|
On October 07 2014 23:33 Wombat_NI wrote: God forbid Protoss lament the current death of Templar openings, although they may yet pull a Lazarus.
I really, really miss Templar starts to be honest.
And I don't understand this argument that "Templars are made in some games that result in a win therefore its not unviable". People seem to be arguing completely different things here; one group about whether you physically CAN do something and the other whether its viable as a playstyle (the latter of which is the more important question when it comes to openings). You can't conflate an attempt to surprise someone in a game and capitalise on it with an overall viable playstyle; because its a trick you can only pull so many times.
Hell, the Mothership Rush All In was used a couple of times in pro games and resulted in a win or two. That doesn't mean it was viable as an overall playstyle to go Mothership first with any regularity.
|
Protoss cannot open with HT's these days because widow mines will hardcounter that type of play.
How is that any more unacceptable than terran being unable to go mech?
|
On October 08 2014 01:06 ( bush wrote: Protoss cannot open with HT's these days because widow mines will hardcounter that type of play.
How is that any more unacceptable than terran being unable to go mech?
Well first of, "going Mech" is quite an arbitrary demand. Not being able to play a composition and being capable to play without a large amount of your options no matter what the opponent does is quite a stronger claim than "I want to play HTs". After all the race is Terran, not "bio" or "mech". However, to demand that certain units should have reasonably large roles should be acceptes by both sides. In that regard I think to ask for a siege tank buff is quite a more urgent matter than to have HTs faster, since HTs do have a huge place in the matchup regardless of them being viable in openings or not. In that regard I think both sides have massive holes in their viable choices.
|
On October 08 2014 01:06 ( bush wrote: Protoss cannot open with HT's these days because widow mines will hardcounter that type of play.
How is that any more unacceptable than terran being unable to go mech?
Protoss do open High Templar There was a post a couple pages back with recent games with templar opening. It's less common, but not completely dead
|
On October 08 2014 01:21 Big J wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 01:06 ( bush wrote: Protoss cannot open with HT's these days because widow mines will hardcounter that type of play.
How is that any more unacceptable than terran being unable to go mech? Well first of, "going Mech" is quite an arbitrary demand. Not being able to play a composition and being capable to play without a large amount of your options no matter what the opponent does is quite a stronger claim than "I want to play HTs". After all the race is Terran, not "bio" or "mech". However, to demand that certain units should have reasonably large roles should be acceptes by both sides. In that regard I think to ask for a siege tank buff is quite a more urgent matter than to have HTs faster, since HTs do have a huge place in the matchup regardless of them being viable in openings or not. In that regard I think both sides have massive holes in their viable choices.
THIS.
Is not like they can't make HTs, they just have to get some colossus and range before that. On the other hand terran can't use over 1/3 of their tech tree it any given point in time.
It is hard, yeah, but I think mech should be a more pressing matter because:
A) Not really a balance issue, so changes wouldn't affect much. B) More variety is good. C) This actually opens more of the protoss tech tree at the same time (immortals/carriers/tempest/etc)
Much like what I posted about Zerg, whatever is patched next should be underused things, to make the MUs better without breaking them.
|
If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building.
|
On October 08 2014 01:37 Lexender wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 01:21 Big J wrote:On October 08 2014 01:06 ( bush wrote: Protoss cannot open with HT's these days because widow mines will hardcounter that type of play.
How is that any more unacceptable than terran being unable to go mech? Well first of, "going Mech" is quite an arbitrary demand. Not being able to play a composition and being capable to play without a large amount of your options no matter what the opponent does is quite a stronger claim than "I want to play HTs". After all the race is Terran, not "bio" or "mech". However, to demand that certain units should have reasonably large roles should be acceptes by both sides. In that regard I think to ask for a siege tank buff is quite a more urgent matter than to have HTs faster, since HTs do have a huge place in the matchup regardless of them being viable in openings or not. In that regard I think both sides have massive holes in their viable choices. THIS. Is not like they can't make HTs, they just have to get some colossus and range before that. On the other hand terran can't use over 1/3 of their tech tree it any given point in time. It is hard, yeah, but I think mech should be a more pressing matter because: A) Not really a balance issue, so changes wouldn't affect much. B) More variety is good. C) This actually opens more of the protoss tech tree at the same time (immortals/carriers/tempest/etc) Much like what I posted about Zerg, whatever is patched next should be underused things, to make the MUs better without breaking them.
