On June 10 2012 08:02 Shiori wrote: [quote] I can't be the only person who realizes that the Reaper remake will be entirely useless against the new Queen (hell, even 3 of them in the battle report didn't do anything) and worthless against Protoss for essentially the same reason they're worthless now: 1 Stalker counters any number of them.
No you're not the Reaper is made even worse than he currently is in every MU other then TvT where he'll be a pain in the ass. 7 Range is more than Marines in a Bunker which means Gasless FE builds would be dead since any build without techlab rax staight up dies :O
Yeah man those gauss pistols really tear down bunkers, it's not like repair can counter their low DPS vs armored and the marines will zone out the reapers from hitting the SCVs with good positioning.
Lol what? The reapers will outrange marines in a bunker, thats the point. Even if you repair the reapers can just move around the bunker, and how is a range 5 marine supposed to "zone out" a range 7 reaper that also has a speed advantage?
Do I have to spell this out for you? You place a bunker or two next to your mineral line. If the reapers shoot it, you repair it. If they move forward to hit the SCV on the other side, your range *6* marines with the +1 bunker increase fuck them up. You might still lose a couple harvesters but that's the price you pay for doing a greedy gasless build against an opponent who went for better tech.
Reaper expand into more Reapers has the expo up ~10 seconds later ...
But with less harvesters and bank. You can't just spend 75 minerals on a refinery and lose mineral mining time on the 3 SCVs needed to get gas, drop more on a tech lab, and come out with the same money as someone who put all of that into econ.
Maybe you should just accept that you have no idea what you're talking about and not get into an argument where you have no knowledge to back up your statements. Especially here on TL where just believing you're right isn't enough.
The difference between a 1 rax gasless and reaper expand is negligible. The reaper expand player is down 1 SCV and a bit of mineral income in exchange for complete map control where he can just take an uncontested 3rd. In fact, the reaper would still outrange marines in a bunker lol.
Alright I'll defer to your experience as TvT is not my forte, but if that's the case and it truly is a negligible difference then I'm not sure what the problem was in the first place with gasless FE becoming a dead strat. The game isn't really losing much strategic diversity if both openers resulted in a similar state, no?
On June 10 2012 09:13 Saechiis wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:59 SmileZerg wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:49 MaK UK wrote: I dont understand why everyone is hating on the warhound??
It's a siege line breaker so 1A suits its role. Its fast which lets it close siege tank range quickly, with the addition of its main gun being really powerful and shoots fast. It seems like the new go to unit for packing a punch through a turtle player.
Also the design isn't that bad, don't see why people hate it, i don't think the old BW Goliath model would suit what its role is, unless they beefed it up and stuck the same cannon on it!
I won't even say anything about the model, because I'm fucking certain that horrid thing won't even make it to the beta.
But design-wise, nobody wants a 1A unit. That shouldn't suit anything's role, and it ruins the positional feel of mech from BW that everyone's been after. Also, having an anti-mechanical specialist in a game where one race is entirely bio just feels bad.
People just like complaining. The Haywire attack could be manually targeted for increased efficiency just like charge can be manually activated at specific times for Protoss players. There's also nothing keeping players from micro'ing Warhounds to abuse their speed and range or by getting better concaves, superior positioning and target-firing mechanical units. Most viewers just only see the obvious micro that gives clear visual feedback like ... feedback ^^
It's also not like Terran needs more micro heavy units, almost all of their current units are already heavily dependant on control.
You make some good points, but the apparent complete lack of utility against zerg still stands. Sure there are units which aren't used in every match-up, but the expansion is Blizzards chance to fix that. Even if they don't become a staple, I think just about every unit should have some niche role no matter what races are involved.
Or maybe it's just that hideous model that makes me want to hate on Warhounds. I can't say for sure.
Dammit all what the war hound should've been is this.
No you're not the Reaper is made even worse than he currently is in every MU other then TvT where he'll be a pain in the ass. 7 Range is more than Marines in a Bunker which means Gasless FE builds would be dead since any build without techlab rax staight up dies :O
Yeah man those gauss pistols really tear down bunkers, it's not like repair can counter their low DPS vs armored and the marines will zone out the reapers from hitting the SCVs with good positioning.
Lol what? The reapers will outrange marines in a bunker, thats the point. Even if you repair the reapers can just move around the bunker, and how is a range 5 marine supposed to "zone out" a range 7 reaper that also has a speed advantage?
