|
It seems to me that people who want to "Mech" in SC2 basically ONLY want to make tanks. I think this is pretty silly, honestly.
Mech in Brood War was Tank based, but it also involved Goliaths, Vultures, Spider Mines, Science Vessels...
in SC2, an army that is Tank, Thor, Hellbat, Viking, Raven is very strong with the Tanks as the primary damage dealers and the rest of the units there to support them.
I think the difference in SC2 is that bases are more difficult to defend than in BW (warpins, turbovacs, etc.) and therefore it's hard to get to the 4 bases you need to make this composition. But the composition itself is strong.
|
On January 06 2014 22:48 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +Let's take Banshee harass. With good control and a bit of luck you can do some dmg. It doesn't have to be huge. In the latest patch, we got combined upgrades. This means that now the Banshees you use to harass can be used for a fallowing push and be that much stronger then they were before. It's not the typical harass unit that is judged by how much dmg it did and that's it, but it's a reliable combat unit that can, before the attack, also do some harass. I can see more buffs to the unit giving how easy detection has become in HOTS. I don't think I made myself clear. My point is that its not really relevant whether the harass-unit itself can be used in a follow-up push or not in an assesment of whether mech-aggression has long-term viability. The problem is that in the midgame, mech cannot attack. Neither vs zerg nor protoss. This means that both races can focus on setting up static defense, splitting up their armies to defend vulnerable locations. That means mech mid-game harass is simply a gimmick that will eventually be figured out. It can never be a long-term viable thing, because the opponent can commit to defend the harass without any signifcant opportunity cost. BW was very different in that regard. Show nested quote + It's not the typical harass unit that is judged by how much dmg it did and that's it, but it's a reliable combat unit that can, before the attack, also do some harass. Well all harass units in BW were also usefull in battles. So it is typical in that regard. Blizzard just hasn't really understood (yet) that specialized harass-units such as Reapers, Oracles and Hellions are flawed from a design-perspective. Show nested quote +The threat of harass in TvP i think is still there, with Hellion runbys and Hellion drops. What is lacking is the threat of attack and that makes defending harass easy. Why don't Protoss fear attack? Because Siege Tanks are worthless units that need to be supported by half the tech tree just to function.
Eh.. if you ever played/watched BW you will absolutely laugh at the "threat" of hellion runby's in the midgame. Vultures are far far superior in that regard and the tools protoss had back then were much much worse to defend against harass. If mech ever just became semi-standard in Sc2, no decent protoss would ever take damage from Hellion-harss play. It can work (as a gimmick) on the ladder because protosses doesn't have practice vs that. But it has no long-term vialibty. Show nested quote +
Blizzard will never replicate BW in such detail, so looking at just how things worked back then won't solve anything. We have to look at WHY it worked and come up with solutions based on the tools already present in SC2. For example, something like an upgrade that gives tanks "mini EMPs" might solve the total dependency on Ghosts that is present right now and unlock the turtle fest necessary to play mech.
It wouldn't surprise me if I had spent more time testing and analyzing this issue in detail than everyone else over the last year, and I made a list of suggestions in my head that I believe will make mech viable and fun in LOTV. It will not replicate BW (don't know where you get that from), but will replicate some of the concepts that made it awesome. But a lot of changes needed, which means it can't come in a patch - thus i won't discuss them in this forum. Making mech viability in it self is actually extremely easy (just buff tanks/buff damage vs shields), however that will lead to extremely lame games, and Blizzard are cautious against that approach (understandable). Giving Tanks-emp is a solution w/ a ton of unintended conseuqences. E.g. it makes Ghosts redudant (even when you go bio) and it will be very hard to balance. Further, EMP also scales very well, which means your still always better off keeping your mech-army (consisting mainly of tanks) in a defensive deathball, rather than attacking. Hrass-play is sitll too easy to fend off. If there is one thing that needs a change with mech its the hellion. Buff it vs non-light units and make it possible for it to kill static defense. Then players will go hellion/Tank rather than just pure tanks when going mech and it will reward more aggressive play. BW mech would also have been super lame (regardless of superior econ) if Vultures costed 100 minerals (instead of 75 mins).