EXACTLY! Maybe if protoss had to play against more than unit composition than they would have the option to explore more of their own tech tree at different points in the game! brings me back to my point about how just about every unit in the protoss army has a place in the matchup whether it be early late or mid-game. On the other hand terran has no use for helions, hellbats, thors, tanks, banshees, bc except for some early game helion pressure which usually isnt even worth it. Why should terran be forced into bio but protoss able to have two distinct tech choices available as an opening that counter bio? I dont understand how that argument has any leg to stand on.
|
On October 08 2014 01:52 Ouija wrote: If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building.
No, just no. There are people playing this game 12 hours a day everyday and they don't attemp to mech vs protoss, and you think that is because they don't have the proper scout to handle their opponents strategy?
|
On October 08 2014 01:52 Ouija wrote: If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building. That was funny. Let me guess, you just lost to it in gold and you are mad right now and you felt the rush to complain about mech in PvT here right?
|
On October 08 2014 02:07 ( bush wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 01:52 Ouija wrote: If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building. No, just no. There are people playing this game 12 hours a day everyday and they don't attemp to mech vs protoss, and you think that is because they don't have the proper scout to handle their opponents strategy?
I hate to break it to you, but there is also the opposite. People who do play mech vs protoss every single day and win. I'm not saying that is the only problem terran players have but IMO it is one problem. And honestly I feel sorry for all those poeple who play 12 hours a day and never try out a composition. It's actually quite sad : (
So many people in the forums have this mob like mentality where if a few people say something then by gosh it must be true. Yet very few people to my knowledge have spent the time trying to understand how to play mech and make it work.
I am far from playing against top level players, but I have told protoss players at masters level that i play mech vs toss and still roll them over. So if I, along with the other mech players out there can do it, so can everyone else!!!
@Faust -- If you actually want to have a discussion drop the childish stuff. I'm headed to class now, but I will be back to continue the discussion.
|
On October 08 2014 02:22 Ouija wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 02:07 ( bush wrote:On October 08 2014 01:52 Ouija wrote: If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building. No, just no. There are people playing this game 12 hours a day everyday and they don't attemp to mech vs protoss, and you think that is because they don't have the proper scout to handle their opponents strategy? I hate to break it to you, but there is also the opposite. People who do play mech vs protoss every single day and win. I'm not saying that is the only problem terran players have but IMO it is one problem. And honestly I feel sorry for all those poeple who play 12 hours a day and never try out a composition. It's actually quite sad : ( So many people in the forums have this mob like mentality where if a few people say something then by gosh it must be true. Yet very few people to my knowledge have spent the time trying to understand how to play mech and make it work. I am far from playing against top level players, but I have told protoss players at masters level that i play mech vs toss and still roll them over. So if I, along with the other mech players out there can do it, so can everyone else!!!
As a Terran that played pretty much mech only for the first half of 2014 this is not only a lie but an obvious troll bait.
I know of a lot of players who are masters of mech such as Lyyna and HTOmario (who is constantly GM in both NA and KR), SuperNova too, plays mech a lot on his stream.
Following your logic I can only SkyTerran only for 12 hours and beat master players with it. Funny thing is, it has done been too, and it worked.
But that is NOT what we are discussing, so if you are just going to use personal anecdote with no real value, please at least post something more meaningful than "it Works for some people" and "I've beat masters protoss".
|
On October 08 2014 02:22 Ouija wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 02:07 ( bush wrote:On October 08 2014 01:52 Ouija wrote: If blizzard actually buffed mech vs toss it would become the most OP unit comp. Mech armies can already roll through protoss armies with 0 trouble at all. The meching player just needs to be on top of their scouting and have the correct composition to deal with whatever the protoss is building. No, just no. There are people playing this game 12 hours a day everyday and they don't attemp to mech vs protoss, and you think that is because they don't have the proper scout to handle their opponents strategy? I hate to break it to you, but there is also the opposite. People who do play mech vs protoss every single day and win. I'm not saying that is the only problem terran players have but IMO it is one problem. And honestly I feel sorry for all those poeple who play 12 hours a day and never try out a composition. It's actually quite sad : ( So many people in the forums have this mob like mentality where if a few people say something then by gosh it must be true. Yet very few people to my knowledge have spent the time trying to understand how to play mech and make it work. I am far from playing against top level players, but I have told protoss players at masters level that i play mech vs toss and still roll them over. So if I, along with the other mech players out there can do it, so can everyone else!!! @Faust -- If you actually want to have a discussion drop the childish stuff. I'm headed to class now, but I will be back to continue the discussion. Almost any composition is viable below the pro level. The problem is that in the pro level those builds are not the meta, cause they are simply inferior to many other builds/styles. They are used sometimes as a surprise but they need that surprise element to work properly. Mech v toss can be done but it is a surprise build, not a way to win consistently.