Do I have to spell this out for you? You place a bunker or two next to your mineral line. If the reapers shoot it, you repair it. If they move forward to hit the SCV on the other side, your range *6* marines with the +1 bunker increase fuck them up. You might still lose a couple harvesters but that's the price you pay for doing a greedy gasless build against an opponent who went for better tech.
Reaper expand into more Reapers has the expo up ~10 seconds later ...
But with less harvesters and bank. You can't just spend 75 minerals on a refinery and lose mineral mining time on the 3 SCVs needed to get gas, drop more on a tech lab, and come out with the same money as someone who put all of that into econ.
Maybe you should just accept that you have no idea what you're talking about and not get into an argument where you have no knowledge to back up your statements. Especially here on TL where just believing you're right isn't enough.
The difference between a 1 rax gasless and reaper expand is negligible. The reaper expand player is down 1 SCV and a bit of mineral income in exchange for complete map control where he can just take an uncontested 3rd. In fact, the reaper would still outrange marines in a bunker lol.
Alright I'll defer to your experience as TvT is not my forte, but if that's the case and it truly is a negligible difference then I'm not sure what the problem was in the first place with gasless FE becoming a dead strat. The game isn't really losing much strategic diversity if both openers resulted in a similar state, no?
On June 10 2012 09:13 Saechiis wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:59 SmileZerg wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:49 MaK UK wrote: I dont understand why everyone is hating on the warhound??
It's a siege line breaker so 1A suits its role. Its fast which lets it close siege tank range quickly, with the addition of its main gun being really powerful and shoots fast. It seems like the new go to unit for packing a punch through a turtle player.
Also the design isn't that bad, don't see why people hate it, i don't think the old BW Goliath model would suit what its role is, unless they beefed it up and stuck the same cannon on it!
I won't even say anything about the model, because I'm fucking certain that horrid thing won't even make it to the beta.
But design-wise, nobody wants a 1A unit. That shouldn't suit anything's role, and it ruins the positional feel of mech from BW that everyone's been after. Also, having an anti-mechanical specialist in a game where one race is entirely bio just feels bad.
People just like complaining. The Haywire attack could be manually targeted for increased efficiency just like charge can be manually activated at specific times for Protoss players. There's also nothing keeping players from micro'ing Warhounds to abuse their speed and range or by getting better concaves, superior positioning and target-firing mechanical units. Most viewers just only see the obvious micro that gives clear visual feedback like ... feedback ^^
It's also not like Terran needs more micro heavy units, almost all of their current units are already heavily dependant on control.
You make some good points, but the apparent complete lack of utility against zerg still stands. Sure there are units which aren't used in every match-up, but the expansion is Blizzards chance to fix that. Even if they don't become a staple, I think just about every unit should have some niche role no matter what races are involved.
Or maybe it's just that hideous model that makes me want to hate on Warhounds. I can't say for sure.
Dammit all what the war hound should've been is this.
Thor sized with hellion move speed.
With long range worthy of a Command Wolf btw a bonus if the unit creation played this music.
and another new unit and a reaper remake and and battle hellions dont require an upgrade at all.
I can't be the only person who realizes that the Reaper remake will be entirely useless against the new Queen (hell, even 3 of them in the battle report didn't do anything) and worthless against Protoss for essentially the same reason they're worthless now: 1 Stalker counters any number of them.
No you're not the Reaper is made even worse than he currently is in every MU other then TvT where he'll be a pain in the ass. 7 Range is more than Marines in a Bunker which means Gasless FE builds would be dead since any build without techlab rax staight up dies :O
Yeah man those gauss pistols really tear down bunkers, it's not like repair can counter their low DPS vs armored and the marines will zone out the reapers from hitting the SCVs with good positioning.
Lol what? The reapers will outrange marines in a bunker, thats the point. Even if you repair the reapers can just move around the bunker, and how is a range 5 marine supposed to "zone out" a range 7 reaper that also has a speed advantage?
Do I have to spell this out for you? You place a bunker or two next to your mineral line. If the reapers shoot it, you repair it. If they move forward to hit the SCV on the other side, your range *6* marines with the +1 bunker increase fuck them up. You might still lose a couple harvesters but that's the price you pay for doing a greedy gasless build against an opponent who went for better tech.