You have to remember we have a precedent of a decent enough version of mech in TvT. In spite of it being a thing for years at pro level, mech can still do hellion runbys (this goes for both mech vs bio and mech vs mech), hellbat drops with blue flame are very strong to. It's not all doom and gloom even if the Vulture was a vastly superior unit.
As far as TvP goes, Tanks coupled with Hellions and maybe WM need to perform much better and reliably against Protoss ground, including Immortals. When you no longer have to tech to everything at once before moving out, the threat of attack for Protoss will come back, thus i propose the miniEMP on the Tank. Overlaping? You SHOULDN'T have to make bio when going mech... and as far as bio play goes, it's not like you'll build tanks to snipe HT. At most it might make bio-mech a possibility in itself.
With the appropriate changes there is hope i think. This is one of the only builds that gave me hope for mech TvP. I think it got weaker in HOTS due to the PO and easier scouting though 
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
From what I heard of my teammate(zerg) - he was talking about small vision for abductions. That yes, he can abduct, but the vision is better for Terran and that he has to sacrifice a lot to abduct a raven from raven/viking clump. I was thinking about adding the parasite spell back. Or some kind of revelation for Zerg. Could it help to fight turtle raven style?
|
You have to remember we have a precedent of a decent enough version of mech in TvT. In spite of it being a thing for years at pro level, mech can still do hellion runbys (this goes for both mech vs bio and mech vs mech), hellbat drops with blue flame are very strong to. It's not all doom and gloom even if the Vulture was a vastly superior unit.
Yes hellions are alot better vs terran than vs zerg and protooss in the mid/late game as terrans static defense (planetary) is a more costly and less efficient way at dealing w/ harass. Plus you typically have OC's at your 3rd and natural.
|
On January 07 2014 00:25 deacon.frost wrote:
From what I heard of my teammate(zerg) - he was talking about small vision for abductions. That yes, he can abduct, but the vision is better for Terran and that he has to sacrifice a lot to abduct a raven from raven/viking clump. I was thinking about adding the parasite spell back. Or some kind of revelation for Zerg. Could it help to fight turtle raven style?
How about instead of buffing Zerg we redesign retarded units and spells such as the SH and the Blinding Cloud and then tweak Terran from there?
|
Just keep in mind that brood war comparisons do not help here. Seriously. Starcraft 2 is a brand continuation and a RTS, but that's where the similarities end. Starcraft II is a new game, and making mech viable for the sake of reviving brood war is not one of the aims of Blizzard. IMO, I'm perfectly fine with the state of mech. You can play it TvT, it's not like it's completely out of the game. Might not be the very best choice in TvP or TvZ, but that is a question of map, enemy's BO and so on (oversimplifying a bit, I know, but too lazy to argue hardcore now). I didn't here any zerg complaining about the fact that mass roach/hydra is not a viable tactic vs Terran. It's played, yep. But that's mech too.
|
On January 07 2014 01:03 fried_rice wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2014 00:25 deacon.frost wrote:
From what I heard of my teammate(zerg) - he was talking about small vision for abductions. That yes, he can abduct, but the vision is better for Terran and that he has to sacrifice a lot to abduct a raven from raven/viking clump. I was thinking about adding the parasite spell back. Or some kind of revelation for Zerg. Could it help to fight turtle raven style? How about instead of buffing Zerg we redesign retarded units and spells such as the SH and the Blinding Cloud and then tweak Terran from there?
I don't understand how you can talk about redisigning a complete unit like the swarm host a year after the launch of the game. It would have SO MUCH intrications to redesign a full unit.
Also what Boxerfred said
|
Czech Republic12129 Posts
As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" 
Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty
|
On January 07 2014 00:13 DinoMight wrote:
It seems to me that people who want to "Mech" in SC2 basically ONLY want to make tanks. I think this is pretty silly, honestly.