|
Your argument doesn't make too much sense to me. You say that you and a bunch of other people can make mech work vs Protoss at masters level. That means exactly what it says, nothing else.
I can crush people with mass reapers at masters level, and I know a lot of other people who are also capable of doing that. Does it mean mass reapers is a viable strategy which people can do in GSL and win with it?
|
Not being able to play a composition and being capable to play without a large amount of your options no matter what the opponent does is quite a stronger claim than "I want to play HTs"
Terarn infastructure is much less flexible than toss. Terran can't really switch back and fourth between mech and bio like toss can with HT's.
|
On October 08 2014 00:56 -Celestial- wrote:I really, really miss Templar starts to be honest. And I don't understand this argument that "Templars are made in some games that result in a win therefore its not unviable". People seem to be arguing completely different things here; one group about whether you physically CAN do something and the other whether its viable as a playstyle (the latter of which is the more important question when it comes to openings). You can't conflate an attempt to surprise someone in a game and capitalise on it with an overall viable playstyle; because its a trick you can only pull so many times. Hell, the Mothership Rush All In was used a couple of times in pro games and resulted in a win or two. That doesn't mean it was viable as an overall playstyle to go Mothership first with any regularity.
We just have very different definitions of viable then. Would you say 3 Gate Oracle isn't viable at the moment because if you did it every game, your opponent would just blind counter it and win? How about Reactor Factory / Medivac openings in TvP, are they 'not viable' because all Protoss has to do is scout on 9 to see gas first then make Stalkers + Observer / Cannon to get a huge lead?
To me, something doesn't have to be usable every game in every scenario in order to be considered a viable strategy. It just needs to be something that has a reasonable chance of success (i.e. doesn't straight up lose to standard play) in the current metagame.
|
On October 08 2014 02:35 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Not being able to play a composition and being capable to play without a large amount of your options no matter what the opponent does is quite a stronger claim than "I want to play HTs" Terarn infastructure is much less flexible than toss. Terran can't really switch back and fourth between mech and bio like toss can with HT's.
I think adding the one or other tank or thor isn't harder than having a Stargate or Robotics adding Immortals or Colossi (or Phoenix/Voidrays/Tempest against Zerg). Given that there is always a little upgrade dilemma, however, if a unit really has a good reason to be played, being 1-2 upgrades behind doesn't immidiatly invalidate it. Moreso when we talk about units that are not like marines, zerglings or zealots which do profit a lot or get punished very hard depending on upgrade advantages.
The thing just is, that there is no reason to build a Thor over Marine/Marauder or a tank. Those units do hardly help you in any way. They do not really have a unique role when fighting, but are quite a burden to your army when not.
|
On October 08 2014 02:43 Pursuit_ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2014 00:56 -Celestial- wrote:I really, really miss Templar starts to be honest. And I don't understand this argument that "Templars are made in some games that result in a win therefore its not unviable". People seem to be arguing completely different things here; one group about whether you physically CAN do something and the other whether its viable as a playstyle (the latter of which is the more important question when it comes to openings). You can't conflate an attempt to surprise someone in a game and capitalise on it with an overall viable playstyle; because its a trick you can only pull so many times. Hell, the Mothership Rush All In was used a couple of times in pro games and resulted in a win or two. That doesn't mean it was viable as an overall playstyle to go Mothership first with any regularity. We just have very different definitions of viable then. Would you say 3 Gate Oracle isn't viable at the moment because if you did it every game, your opponent would just blind counter it and win? How about Reactor Factory / Medivac openings in TvP, are they 'not viable' because all Protoss has to do is scout on 9 to see gas first then make Stalkers + Observer / Cannon to get a huge lead? To me, something doesn't have to be usable every game in every scenario in order to be considered a viable strategy. It just needs to be something that has a reasonable chance of success (i.e. doesn't straight up lose to standard play) in the current metagame. You are comparing (poorly represented) all ins with a macro/turtlde build....
|
I do agree that TvP is very restricted for both sides. Where as TvZ can vary from Bio vs Ling/Bane/Muta to Mech vs Swarm Host, TvP feels destined to always nearly be MMMVG vs Gateway + Colossi/Storm.