Reaper expand into more Reapers has the expo up ~10 seconds later ...
But with less harvesters and bank. You can't just spend 75 minerals on a refinery and lose mineral mining time on the 3 SCVs needed to get gas, drop more on a tech lab, and come out with the same money as someone who put all of that into econ.
Maybe you should just accept that you have no idea what you're talking about and not get into an argument where you have no knowledge to back up your statements. Especially here on TL where just believing you're right isn't enough.
The difference between a 1 rax gasless and reaper expand is negligible. The reaper expand player is down 1 SCV and a bit of mineral income in exchange for complete map control where he can just take an uncontested 3rd. In fact, the reaper would still outrange marines in a bunker lol.
Alright I'll defer to your experience as TvT is not my forte, but if that's the case and it truly is a negligible difference then I'm not sure what the problem was in the first place with gasless FE becoming a dead strat. The game isn't really losing much strategic diversity if both openers resulted in a similar state, no?
In general every opener not involving a techlabed barracks would result in the loss of a decent amount of workers or Marines or both with 7 range reapers. You need a tank , marauder or a reaper yourself . 1 Reaper straight up kills every single one of your marines . Thats all we're saying. If thats good or bad i don't know but it would feel strange to basically beeing forced into a specific opener especially in TvT.
On June 10 2012 08:02 Shiori wrote: [quote] I can't be the only person who realizes that the Reaper remake will be entirely useless against the new Queen (hell, even 3 of them in the battle report didn't do anything) and worthless against Protoss for essentially the same reason they're worthless now: 1 Stalker counters any number of them.
No you're not the Reaper is made even worse than he currently is in every MU other then TvT where he'll be a pain in the ass. 7 Range is more than Marines in a Bunker which means Gasless FE builds would be dead since any build without techlab rax staight up dies :O
Yeah man those gauss pistols really tear down bunkers, it's not like repair can counter their low DPS vs armored and the marines will zone out the reapers from hitting the SCVs with good positioning.
Lol what? The reapers will outrange marines in a bunker, thats the point. Even if you repair the reapers can just move around the bunker, and how is a range 5 marine supposed to "zone out" a range 7 reaper that also has a speed advantage?
Do I have to spell this out for you? You place a bunker or two next to your mineral line. If the reapers shoot it, you repair it. If they move forward to hit the SCV on the other side, your range *6* marines with the +1 bunker increase fuck them up. You might still lose a couple harvesters but that's the price you pay for doing a greedy gasless build against an opponent who went for better tech.
Reaper expand into more Reapers has the expo up ~10 seconds later ...
But with less harvesters and bank. You can't just spend 75 minerals on a refinery and lose mineral mining time on the 3 SCVs needed to get gas, drop more on a tech lab, and come out with the same money as someone who put all of that into econ.
Maybe you should just accept that you have no idea what you're talking about and not get into an argument where you have no knowledge to back up your statements. Especially here on TL where just believing you're right isn't enough.
The difference between a 1 rax gasless and reaper expand is negligible. The reaper expand player is down 1 SCV and a bit of mineral income in exchange for complete map control where he can just take an uncontested 3rd. In fact, the reaper would still outrange marines in a bunker lol.
Alright I'll defer to your experience as TvT is not my forte, but if that's the case and it truly is a negligible difference then I'm not sure what the problem was in the first place with gasless FE becoming a dead strat. The game isn't really losing much strategic diversity if both openers resulted in a similar state, no?
On June 10 2012 09:13 Saechiis wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:59 SmileZerg wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:49 MaK UK wrote: I dont understand why everyone is hating on the warhound??
It's a siege line breaker so 1A suits its role. Its fast which lets it close siege tank range quickly, with the addition of its main gun being really powerful and shoots fast. It seems like the new go to unit for packing a punch through a turtle player.
Also the design isn't that bad, don't see why people hate it, i don't think the old BW Goliath model would suit what its role is, unless they beefed it up and stuck the same cannon on it!
I won't even say anything about the model, because I'm fucking certain that horrid thing won't even make it to the beta.
But design-wise, nobody wants a 1A unit. That shouldn't suit anything's role, and it ruins the positional feel of mech from BW that everyone's been after. Also, having an anti-mechanical specialist in a game where one race is entirely bio just feels bad.
