EPTSuggestion for a Mech tvp Buff - Page 21
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
AxiomBlurr
786 Posts
| ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
On December 05 2013 19:55 AxiomBlurr wrote: I think the best way to improve mech v P is to remove energy from banshees - (if you research cloak,,,they have energy).... Wouldn't that make cloak somewhat redundant? Who would research cloak THEN wait for his banshee to amass energy just to for the ability to cloak? That upgrade is already rarely used as it is. | ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On December 05 2013 19:39 -Celestial- wrote: See this kind of mentality is utterly absurd. Just because you don't see something RIGHT NOW at high levels doesn't mean its not viable. It just means the game isn't figured out fully. We didn't see Ghosts for ages in 2011 until Terrans finally "got around" to trying them out (after insisting for months they were terrible). They were immediately nerfed because they were far too good. Zerg didn't start off using Broodlord Infestor every single game in WoL despite the fact it proved to be "the solution" to winning lategame as Zerg. That developed over a long period of time. Protoss didn't magically just know that a great way to deal with the aforementioned Broodlord Infestor is to mass up a bunch of sentries and immortals and go for the throat before Zerg ever gets there. There's a ton of other things. Hell, every single build in the game can be classified this way because they had to be designed and refined. But the point is that if you honestly believe that "its never been done successfully before so its crap" is true then I bet you're still confused why every PvP didn't stay as 4-gate vs 4-gate. I mean I'm not saying any particular thing is viable; but your argument against it is utterly absurd. No, he is right, just adding ghosts into the mech army isn't the solution. What you fail to acknowledge are two things. First in 2011 the game WAS still being figured out. Right now it is like 90% figured out, the only new things to discover are maybe some map specific nuances. The great big difference between 2011 and now is that back then, not only was the game being patched very often (compared to now), but the map pool was also changing dramatically, thus it took a long time for people to learn how to play properly. It also took time for us to develop an idea of what kind of meta game we see. Secondly, there is a very good reason you don't see a strategy RIGHT NOW, and its because it really doesn't work. You fail to take into account the fact that there are hundreds of pro gamers, a lot of which are Korean, which grind at 40+ games per day, that talk to each other on a daily basis trying to figure out the best way to play the game. If mech was even remotely viable in some way then you'd have seen it by now. Even the great king of mech, Mvp abandoned it long ago in HoTS, why? Because trough practice and repetition with his team mates and on ladder, trough talking to his team mates and maybe other terrans he figured that it really just doesn't work. Its the same process repeated hundreds more times by other pro gamers. I bet they also repeat the process every time each new patch or new map pool, still no mech. And now before you contest my point about game being figured out with some silly argument, I also want to point out that, in a lot of match ups you can basically make a list off all the openings, all the variations of the mid game and all mid to late game compositions and strategies. Literally every game follows a certain set off strategies with very tiny variations depending on the execution of both players, the scouting and the maps. And if you still want to refute my argument based on the fact that it took longer to figure out BW, then I'll have to also point out to you that, in BW we had way fewer pro gamers then in SC2, in BW replayes weren't as easily shared and in BW we had far less tournaments per year. The combination of so many pro gamers playing, sharing and having access to so much information, coupled with the huge number of tournaments and the relatively stable map pool leads to this current situation where you can figure out the game in about 9 months, give or take. Edit: I will however say that, if the map pool is changed significantly or if the races receive some changes, then the meta can also change and evolve. But, logically, that means that the game transitioned from a state where it WAS FIGURED OUT, aka known map pools and races, to a state where things need to be figured out to come to the optimal way to play. Make no mistake, the game is, in essence, figured out now, its just up to Blizzard now to either change the races in some way or change the map pool in such a way as to produce the desired changes, aka to change the game into a state of unknown. | ||
|
Jek
Denmark2771 Posts
| ||
|
DusTerr
2520 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:16 Jek wrote: What about messing with the Ravens cost something like 150/150? HSM ignore Hardened Shield and their utility is pretty good against protoss too -- they make Tempest utterly useless. I think ghosts going more mineral / less gas was a mistake and would not like to see it happen to ravens too (I'd actually like to see ghosts changed back to 150/150 - although it still seems expensive compared to templar). | ||