Mech in Brood War was Tank based, but it also involved Goliaths, Vultures, Spider Mines, Science Vessels...
in SC2, an army that is Tank, Thor, Hellbat, Viking, Raven is very strong with the Tanks as the primary damage dealers and the rest of the units there to support them.
I think the difference in SC2 is that bases are more difficult to defend than in BW (warpins, turbovacs, etc.) and therefore it's hard to get to the 4 bases you need to make this composition. But the composition itself is strong.
SC2 tank requires SO much support (Viking Ghost Thor Hellbat Raven Banshee) you only have like 5 Tanks in the end.
The problem with MEch in SC2 is the weakness of the tank and the fact there's no positional control except for the HT and MSC.
Only the Templar and MSC can defend a location with low supply, while in any other fight, the deathball ALWAYS wins against a spread army.
Just to show it, I tested in the unit tester.
40 3/3 Siege Tanks, Presieged
25 Zealots, 9 Immortals, 12 Archons, 3/3 slightly spread.
120 Supply for Terran in 2 chokes vs 130 Supply for Protoss.
In a decent RTS situation, an immobile long range splash unit would SHREDDER a low range attacking army.
In SC2? 7 Immortals and 2 Archons survive.
Mech and interesting games in general hardly exist because there is NO defensive advantage. More shit usually beats less shit, even if said shit is slightly weaker.
This is mostly because of Steppes of War balance and poor maps. It's starting to show that SC2 games are often not intersting because nothing really happens because it can't happen (Protoss being the exception in being able to decently defend without commiting a lot of supply thanks to Cannons, HT, Warp in and MSC). The other races have no such things (Spines suck, the rest of units are low range and inefficient for Zerg, or for Terran, defense being the Planetary OR leaving supply behind in large bunkers that cover a small area).
IT SHOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO RUSH INTO A LIGHTLY DEFENDED BASE UNCAREFULLY - BUT IT IS.
If I move my army around and take a Siege Tank shell, am I frightened or do I think... meh..?
I think meh. What did it do, take 12 medivac energy, 2 zerglings or scratch some shields?
Siege Tanks (and Hosts/Lurkers) should be FEARED! You should be afraid to run into a base like you are against HT Cannon!
Bigger open maps, worse economy, better defensive units, no warp in and go from there.
There's your interesting game.
|
On January 07 2014 01:22 deacon.frost wrote:As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty In a word, no. Outside of early-game timing pushes, bio wasn't a viable strategy because it was shut down so hard by P splash (Reavers and Templar). PvBio in BW was probably a more significantly "hard" hard counter than any interaction in SC2, outside of maybe Immortals vs. Siege Tanks.
|
On January 07 2014 01:22 deacon.frost wrote:As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty
I mostly want to be able to mech just because I then have the option. I love my marines, don't get me wrong, but I feel i'm too constrained in what I can do, as opposed to protoss who can choose tech paths like storm/colossus, or zerg who can go ling/muta/, roach/hydra, SH and whatnot. Everytime I have to react to them and i'd like to surprise them for once.
Especially in TvP. I hated the matchup. Every time I have to spot the all in and then spot the tech path. Now I just go mech against them (platinum is great in that regard) since none of them know how to react to it and it feels great to finally have some control back in the matchup. Now I lose because I forgot to make ghosts, instead of eating 1 storm = GG.
That, and Blue flame Hellion runby's. I get at least 20 probes each game. It's so delicious :D.
|
On January 07 2014 01:27 SC2Toastie wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2014 00:13 DinoMight wrote:
It seems to me that people who want to "Mech" in SC2 basically ONLY want to make tanks. I think this is pretty silly, honestly.
Mech in Brood War was Tank based, but it also involved Goliaths, Vultures, Spider Mines, Science Vessels...
in SC2, an army that is Tank, Thor, Hellbat, Viking, Raven is very strong with the Tanks as the primary damage dealers and the rest of the units there to support them.