People just like complaining. The Haywire attack could be manually targeted for increased efficiency just like charge can be manually activated at specific times for Protoss players. There's also nothing keeping players from micro'ing Warhounds to abuse their speed and range or by getting better concaves, superior positioning and target-firing mechanical units. Most viewers just only see the obvious micro that gives clear visual feedback like ... feedback ^^
It's also not like Terran needs more micro heavy units, almost all of their current units are already heavily dependant on control.
You make some good points, but the apparent complete lack of utility against zerg still stands. Sure there are units which aren't used in every match-up, but the expansion is Blizzards chance to fix that. Even if they don't become a staple, I think just about every unit should have some niche role no matter what races are involved.
Or maybe it's just that hideous model that makes me want to hate on Warhounds. I can't say for sure.
Dammit all what the war hound should've been is this.
It should've! But it also should have a completely different role. Hate the idea of a 1a unit countering positional tank play. It's a cop out. This isn't a balance whine btw, I'm sure whatever they do it'll eventually get balanced. But I'm sure there could be a better design for an anti-mech unit. I love how swarm hosts can be used to absorb tank shots so the zerg can move in with ling/banes/whatever else. They can burrow under them with ultras or grab them with vipers. I can accept those sort of designs to counter tanks, but a 1a unit that simply counters them?
Also, in my mind I'm struggling to see this counter working. Terrans will start positioning bio in front of their tanks to drop warhounds, meaning warhounds will either not be used or will be yet another extremely difficult unit to control in the TvT frontline stalemate battles. Imagine the tank/marine/viking battles you're used to with an extra unit with a separate role. It doesn't add a new dynamic, just complicates the current one. I think some sort of anti-tank spellcaster would be much more interesting.
On June 10 2012 10:28 medic_ro wrote: HOW the fock does HoTs solve terran late game ?!
Mass siege tanks are not even usefull ...
Balance isn't final, I am sure they are playing with the viper pull and they can always remove anything. The Protoss Oracle lost its ability to shut down defensive buildings for example. Locusts now shoot air and ground and are not melee etc etc.
No you're not the Reaper is made even worse than he currently is in every MU other then TvT where he'll be a pain in the ass. 7 Range is more than Marines in a Bunker which means Gasless FE builds would be dead since any build without techlab rax staight up dies :O
Yeah man those gauss pistols really tear down bunkers, it's not like repair can counter their low DPS vs armored and the marines will zone out the reapers from hitting the SCVs with good positioning.
Lol what? The reapers will outrange marines in a bunker, thats the point. Even if you repair the reapers can just move around the bunker, and how is a range 5 marine supposed to "zone out" a range 7 reaper that also has a speed advantage?
Do I have to spell this out for you? You place a bunker or two next to your mineral line. If the reapers shoot it, you repair it. If they move forward to hit the SCV on the other side, your range *6* marines with the +1 bunker increase fuck them up. You might still lose a couple harvesters but that's the price you pay for doing a greedy gasless build against an opponent who went for better tech.
Reaper expand into more Reapers has the expo up ~10 seconds later ...
But with less harvesters and bank. You can't just spend 75 minerals on a refinery and lose mineral mining time on the 3 SCVs needed to get gas, drop more on a tech lab, and come out with the same money as someone who put all of that into econ.
Maybe you should just accept that you have no idea what you're talking about and not get into an argument where you have no knowledge to back up your statements. Especially here on TL where just believing you're right isn't enough.
The difference between a 1 rax gasless and reaper expand is negligible. The reaper expand player is down 1 SCV and a bit of mineral income in exchange for complete map control where he can just take an uncontested 3rd. In fact, the reaper would still outrange marines in a bunker lol.
Alright I'll defer to your experience as TvT is not my forte, but if that's the case and it truly is a negligible difference then I'm not sure what the problem was in the first place with gasless FE becoming a dead strat. The game isn't really losing much strategic diversity if both openers resulted in a similar state, no?
On June 10 2012 09:13 Saechiis wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:59 SmileZerg wrote:
On June 10 2012 08:49 MaK UK wrote: I dont understand why everyone is hating on the warhound??
It's a siege line breaker so 1A suits its role. Its fast which lets it close siege tank range quickly, with the addition of its main gun being really powerful and shoots fast. It seems like the new go to unit for packing a punch through a turtle player.
