran Mech army against a Protoss, while trying to keep protoss from having 8 bases while you're off of 3-4 bases as terran. yes mech is BAD vs protoss. A 200 vs 200 mech vs pretty much anything protoss army is heavily protoss favored. On paper, mass tank should kill everything on the ground, but it just isn't the case. Chargelots, archons, immortals, colossi.. all these things will obliterate a mech army in a straight up fight. Terran has to spam PFs all over the place for their army to not straight up die, but even then protoss can abuse their mobility and resupply rate (gates make chargelots and archons, after all) I wish people would stop with the "there's no data on mech because no one is doing it" bullshit. There has been attempts to make mech work since the beta - and it actually worked for a while back then, thanks to tanks not being worse than colossi and ghosts doing full damage to shields and energy. Now mech is beyond the point of saving with all the nerfs to terran. There really should be no suggestions of "going mech" from protoss players, and unfortunately there isn't really any point in discussing tvp mech any longer either. Mech just isn't viable because of how the protoss army is designed - get over it.
Wow just as I was getting ready to hit post I saw this ^^ props on beating me to the punch.
Those who assume that mech is viable vs protoss need to go play it, play against or go look at all the games that players like jinro grinded out. Aside from all the logistical problems it has, its simply not cost effective ENOUGH to be considered.
If you compare a engagement in TVT with mech in a position vs a well spread bio force, you will lose maybe HALF your hellions before the entire bioball is vaporized. TVZ, to fight mech you force Terran to trade Tanks for thors or get broodlord infestor to siege mech positions because your low hp units die as you run in, and your high hp armored units melt to tank fire.
The reason this is, Zerg and Terran Don’t have any NON ARMORED high hp unit that can tank massive amounts of damage as the army closes on the meching player. Zealots tank a massive amount of siege tank splash, as do archons. Marauders and roaches get splattered, Zealots and archons shrug it off. This means the meching force basically splashes itself into oblivion as the higher hp ball of protoss crushes in. Zealots simply take too long to die to hellions, which are trying to buffer the tanks.
The same mech force that loses half of its hellions against bio, barely remains standing after the engagement. Now, protoss with its ability to reinforce the fastest after an engagement mops up whatever remains with ease. Envision an engagement where your pushing across the map, if you have 25-50% of your army remaining against a competent protoss that tailors their ground force to combat mech and spreads thier units; that’s a good thing as a mech player...
You watch goody play mech TVP, and he basically MASSES PFS as he splits the map, something you don’t necessarily have to do as a meching player in TVT or TVZ. This is because mech by itself as a stand alone army isn’t efficient enough, the fact that a 1500hp building is required to buffer the army in this match up to be cost efficient enough to use logistically says something.
There are a number of pros who have made their thoughts on mech vs protoss clear, Jinro Goody and Avilo are such examples. Basically figuring out how to mech isn’t rewarding enough in engagements as compared to well microed Bio+Support. There IS a lot of data on it if you know where to look and its easy to see how there are major differences between Mech vs Protoss and the other match ups.
It will take major changes to the units that make mechs composition before we start seeing it again or used successfully vs protoss on long macro games on large maps like Tal Darim.
…And that’s before we consider the implications of giving up map control and mobility.
Bottom line, Bio in theory is much less limited because you can kite, spread and target your units to maximum effectiveness. The automaton for mech is quite a bit more limited since you cant kite back with sieged tanks...
Its very disingenous to those pros to say high level terrans never played around with it or attempted to grind these things out in practice.
|
On December 09 2011 06:03 iamke55 wrote:
Normally I'm supportive of Incontrol but I find it shocking that a former Brood War player, of all people, is convinced 1.5 years into the life of SC2 that mech will never be viable. Weren't BW players convinced 1.5 years after that game was released that playing Terran wasn't viable? We all know how that turned out. I started reading BW forums in 2002 (4 years after release) and I can tell you what people thought about strategies back then:
-Mech will never work in TvZ
-Queens are useless
-Devourers and valkyries are also useless
-DTs are only good vs Terran and Protoss
-Vultures are only good vs Protoss
-Zerg must tech on 2 hatch because 3 hatch will always lose to fast tanks (standard Terran build at the time)
-Defilers will never be standard because they take too many clicks to use
-Carriers are better than arbiters in PvT
-Forge FE is an unorthodox build
-Protoss is weak against Zerg due to being unable to scout the tech path
-Lost temple is a really good map
-2 barracks CC in TvZ is considered an insanely fast expo
-Expanding before 2 factories in TvP is considered early
-Every single game of TvP had a fast dragoon attacking Terran's 2 supply + 1 barracks wall, followed by a tank popping out to scare it away
-Zerg cannot lose to Protoss upon reaching crackling/ultra
-Island maps are suitable for use in competitive play
-When Boxer expanded as his main mineral patches had 500 minerals left each, this was not considered a late expansion
-If Protoss scouts Terran making multiple than 2 marines, the build is likely a gundam rush
-You can gundam rush every TvP and do pretty well
So I think the discussion would've been more interesting if they stuck to the original topic about what ways people might be able to make mech work in the future, not whether it can work at all based on 1.5 years of games where Terrans just go bio.
Lol most of these are little playstyle changes. Going mech means game flow for early/mid/late game is different + completely different unit compositions. Most of the list here are just little deviations of game flow where unit compistion is the same or same game flow but a little different unit composition.
Going mech vs Protoss in SC2 is a massive branch from marine/marauder in terms of game flow and unit composition. Incontrol is right, another reason is that SC2 has alot of hard counters compared to BW.
|
I would like to see these replays of high level players trying mech. (Maybe i missed them in the walls of text?)
The basic vibe i get when it comes to evidence is "some guy went mech awhile back and it wasn't very good so we haven't really tried since then".
All this hypothesizing is great and all but we can't get anywhere without solid data.
|
On December 09 2011 05:06 ceaRshaf wrote:Show nested quote +On December 09 2011 05:03 drax2000 wrote:On December 09 2011 05:02 ceaRshaf wrote:
Having the Vikings and Ghosts on separate control is not positioning. You sure as hell are ignorant, aren't you? A terran has to position his army just as much as a protoss has to and has to micro alot more during the fight aswell, but that's not even the point. I find it interesting that you changed the topic to "bio vs. toss" because you obviously have no arguments in favor of mech in tvp. Yeah right, you got me. There is nothing to talk about mech because no one is doing it. We can't discuss anything. I don't want discussions on virtual battles. But the statement that it could be viable stands. Bio will dry out vs protoss or HOTS will be released.
exactly no 1 is doing it for a reason. Honestly don't get how you guys aren't seeing this. MEch isnt viable as toss. ITS BEEN DONE in both other matchups. You dont think we've been sitting around going... well i guess it works TvZ/TvT maybe we should try TvP mech? NO! Everyones tried it. It doesnt work... at all. Period. There are some 2 base pushes with marine/tank/banshee but other then that its as close to mech as were ever going to get.
On December 09 2011 07:27 Atlas247 wrote:
I would like to see these replays of high level players trying mech. (Maybe i missed them in the walls of text?)
The basic vibe i get when it comes to evidence is "some guy went mech awhile back and it wasn't very good so we haven't really tried since then".
All this hypothesizing is great and all but we can't get anywhere without solid data.
Hannible vs MC GSTL isprobably the best result as far as proving MEch doesn't work. MC was down 60 food... and just walked into his base and still crushed a 200/200 food mech + ghost.
Other proof that mech doesnt work. NO ONE USES IT. Its not that its unexplored its that its been explored and its not viable. The reason you dont see it in Televised games is because they dont want a auto loss. Honestly dont get how people dont see that...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