I think the difference in SC2 is that bases are more difficult to defend than in BW (warpins, turbovacs, etc.) and therefore it's hard to get to the 4 bases you need to make this composition. But the composition itself is strong. SC2 tank requires SO much support (Viking Ghost Thor Hellbat Raven Banshee) you only have like 5 Tanks in the end. The problem with MEch in SC2 is the weakness of the tank and the fact there's no positional control except for the HT and MSC. Only the Templar and MSC can defend a location with low supply, while in any other fight, the deathball ALWAYS wins against a spread army. Just to show it, I tested in the unit tester. 40 3/3 Siege Tanks, Presieged 25 Zealots, 9 Immortals, 12 Archons, 3/3 slightly spread. 120 Supply for Terran in 2 chokes vs 130 Supply for Protoss. In a decent RTS situation, an immobile long range splash unit would SHREDDER a low range attacking army. In SC2? 7 Immortals and 2 Archons survive. Mech and interesting games in general hardly exist because there is NO defensive advantage. More shit usually beats less shit, even if said shit is slightly weaker. This is mostly because of Steppes of War balance and poor maps. It's starting to show that SC2 games are often not intersting because nothing really happens because it can't happen (Protoss being the exception in being able to decently defend without commiting a lot of supply thanks to Cannons, HT, Warp in and MSC). The other races have no such things (Spines suck, the rest of units are low range and inefficient for Zerg, or for Terran, defense being the Planetary OR leaving supply behind in large bunkers that cover a small area). IT SHOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE TO RUSH INTO A LIGHTLY DEFENDED BASE UNCAREFULLY - BUT IT IS. If I move my army around and take a Siege Tank shell, am I frightened or do I think... meh..? I think meh. What did it do, take 12 medivac energy, 2 zerglings or scratch some shields? Siege Tanks (and Hosts/Lurkers) should be FEARED! You should be afraid to run into a base like you are against HT Cannon! Bigger open maps, worse economy, better defensive units, no warp in and go from there. There's your interesting game.
That's exactly my point. You are testing pure siege Tank vs. an army well constructed to fight pure siege tank.
Now try the same thing again, but add blue flame Hellbats and 2 ghosts for EMP.
|
On January 06 2014 18:09 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote:
for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered? The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
That is a fairly wrong statement. Vultures were not the reason mech was strong, even tho vultures are indeed better than helions, but no for that much. Vultures costed 75m, but terran having mules in SC2 and having its gas bottlenecking its mech units production, minerals are not an issue in SC2. However vultures took at least 1 of the 2 upgrades to be efficient out of the map as speedless and mineless vultures wouldnt do anything to any decent player. They didnt do better against non-light units as suggested, they just did full dmg to shields, but for example dragoons wouldnt take full dmg after the shields were down. The only difference was the mines, which were supply less and basically free. On themselves the mines are not reason enough to make vultures better, but the sinergy between the vulture harrass and how mine zone-ing complements it well, make it better since, prolly vultures and hellion have the same or close worker killing rates.
Tanks were the main reason why mech was strong, the 75 sieged dmg which had spalsh dmg, made them the best ground to ground unit, specially when u had enough of them. It was so strong that Protoss'es, normally known for having the strongest units than the other races, had to find work arounds, to avoid fighting straight up against tanks, be it arbiters, or just completly avoiding them with carriers. SC2 had the 75dmg tanks, but as soon as ppl started to QQ instead of finding these workarounds, finding new strats to bet it by themselves, it "forced" blizzard to nerf them for over 50% their dmg, making them 35dmg (note also that the pom pom mode dmg was also reduced from 30 to 15dmg).
Thors are really bad units, they are expensive not only resourcewise but in time too, they take a lot of space, anti-air attack looks good on paper, but its very reduced aoe range and its reload speed makes it very cost inneficient anti-air unit, 7 mutas can take out a thor when magic boxed, they die really fast when not repaired.
So is mech viable? define viable. If you mean that its a valid strat that you can use to trick your oponent, counter a given strat, or just variety in a best of X, then yes. If you mean as a standard strat that you can use every game and have a fair chance to win, like any other standard strat, no.