Also the design isn't that bad, don't see why people hate it, i don't think the old BW Goliath model would suit what its role is, unless they beefed it up and stuck the same cannon on it!
I won't even say anything about the model, because I'm fucking certain that horrid thing won't even make it to the beta.
But design-wise, nobody wants a 1A unit. That shouldn't suit anything's role, and it ruins the positional feel of mech from BW that everyone's been after. Also, having an anti-mechanical specialist in a game where one race is entirely bio just feels bad.
People just like complaining. The Haywire attack could be manually targeted for increased efficiency just like charge can be manually activated at specific times for Protoss players. There's also nothing keeping players from micro'ing Warhounds to abuse their speed and range or by getting better concaves, superior positioning and target-firing mechanical units. Most viewers just only see the obvious micro that gives clear visual feedback like ... feedback ^^
It's also not like Terran needs more micro heavy units, almost all of their current units are already heavily dependant on control.
You make some good points, but the apparent complete lack of utility against zerg still stands. Sure there are units which aren't used in every match-up, but the expansion is Blizzards chance to fix that. Even if they don't become a staple, I think just about every unit should have some niche role no matter what races are involved.
Or maybe it's just that hideous model that makes me want to hate on Warhounds. I can't say for sure.
Dammit all what the war hound should've been is this.
It should've! But it also should have a completely different role. Hate the idea of a 1a unit countering positional tank play. It's a cop out. This isn't a balance whine btw, I'm sure whatever they do it'll eventually get balanced. But I'm sure there could be a better design for an anti-mech unit. I love how swarm hosts can be used to absorb tank shots so the zerg can move in with ling/banes/whatever else. They can burrow under them with ultras or grab them with vipers. I can accept those sort of designs to counter tanks, but a 1a unit that simply counters them?
Also, in my mind I'm struggling to see this counter working. Terrans will start positioning bio in front of their tanks to drop warhounds, meaning warhounds will either not be used or will be yet another extremely difficult unit to control in the TvT frontline stalemate battles. Imagine the tank/marine/viking battles you're used to with an extra unit with a separate role. It doesn't add a new dynamic, just complicates the current one. I think some sort of anti-tank spellcaster would be much more interesting.
Gahh... I still hate the Warhound. I haven't seen a single good justification for it, it solves a problem that doesn't really exist (TvT passiveness), and even if it is a problem, is far more interestingly solved by Mine drops (and I fucking love the mines). They'll be pointless vs Zerg, inherently pointless, rather than just tactically useless like some units (e.g Hydras vs Terran are pointless but not inherently incapable of being useful). It's 1a, ugly, and terrible.
On June 10 2012 08:27 hifriend wrote: "Terrans don't mech, and we need variety. Let's turn mech into bio."
Yeah I don't think anyone thinks that bio will be viable in HoTS past the early game. Protoss was hard enough in WoL and Zerg has so many more units that destroy bio now. Looks like all mech all the time.
We can hope for 22 range marines to balance it out I guess. (jk lol)
what an original, totally unbiased, and thoughtful opinion.
seriously, how do you know that bio won't be viable? just because of a battle report? can you get over your little whine already? we fucking get it. If the terran sucks in the beta, blizzard will be sure to know. You're already planning on changing race when this isn't even a final build? it's an ALPHA, beta comes after feedback taken from the event, and it should be obvious but that's when things will get ironed out and stress tested, so hold your horses.
Do I really want terrans to disappear? no, ZvT is fun as hell, I want this game to be just as balanced as you do.
On June 10 2012 10:28 medic_ro wrote: HOW the fock does HoTs solve terran late game ?!
Mass siege tanks are not even usefull ...
i find it so sad that ppl still do not know how to use ghosts.
most of our powerfull suport units (infestor, queen, viper, etc) are all energy based and psionic. this means that EMP works on them and snipe works on them. please learn how to use them because if u can get key emps off you have shut down alot of what zerg can do.
On June 10 2012 10:59 MCDayC wrote: Gahh... I still hate the Warhound. I haven't seen a single good justification for it, it solves a problem that doesn't really exist (TvT passiveness), and even if it is a problem, is far more interestingly solved by Mine drops (and I fucking love the mines). They'll be pointless vs Zerg, inherently pointless, rather than just tactically useless like some units (e.g Hydras vs Terran are pointless but not inherently incapable of being useful). It's 1a, ugly, and terrible.