I think the primary reason is that the other options (Mech, Sky Terran, HT, Sky Toss) don't provide enough flexibility like the standard builds do. MMM and Gateway + Colossi can deal with just about anything equally well. It doesn't mean the other builds don't exist and that they are completely horrible, it just means they struggle dealing with solid standard play.
Whereas Bio can deal with any composition nearly equally well, Mech can die horribly against an Air transition because Mech AA is limited and at the same time HT openings seem to have trouble dealing with Widow Mines for Protoss. Whilst I am fine with builds have varying strengths and weaknesses, the balance is off for these types of play.
I play Terran so I can't provide too much detail into the Protoss side of things, but for me, what Mech is lacking:
1. Flexibility vs Protoss compositions + Show Spoiler +Mech is more much a one trick pony than Bio is, without really giving much in return. Hellbat + Siege Tank will probably murder most Gateway/Colossi armies, but it has no AA at all. Adding AA to counter that will make it safer against Air play, but in return its more vulnerable on the ground (Thors/Vikings aren't very good in dealing with Protoss ground). Immortals can be dealt with to an extent with Hellbats and Ghosts, but it is much easier for Protoss to mix in Immortals than it is for a Mech army to adapt to it.
As a result, a Mech army is only good at one thing at a time, and horrible versus anything else. The much longer build time of the Tank and Thor also further restrict the flexibility of a Mech composition. If Mech was really really good at that one thing, something could be said for that, but this is currently not the case in TvP.
Bio suffers from none of this for the simple reason that its core unit can shoot Air, is fast and has a lot of DPS and is great against Immortals. This outweighs the downside of Marines not having long AA range and being vulnerable to splash. Adding Vikings to a Bio composition is also not as much of a detriment as the Starport with a Reactor is a natural component of a Bio composition and Gas is not the primary spender for Bio units.
2. Siege Tanks lack raw damage + Show Spoiler +In Brood War, a field of Siege Tanks pretty much said: 'no, you can't go here'. In SC2, Protoss just laughs in your face, sends in the Chargelot/Immortal/Archons and gone are the Tanks. On top of that, they cost a very gas expensive 150/125/3 and only deal 35 damage to Archons/Chargelots and a pitiful 10 to Immortals with shields.
Instead of Tanks being the powerful artillery to counter the lack of mobility in a Mech army, it doesn't add much of anything. Of course, just flatly increasing the Tank's damage could unbalance TvZ so the unit is in a tricky spot. None the less, the changes I propose to aid the Tank:
Cost modified to 150/100/3.
Single target damage increased to 60 (splash damage remains unchanged) and will always deal this full damage to shielded targets.
Immortal shields (as mentioned by TheDwf) will half the damage of any attack dealing more than 20 damage, rather than reducing it to 10. This means a Siege Tank shot would deal 60 / 2 = 30 damage.
Until three bases, Mech is very fragile due to the gas cost of the composition. The gas cost of Tanks is a big reason here and for what it does, 125 gas each is a little too much. By reducing this to 100, there is a little more breathing room in the composition and Tanks can be brought in a numbers a bit more easily.
The damage changes would mean a Zealot would take the full 60 damage from the first shot and 35 damage from any further shots. If it had only 1 shield left before it takes the first shot, it would take 35 (regular damage) + 1 = 36 damage. Archons would always take the full 60 damage, but other than that, no unit match-ups outside of TvP are really affected as the 10 additional damage vs Armored (only on the primary target) would have no real effect in TvZ or TvT.
The main reason for the damage change on the primary target is due to the difference between a Zerg army and a Protoss army. Zerg units can die to Tanks because they are numerous, but with low HP (100 minerals = 4 zerglings = 4 units with 35 HP each). This means the splash damage does most of the work.