However the point of the op, is interesting. I guess that a mixed ground and air (since their upgrades are the same) like instead of adding more factorys (normally mech players have 1 reactor fact and 2 techlab facts entering the mid game) maybe add 3 starports, if u dont have one already, and make ravens/banshees and vikings, which all 3 of these are great units. Viking+raven do very good against mutas cuz of the pdd and hunter seeker, prolly even better than thors, and also can do well against other units, vikings can deal with blords and have a really nice ground weapoin, and ravens are ravens, we all know how good they are. banshees are extremely good too, have really good dps against anything in the ground. Battlecruisers i think they are not optimal, unless really really late game where u have the bank and time to get like 6-8 of them at the same time, they are kind of like ultralisks. not really that great to get 1 or 2 that are not even 3-3.
The reason, in my opnion, players dont do this mix of units, its because most mech players, do mech because of the turtling, that requires less apm from them cuz its easier to manage ur base and macro if ur just sitting in your base. Not trying to be insulting but the players that do mech, are probably less skilled and slower than other players on their same rank. Until someone with the skill and apm to macro and controll an army with over 6 different units, mech would still be easy to deal with and will not be a strat you can rely on.
|
On January 06 2014 18:09 Hider wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote:
for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered? The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions.
On January 07 2014 01:37 MadJack wrote:Show nested quote +On January 06 2014 18:09 Hider wrote:On January 06 2014 18:05 cptjibberjabber wrote:
for those of us who haven't played BW, how was it stronger? how was it countered? The main difference wasn't actually related to Tanks, but more that Vultures were insanely good. 75 minerals, better vs non-light units and 3 spider Mines - that's super superior to Hellions. That is a fairly wrong statement. Vultures were not the reason mech was strong, even tho vultures are indeed better than helions, but no for that much. Vultures costed 75m, but terran having mules in SC2 and having its gas bottlenecking its mech units production, minerals are not an issue in SC2. However vultures took at least 1 of the 2 upgrades to be efficient out of the map as speedless and mineless vultures wouldnt do anything to any decent player. They didnt do better against non-light units as suggested, they just did full dmg to shields, but for example dragoons wouldnt take full dmg after the shields were down. The only difference was the mines, which were supply less and basically free. On themselves the mines are not reason enough to make vultures better, but the sinergy between the vulture harrass and how mine zone-ing complements it well, make it better since, prolly vultures and hellion have the same or close worker killing rates. [...]
...? spider mines are part of the vulture, imo.
|
On January 07 2014 01:22 deacon.frost wrote:As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty
Really your innocent question is good. Because Bio PvT was a no no in BW (unless reaaallly special timings) but people want to play TvP as it was in BW in SC2. You can't play mech vs P in SC2, you can't play Bio in BW. Period.
It's like people complaining about destructible rocks on maps where there was destructible temple/eggs/hatchery in BW.
But it's for the love of comparing. Don't get me wrong i love BW. Put people complained in BW too. It wasn't as vocal as today.
|
On January 07 2014 01:54 FFW_Rude wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2014 01:22 deacon.frost wrote:As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty Really your innocent question is good. Because Bio PvT was a no no in BW (unless reaaallly special timings) but people want to play TvP as it was in BW in SC2. You can't play mech vs P in SC2, you can't play Bio in BW. Period. It's like people complaining about destructible rocks on maps where there was destructible temple/eggs/hatchery in BW. But it's for the love of comparing. Don't get me wrong i love BW. Put people complained in BW too. It wasn't as vocal as today.
Seriously.. whenever anyone gives the "mech MUST be viable" argument "BECAUSE BW!" I get a bit annoyed because obviously there are strategies now that are viable that weren't in BW.
That's like if every Protoss demanded the Bisu build be viable in PvZ again. It's a different game. Mech can work but it needs to be played a certain way. The turtle to 4 base Raven style may not be the most fast-paced fun to watch thing ever, but it is viable on certain maps.