The problem it's meant to solve is the uselessness of mech in TvP, a problem which it, the battle hellion, and the widow mine should fix very well. Their uselessness versus Zerg isn't a massive flaw; no one thinks that Corsairs should be removed from BW because they are inherently useless against P.
On June 10 2012 10:28 medic_ro wrote: HOW the fock does HoTs solve terran late game ?!
Mass siege tanks are not even usefull ...
i find it so sad that ppl still do not know how to use ghosts.
most of our powerfull suport units (infestor, queen, viper, etc) are all energy based and psionic. this means that EMP works on them and snipe works on them. please learn how to use them because if u can get key emps off you have shut down alot of what zerg can do.
hahaha 1.5 radius EMP on the race that has the casters with the largest hit boxes, would work great right?
On June 10 2012 10:59 MCDayC wrote: Gahh... I still hate the Warhound. I haven't seen a single good justification for it, it solves a problem that doesn't really exist (TvT passiveness), and even if it is a problem, is far more interestingly solved by Mine drops (and I fucking love the mines). They'll be pointless vs Zerg, inherently pointless, rather than just tactically useless like some units (e.g Hydras vs Terran are pointless but not inherently incapable of being useful). It's 1a, ugly, and terrible.
The problem it's meant to solve is the uselessness of mech in TvP, a problem which it, the battle hellion, and the widow mine should fix very well. Their uselessness versus Zerg isn't a massive flaw; no one thinks that Corsairs should be removed from BW because they are inherently useless against P.
Mech will not be viable in HoTS. Mech beats Protoss in 1-1 engagements in WoL yet no one ever uses mech. Which is because Protoss is such a mobile race and Terran mech is way to slow to have a chance. A slow mech will not change this, just might make all ins easier.
On June 10 2012 10:59 MCDayC wrote: Gahh... I still hate the Warhound. I haven't seen a single good justification for it, it solves a problem that doesn't really exist (TvT passiveness), and even if it is a problem, is far more interestingly solved by Mine drops (and I fucking love the mines). They'll be pointless vs Zerg, inherently pointless, rather than just tactically useless like some units (e.g Hydras vs Terran are pointless but not inherently incapable of being useful). It's 1a, ugly, and terrible.
The problem it's meant to solve is the uselessness of mech in TvP, a problem which it, the battle hellion, and the widow mine should fix very well. Their uselessness versus Zerg isn't a massive flaw; no one thinks that Corsairs should be removed from BW because they are inherently useless against P.
If it's used vP it'll just be a bioball that is slower and more expensive. It won't be mech, it won't be space control, or anything. It'll be a blob. And Corsair's didn't have anything inherent in their design to be bad vs Toss (in a mirror anyway), not in the way a unit that is only good vs mechanical will. They should keep the badass mine, the useful battle hellion and just make the thor slightly more useful vs air. Either that will make Mech good vs Toss, or it won't (I personally think it will, Battle Hellions > Zealots and you can make a mine per immortal and assuming hardened shields don't affect it's explosion, you got some dead immortals). Making a unit to specifically fix problems, and fix them in a dull way is bad game design, and I'm Blizzard's biggest defender in SC2 game design.
On June 10 2012 10:59 MCDayC wrote: Gahh... I still hate the Warhound. I haven't seen a single good justification for it, it solves a problem that doesn't really exist (TvT passiveness), and even if it is a problem, is far more interestingly solved by Mine drops (and I fucking love the mines). They'll be pointless vs Zerg, inherently pointless, rather than just tactically useless like some units (e.g Hydras vs Terran are pointless but not inherently incapable of being useful). It's 1a, ugly, and terrible.
The problem it's meant to solve is the uselessness of mech in TvP, a problem which it, the battle hellion, and the widow mine should fix very well. Their uselessness versus Zerg isn't a massive flaw; no one thinks that Corsairs should be removed from BW because they are inherently useless against P.
Mech will not be viable in HoTS. Mech beats Protoss in 1-1 engagements in WoL yet no one ever uses mech. Which is because Protoss is such a mobile race and Terran mech is way to slow to have a chance. A slow mech will not change this, just might make all ins easier.
Actually it's because even after Terran wins the battle they have to win the mass warp in after it. while they are still replacing tanks/hellions mean while.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/Nf2x7.jpg)