|
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:16 Jek wrote: What about messing with the Ravens cost something like 150/150? HSM ignore Hardened Shield and their utility is pretty good against protoss too -- they make Tempest utterly useless. Feedback says hi, and you can still get out of range of HSM. | ||
|
Jek
Denmark2771 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:20 Destructicon wrote: Feedback says hi, and you can still get out of range of HSM. Wouldn't the Templars be decimated by tanks before they get into feedback range? It's not like you'd suicide your Raven into their army unless it's a winning position. | ||
|
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:25 Jek wrote: Wouldn't the Templars be decimated by tanks before they get into feedback range? It's not like you'd suicide your Raven into their army unless it's a winning position. Well firstly, to make sure Ravens do enough damage you need a lot of them, secondly to make sure they do damage you actually do need to get them into suicide range. Lastly, even assuming the ridiculous presumption that you can slow siege your way forward against a protoss, how the hell are you going to have enough gas to afford tanks, ravens and thors? Edit: And possibly Vikings too. See this is the problem, you all just are looking at things in a vacuum and aren't trying hard enough to comprehend all the implications of everything. | ||
|
Jek
Denmark2771 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:31 Destructicon wrote: Well firstly, to make sure Ravens do enough damage you need a lot of them, secondly to make sure they do damage you actually do need to get them into suicide range. Lastly, even assuming the ridiculous presumption that you can slow siege your way forward against a protoss, how the hell are you going to have enough gas to afford tanks, ravens and thors? Edit: And possibly Vikings too. See this is the problem, you all just are looking at things in a vacuum and aren't trying hard enough to comprehend all the implications of everything. Can't really say I have any counter-argument. But hypothecially speaking, couldn't Ravens be used instead of Vikings and allow you to have less Thors? Ravens are pretty good anti-air against Protoss, and their auto-towers make fine buffers for your tanks/hellbats against Zealots and Archons. Ravens, have been working out pretty well for me. But I turtle to 3/3 mech and I'm only in gold/looow plat MMR so I'd imagine this is too gimmicky to be allowed when you and your opponent are actually skilled at controling units and multi-tasking. But I completely understand your arguments. Possible in low levels, impossible in high levels I'd assume. Sadly; Ravens are the most funny terran unit in my opinion. Nothing is more satisfying than finally "out AoE" a Protoss.  | ||
|
drkcid
Spain196 Posts
Maybe a quick fix could be giving to the pont defense drone the hability to stop Inmortal´s attacks. Have someone tested the double tank shoot on a custom map? | ||
digmouse
China6331 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:09 JustPassingBy wrote: Wouldn't that make cloak somewhat redundant? Who would research cloak THEN wait for his banshee to amass energy just to for the ability to cloak? That upgrade is already rarely used as it is. Reminds me of the early stage HotS Ghost change which cloak no longer costs energy but instead a cooldown and duration based ability. | ||
|
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:46 Jek wrote: Can't really say I have any counter-argument. But hypothecially speaking, couldn't Ravens be used instead of Vikings and allow you to have less Thors? Ravens are pretty good anti-air against Protoss, and their auto-towers make fine buffers for your tanks/hellbats against Zealots and Archons. Ravens, have been working out pretty well for me. But I turtle to 3/3 mech and I'm only in gold/looow plat MMR so I'd imagine this is too gimmicky to be allowed when you and your opponent are actually skilled at controling units and multi-tasking. But I completely understand your arguments. Possible in low levels, impossible in high levels I'd assume. Sadly; Ravens are the most funny terran unit in my opinion. Nothing is more satisfying than finally "out AoE" a Protoss. Problem with auto-turrets being used to soak is, they are buildings, so they need clear ground to be placed, and they have a low deploy range, so the Ravens, again, need to get dangerously close to plop them down. And Ravens are a complement to the army, you can't use them to replace Vikings and Thors, at least not to the extent it would be cost efficient. I think actually, a better solution might be, make terran add-ons or buildings or both, a bit cheaper gas wise. Right now it takes a long time and it costs a lot to set up terran infrastructure and it also makes the race very inflexible. And in particular for mech, it costs so, so much to get both the infrastructure and the units to be safe. To put it into perspective, you need 5 factories, and probably 2 SP, 3 reactors, 4 TLs, a ghost academy (if you want to incorporate ghosts), 2 armories, and also the essential upgrades like blue flame, moebius and cloak. Not to mention also the time it takes to set it all up. Even protoss, which is supposed to be a very gas heavy race, doesn't have to dump so much of it into upgrades and infrastructure as a meching terran has to. | ||