Protoss units generally do not die to Tanks because they are relatively few, but with high HP. (100 minerals = 1 zealot = 1 unit with 150 hp) This means the direct damage does most of the work.
As such, increasing the direct damage without increasing splash damage would only really affect TvP. By changing it so that Tanks always deal full damage to shields, again only TvP Tanks are affected.
Tanks with these changes would more strongly balance out the severe lack of mobility. They still can't shoot up, will still mass murder each other against any Zealots on top of Tanks and they still have to siege up. But when they do, they can truly zone out an area.
3. Lack of mobile AA + Show Spoiler +There is no decent mobile AA available in the Terran Mech army. Thors are far too slow, too bulky and too expensive. They are also horrible when it comes to raw AA DPS for their cost. Void Rays alone will easily beat a Thor. Although Widow Mines could provide some AA, it only has range 5 and needs to burrow. To deal with air units, you need either speed, DPS or range (preferably at least two of these) and the Widow Mine's attack has none (the DPS is low due to the cooldown).
Vikings are an option, but getting those out in decent numbers to survive against Air will heavily chew into your Mech army due to the gas cost and it's for a unit that is essentially only AA. It cannot help too much on the ground as it only has 125 health, no armor and average DPS for a hefty 150/75 each.
As such, some type of Goliath like unit is needed. Something that moves at decent speed (2.75 or 2.95), has decent Air range (at least 6) and can deal some acceptable AA damage whilst still being able to support on the ground. A kind of Mech Stalker if you will. I had hoped that the Warhound would've fulfilled this role, but instead it became some weird anti-ground unit that got binned.
I'd consider bringing it back with a normal damage to cost ratio with the primary role being support and AA. Something around the 125/75/2 mark with ~35-40 second build time and a decent DPS/range AA attack (say 9-10 DPS and 7 range). The cost is similar to a Viking but this time it doesn't take away as much from the ground army. It would have a weaker but still acceptable ranged ground attack (range 6 or 7) so it can support the ground army. On their own they should suck against ground units, to make sure they stick to a supporting role.
Obviously all these changes at once would probably be too much, but Mech (especially Tanks) currently struggle too much against what standard Protoss play can bring for a Terran to truly consider using it.
|
Do not know if anyone watched ty vs myunsik final game today. I think ty is such a great thinker of the game. Still remember his Proleague game against maru. Total domination.
Anyway back to balance 'discussion'. Go watch Ty's games today. All tvp. To everyone saying mech is not viable. Ty used the tanks to supplement his bio to great effect. Sure it wasn't a pure mech build. But he used 2-3 tanks in some games to great effect.
I think a lot of terran players get sucked into a narrow minset. Either bio or mech. And because bio is already so powerful that mech pales in comparison, terrans complain about mech sucking.
Looking at Protoss and Zerg plays. Hydra/roach use ranged upgrades but trade horribly against bio. Zerg still use them in the composition, successfully too (hyun). Zergs takes to the air with mutas, broodlords and corruptors. Use infestors/swarm hosts and ultras. Likewise for Protoss players. Hampered by incredibly weak gateway units. Protoss players have to use tech to deal with marines and marauders. From watching pro games, I see the willingness of Protoss and zergs to adapt, to try to use different units. Like snute with swarm host. Like hyun with roach. Protosses need to use higher techs to play else they are dead on gateway units.
Over 4 years of watching pro Starcraft 2. This is the mindset I see. Terrans complain about spending a scan to clear creep, kill observer. Build the damn raven. Remember pigbaby? He built 7 observers for bloody detection and scouting. You already have the star port. You already have the tech lab. Roach bane allin can kill you. Build the bloody tank. You already have tech lab and factory. Terran players are too pigeon-holed in their thinking. 4M everyday. When it don't work. Buff terran.
|
I'm pretty sure there is ways to open high templar. It just require some micro and not a move mass chargelots +s torm like it was. Ofc open colossus is way easier so protoss don't try to throw only a few zealots before engaging like zerg do vs WM, to attack from two angles to maximize friendly fire, to use blink stalker to trigger WM without losing anything, to use hallucinated archons or phoenix or even hallucinated zealots to trigger WM.
|
|
|
|