EPTAs for the Thor proposed by Avilo, it looks like Cyclone in early beta: slightly OP. :D
Breaking even with carriers (which cost 1.5x as much) is damn strong already, but winning with half of army left alive is insane
Making Mech Viable - Addressing Mech Anti-Air - Page 4
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
As for the Thor proposed by Avilo, it looks like Cyclone in early beta: slightly OP. :D Breaking even with carriers (which cost 1.5x as much) is damn strong already, but winning with half of army left alive is insane | ||
|
Vanadiel
France961 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:05 Cyro wrote: Breaking even with carriers (which cost 1.5x as much) is damn strong already, but winning with half of army left alive is insane Plus it was not even at the beginning, it was 28 Thors vs 32 Carrier, and he lost only 13 thors. Now consider the potential of repair in late game when you have enough bank, it's ridiculous. | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
Artosis said TY defeated Patience with mech in code A. And his point is kind of valid : you play with liberators like you play with mechunits. The "spirit" is the same. The days of pure bio vs pure mech are long gone : when you play against roach ravager into ultra with MMM + tanks + liberators, do you really call this bio? Game has evolved into more mixed composition, which are adjusted depending on what your opponent is throwing at you. There not this big frontier between bio and mech that existed in HotS. And what you mean mech has no anti air? vinking are terran's main anti air and they fit with other mech units as much as they fit with MMM. Last, the worst thing would be to buff the thors to the point where massing them would make any sense. The buff your propose is way to extreme.. If anything, thors must be boosted to give them a support role so that you need like 2-3 in your army at most. Until then, better keep them useless than making them "massable" I'm not thinking bad of you, and I actually think what you're trying to do is important in terms of exploring and experimenting, but I would never want to see the compositions you are advocating being viable at pro level. You're like a genetecian experimenting in his lab, some good thing may come out of your work, but that doesn't meant genetically engineered bacterias must get out of your secured lab. | ||
|
HomeWorld
Romania903 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:20 Gwavajuice wrote: What is mech anyway? Artosis said TY defeated Patience with mech in code A. And his point is kind of valid : you play with liberators like you play with mechunits. The "spirit" is the same. The days of pure bio vs pure mech are long gone : when you play against roach ravager into ultra with MMM + tanks + liberators, do you really call this bio? Game has evolved into more mixed composition, which are adjusted depending on what your opponent is throwing at you. There not this big frontier between bio and mech that existed in HotS. And what you mean mech has no anti air? vinking are terran's main anti air and they fit with other mech units as much as they fit with MMM. Last, the worst thing would be to buff the thors to the point where massing them would make any sense. The buff your propose is way to extreme.. If anything, thors must be boosted to give them a support role so that you need like 2-3 in your army at most. Until then, better keep them useless than making them "massable" I'm not thinking bad of you, and I actually think what you're trying to do is important in terms of exploring and experimenting, but I would never want to see the compositions you are advocating being viable at pro level. You're like a genetecian experimenting in his lab, some good thing may come out of your work, but that doesn't meant genetically engineered bacterias must get out of your secured lab. You seem to be a little bit confused. Mech = Factory Air = Starport Bio = Barracks | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
| ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
Since people mentioned it is to good vs ground units. Also, what stops blizzard from readding that different mode for the thor. Perhaps the 13~ range mode should be singletarget so it can deal with bcs, carriers, tempest and blords while the other mode is the aoe one with the live range. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:29 Cyro wrote: Mech is literally named after Mechanical as Bio is literally Biological. You can argue that starport units don't count, but that's making your own definition of what "mech" means This is wrong. When someone says bio, i never ever take it as the person mean scvs. In broodwar, if you say "mech" you know its the factory units since it differentiates itself well. Because if mech=air + factory units you dont exactly what the person means. People say Bio+ghosts sometimes(?) Anyway, its bad to call mech=air and factory units. Blizzard started with it. And its just very bad. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:34 Foxxan wrote: This is wrong. When someone says bio, i never ever take it as the person mean scvs. In broodwar, if you say "mech" you know its the factory units since it differentiates itself well. Because if mech=air + factory units you dont exactly what the person means. People say Bio+ghosts sometimes(?) Anyway, its bad to call mech=air and factory units. Blizzard started with it. And its just very bad. SCVS are biomechanical. They can be healed and repaired at the same time. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:41 deacon.frost wrote: SCVS are biomechanical. They can be healed and repaired at the same time. So? Thats irrelevant. | ||
|
mrjimp
Sweden14 Posts