|
starslayer
United States696 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:48 drkcid wrote: Right now Ravens aren´t the solution: HSM have too low range to be useful (its easy to lose a raven trying to use the HSM) and sometimes its easy to dodge. If you change the range and/or the damage of the HSM it will affect the general balance. Maybe a quick fix could be giving to the pont defense drone the hability to stop Inmortal´s attacks. Have someone tested the double tank shoot on a custom map? i really like that idea make pdds stop immortal shots. i mean feedback and alot of gas for ravens still would suck but i like that idea just wish blizz would do something about mech tvp or just protoss in general | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On December 05 2013 20:16 Destructicon wrote: No, he is right, just adding ghosts into the mech army isn't the solution. What you fail to acknowledge are two things. First in 2011 the game WAS still being figured out. Right now it is like 90% figured out, the only new things to discover are maybe some map specific nuances. The great big difference between 2011 and now is that back then, not only was the game being patched very often (compared to now), but the map pool was also changing dramatically, thus it took a long time for people to learn how to play properly. It also took time for us to develop an idea of what kind of meta game we see. Secondly, there is a very good reason you don't see a strategy RIGHT NOW, and its because it really doesn't work.You fail to take into account the fact that there are hundreds of pro gamers, a lot of which are Korean, which grind at 40+ games per day, that talk to each other on a daily basis trying to figure out the best way to play the game. If mech was even remotely viable in some way then you'd have seen it by now. Even the great king of mech, Mvp abandoned it long ago in HoTS, why? Because trough practice and repetition with his team mates and on ladder, trough talking to his team mates and maybe other terrans he figured that it really just doesn't work. Its the same process repeated hundreds more times by other pro gamers. I bet they also repeat the process every time each new patch or new map pool, still no mech. And now before you contest my point about game being figured out with some silly argument, I also want to point out that, in a lot of match ups you can basically make a list off all the openings, all the variations of the mid game and all mid to late game compositions and strategies. Literally every game follows a certain set off strategies with very tiny variations depending on the execution of both players, the scouting and the maps. And if you still want to refute my argument based on the fact that it took longer to figure out BW, then I'll have to also point out to you that, in BW we had way fewer pro gamers then in SC2, in BW replayes weren't as easily shared and in BW we had far less tournaments per year. The combination of so many pro gamers playing, sharing and having access to so much information, coupled with the huge number of tournaments and the relatively stable map pool leads to this current situation where you can figure out the game in about 9 months, give or take. Edit: I will however say that, if the map pool is changed significantly or if the races receive some changes, then the meta can also change and evolve. But, logically, that means that the game transitioned from a state where it WAS FIGURED OUT, aka known map pools and races, to a state where things need to be figured out to come to the optimal way to play. Make no mistake, the game is, in essence, figured out now, its just up to Blizzard now to either change the races in some way or change the map pool in such a way as to produce the desired changes, aka to change the game into a state of unknown. First: you're hanging onto the mech thing when I stated "I mean I'm not saying any particular thing is viable". Don't do that, its irrelevant to the point I was making. Secondly: your post here in essence argues that nobody will ever find a new composition or devise a new opening because its all figured out. And therefore games will now forever play out according to exactly the same parameters until LotV. The very idea is hillarious. "Sup progamers, you can stop trying to develop new openings and strategies now, they've all been identified because the game is figured out so select from this list which I am providing you." I look forward to your apology the next time someone shows a new opening or all-in at a tournament (which, by your argument, is impossible). Until them I'm done with this silly diversion from the topic at hand. | ||
|
MvS.MiKE
Sweden15 Posts
| ||
|