Once Terran gets enough Ravens it's really hard to stop...
|
On January 07 2014 02:09 DinoMight wrote:Show nested quote +On January 07 2014 01:54 FFW_Rude wrote:On January 07 2014 01:22 deacon.frost wrote:As a SC BW noob - was a bio viable choice in SC BW PvT? Because if not why is the "no mech in PvT" so wrong now? Why do we have to have mech viable in every MU now? If it was viable and pros do that, then ignore my ignorance. But Terran Strategy on Liquipedia is mentioning mainly Factory... Bio play is there mentioned as "a catch-with-pants-down Bionic play" Excuse poor grammar and English in general, after 8 hours in work after 4 weeks at home my brain is empty Really your innocent question is good. Because Bio PvT was a no no in BW (unless reaaallly special timings) but people want to play TvP as it was in BW in SC2. You can't play mech vs P in SC2, you can't play Bio in BW. Period. It's like people complaining about destructible rocks on maps where there was destructible temple/eggs/hatchery in BW. But it's for the love of comparing. Don't get me wrong i love BW. Put people complained in BW too. It wasn't as vocal as today. Seriously.. whenever anyone gives the "mech MUST be viable" argument "BECAUSE BW!" I get a bit annoyed because obviously there are strategies now that are viable that weren't in BW. That's like if every Protoss demanded the Bisu build be viable in PvZ again. It's a different game. Mech can work but it needs to be played a certain way. The turtle to 4 base Raven style may not be the most fast-paced fun to watch thing ever, but it is viable on certain maps. Once Terran gets enough Ravens it's really hard to stop...
Has it crossed your mind that people might not want "MECH BECAUSE BW, GIMME NOSTALGIA" but because as the game is right now HALF of the Terran tech tree is USELESS, whereas for other races every unit has its uses and is seen in pro-play.
Protoss are not "demanding the Bisu style" not because they are such honored and nice people but because they already use most of their units in fun ways (well, except the Carrier I suppose), whereas if you're Terran all you do is play with the same handful of units in every match and in very similar ways, it's retarded and not good for the game.
Zergs also get to use most of their units as well
Has it also occured to you that the way Terran infrastructure is designed it's very hard to have sinergy between different tech paths (it was like this in BW as well, Terran has to commit too much to a tech-path), so the only way we can see units that are not Marines/Medivacs in play is by having different playstyles, or in this case, what people call "mech".
Also, in BW people were also "locked" into certain playstyles but the units themselves offered much more depth and you could achieve so much more than other people with good micro, even if you're using the same units. SC2 doesn't work like this, there's only so much you can do with a certain composition and the only way can we have more variety in the game is by allowing different compositions to work to a reasonable level.
I'm pretty sure that all the protoss players would be bitching (and fairly) if their race revolved around the Stalker and every other unit that you get to use was a support for it. It's very easy to get "a bit annoyed" at Terrans when your races gives you a million fun options to play with and Terrans are stuck with the same retarded 1rax reaper FE into-10min-timing-since-2010-into-getting-raped-lategame.
|
How about the argument that some people prefer to watch and play mech rather then bio? I guess you could say "go back to BW, great game", that's what Browder said after all.
There is also the argument of diversity. If BW didn't have it, should SC2 suffer the same faults?
Whatever it may be, arguing FOR mech is arguing for stuff to be added, for diversity of play, for making SC2 strategically superior to BW and not just different. How anyone can be against it is just weird IMO.
|
Well this game also shows the flaw of the broodlord and swarmhost in its entirety because these units are effectively not doing any damage if they are killed off while the Guardian and Lurker can be used to chip away at strong points and blockades like the PF north wall that was there. Even 2 guardians chipping away at it is better then what 2 broodlords could do.
|
On January 07 2014 02:45 Genie1 wrote:
Well this game also shows the flaw of the broodlord and swarmhost in its entirety because these units are effectively not doing any damage if they are killed off while the Guardian and Lurker can be used to chip away at strong points and blockades like the PF north wall that was there. Even 2 guardians chipping away at it is better then what 2 broodlords could do.
I don't get it, how are Guardians better than Broodlords? A Broodlord does the same damage as a Guardian and also SHOOTS UNITS, it's a stupid unit IMHO but it's better than a Guardian in every aspect (if you ignore that Guardians morphed from Mutalisks).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