I'm sorry Avilo, I think your logic is flawed form the start. What youre saying is that factory units should be allround, and be able to handle all races all other units? Thats how I interpret what you say when you say that "Mech should be viable" Why is your argument flawed? Simply because buildings in sc2 (and sc1) are so very very cheap in comparison with units. If you have gone 4 factories (4x150:100 = 600:400) that is less minerals than 4 siegetanks. 4 starports cost exactly the same. Terran can build 4 starports at the same time (given that you have the eco to actually produce 4 siegetanks from your factories), so switching to starports takes 36 seconds. Doing the switcheroo will give you the addons for the factories in a few sec if you need them too. I cant see why terran should not be able to be forced out of mech play, just as all races can force the other races not to go a particular build. | ||
|
deacon.frost
Czech Republic12129 Posts
The same way BW is irrelevant to SC2. SC2 is a different new game, so now mech can be starport units + factory units. For the love of me - a liberator with the upgrade is a siege tank without splash damage that can fly, if mech is defined by tank usage, how can be liberators NOT MECH?! Long range - check. Huge damage - check. Zoning unit - check. Siege mode - check. | ||
|
Foxxan
Sweden3427 Posts
mech=mechanical If we are literral, we would include scvs but people dont do that, not even blizzard so that logic is flawed from start. I used broodwar as an example and its not irrelevant in this talk. Its a good way to understand what someone means when someone says bio or mech. "I went mech this game". I have no idea what units he made now cuz blizzard changed the meaning of what mech mean. For the record, mech was never defined as the tank. It was defined as the factory=units that come from the factory. | ||
|
Salteador Neo
Andorra5591 Posts
On March 01 2016 10:41 Laserist wrote: One more mech thread and I'll puke, seriously. Same here lol. TL feels like Groundhog day these past weeks. | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
On March 01 2016 22:06 Salteador Neo wrote: Same here lol. TL feels like Groundhog day these past weeks. Only the past week? There's been a thread a month since SC2 was released The simple solution is to not read everything in them, you'll only feel worse about yourself | ||
|
WeddingEpisode
United States356 Posts
possible to mass them. Thor Shots per second is so slow, I don't think anyone would trust them anyways, as the main army component. Thor hard-counters are so effective, and Thor are so slow to respawn. I think Thor inherently are risk y to make and expensive, and in that way balanced inherently - even with this proposed buff. | ||
|
wjat
385 Posts
Mech is viable on certain map in TvT. Mech has never been viable vs protoss in sc2 history. (maybe some mass hellions bs) | ||
|
Gwavajuice
France1810 Posts
On March 01 2016 21:27 HomeWorld wrote: You seem to be a little bit confused. Mech = Factory Air = Starport Bio = Barracks hmm your vision is very simplistic and not accurate enough. Look at it only from a pure gameplay point of view : - bio => stim + EB upgrades + shield (and concussive shell or ghost cloak if needed) that where you spend your gas, that's the part of the tech tree you're opening. That's what your build, timings and strategy is designed around. Also, in this comp, most of your units are healed. -mech => armory + armory upgrades + blue flame + other unit specific upgrades. That's where you spend your gaz, that's the part of the tech tree you're opening. That's what your build, timings and strategy is designed around. Also, in this comp most of your units are repaired. That's why HotS mech was actually mech, even if you were healing hellbats or massing viking and ravens who were getting out of a starport but sharing the same upgrades. Your build, timing and strategy were designed around the mech part of your tech tree. That's also why MMMM was technically bio cause, except drilling claws you were not upgrading mech units and all your tech was about boosting biological units. And the fact you added thors that were woming out of a factory in end game didn't change the fact that the strat was centered around bio tech. That's what mech vs bio is all about : what part of the tech tree are you using. You can also say it's about mobility vs high damage, but imho this come in a second time and has more to do with historical design choices that could change any time. In LotV there is a lot more mix in the unit compositions and we're just left with "he's researching stim and +1/+1 bio so he's playing bio" but in reality difference is not so clear anymore, and we can safely say that Blizzard is pushing in this direction (mixing all kind of units) Last, if you're not conviced yet : - terrans have bio or mech seen as the two basic playstyles - zergs have melee (lings bane) or range (roach ravagers) seen as the two basic playstyles - Protoss doens't have 2 basic playstyles. Why? because Protoss has the upgrades shared for all units, and can easily jump from one branch of the tech tree to another. It's harder for terrans and zergs. What is bio and what is mech all comes down to which attack and defense upgrades you need to spend your gaz into, basically. | ||
|
Cyro
United Kingdom20282 Posts
- Protoss doens't have 2 basic playstyles. Why? because Protoss has the upgrades shared for all units, and can easily jump from one branch of the tech tree to another. Right now there's a lot of dual upgrading for protoss w/ air and ground. For phoenix and carriers, +3 attack gives +60% to +300% damage to most targets depending on the level of armor upgrade so it's not something that you can ignore. | ||
|
neptunusfisk
2286 Posts
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/search.php?q=mech | ||
|
Tenks
United States3104 Posts
So maybe to that end possibly look at giving the Thor a "Hollow Point" upgrade where it allows its attacks to bypass up to 3 armor or something? Both air and ground receive this benefit. Dunno just throwing shit against the wall here. | ||
| ||