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On December 05 2013 21:54 -Celestial- wrote: First: you're hanging onto the mech thing when I stated "I mean I'm not saying any particular thing is viable". Don't do that, its irrelevant to the point I was making. Secondly: your post here in essence argues that nobody will ever find a new composition or devise a new opening because its all figured out. And therefore games will now forever play out according to exactly the same parameters until LotV. The very idea is hillarious. "Sup progamers, you can stop trying to develop new openings and strategies now, they've all been identified because the game is figured out so select from this list which I am providing you." I look forward to your apology the next time someone shows a new opening or all-in at a tournament (which, by your argument, is impossible). Until them I'm done with this silly diversion from the topic at hand. Nice dodging skills there, instead of doing the sensible thing of going at each of my points to pick apart my argument you just skip them all together. I adore your powers of argumentation! What is hilarious? Exactly about my arguments, pro gamers don't stop developing tactics and strategies, thats what they are hardwired to do, find the best way to play. What they will do however is not waste time practicing something that has been proven to not work. Its not hilarious at all, pro gamers, patch after patch, map pool after map pool test and see which maps are more viable, they see mech is still shit, they stop trying it. Its as logical as it can get, and its also time proven. You can wait long and hard because you aren't going to see any apology from me, because there won't be any to make. The game is almost figured out now, a one off all-in for a specific opponent or a specific map won't change that, and it will remain so until the next balance patch or map rotation. And by then there won't be anything to apologize for because the game will go form a state of being known to a state of unknown, just like I said already. | ||
|
JustPassingBy
10776 Posts
Anyways, just wanted to bring this up. Not sure whether that is a problem or what can be done against it. | ||
|
-Celestial-
United Kingdom3867 Posts
On December 05 2013 22:04 Destructicon wrote: Nice dodging skills there, instead of doing the sensible thing of going at each of my points to pick apart my argument you just skip them all together. I adore your powers of argumentation! You made the assertion that the game is figured out and by association nobody will ever develop another build basically until LotV. I find that an absurd statement to make, it reminds me of that famous misquote "everything that can be invented has been invented". In short there is nothing there I need to argue against, I can simply wait a couple of months for the tournament scene to prove you wrong. On December 05 2013 22:03 MvS.MiKE wrote: Imo Ravens should have a singletarget or a rly small AoE EMP abillity (Smaller then the ghost EMP). Then you could make tanks vs toss, since ravens would have EMP vs immortals, And since its a singletarget or smaller then the ghost EMP it should be cheaper in energy. Let's say it cost 50 energy, then u could still get a PDD and a HSM + EMP. Making the raven a pretty good unit for its cost, And the EMP should probably have the same range as the HSM. Then the ravens should still have to into suicide range but it would still be worth it since u would take out the immortal shield, SAving your tanks. Really not sure how helpful basically duplicating abilities would be to be honest. I think I personally prefer the aforementioned thing about using the idea behind lockdown somehow if it has to be like that. | ||
|
BurningRanger
Germany303 Posts
On December 05 2013 22:03 MvS.MiKE wrote: Imo Ravens should have a singletarget or a rly small AoE EMP abillity (Smaller then the ghost EMP). Then you could make tanks vs toss, since ravens would have EMP vs immortals, And since its a singletarget or smaller then the ghost EMP it should be cheaper in energy. Let's say it cost 50 energy, then u could still get a PDD and a HSM + EMP. Making the raven a pretty good unit for its cost, And the EMP should probably have the same range as the HSM. Then the ravens should still have to into suicide range but it would still be worth it since u would take out the immortal shield, SAving your tanks. Even if it would be nice (although I'd like something like the lockdown ability from the Broodwar Ghost added to the Raven better), I don't think it's a good idea to give the Raven a 4th ability. It would make it harder to use on one side and a jack-of-all-trades on the other. Overall I think the double-attack idea of Goody wouldn't do too much harm. I mean, even without a hardened shield (EMPed) an Immortal still has more HP than a Tank and does nearly double DPS, so they rip through tanks easily. If you'd keep the combined damage of the tank (2x 25 = 50) as is, it would still lose effectiveness against other units, so it's not just a buff. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
- Attacks dealing from 10 to 20 damage are still reduced to 10. - Attacks dealing more than 20 damage are halved instead of reduced to 10. The impact in PvT and PvZ would be (assuming 0 shield upgrade for Immortals): - Marauder: damage would be 10-13 instead of 10. Minor. - Hellbat: damage would be 10-12 instead of 10. Minor. - Unsieged Tanks: damage would be 12.5 - 17 instead of 10. - Sieged Tanks: damage would be 25 - 32.5 instead of 10. - Thors: damage would be 15x2 - 19.5-x2 instead of 10x2. - Baneling: damage would be 10-13 instead of 10. Minor. - Roach: damage would be 10-11 instead of 10. Minor. - Ultralisks: damage would be 17.5 - 22 instead of 10. - Brood lords: damage would be 10-13 instead of 10. Minor. | ||
| ||
