EPTLet's talk about Swarmhosts/Mech - Page 3
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Qikz
United Kingdom12022 Posts
| ||
|
straycat
230 Posts
| ||
|
Comedy
455 Posts
On January 04 2017 15:49 MockHamill wrote: I agree that Swarm Hosts should cost more resources. The current Swarm Host situation is actually worse then the HOTS Swarm Host situation. Back then playing against Swarm Hosts was boring but at least balanced due to pdd being OP. Now when pdd is nerfed you can not actually play mech against a Zerg that knows how to use Swarm Hosts. It has gone so far that I have actually stopped trying trying to play Starcraft against Zerg. I do a 1-base all-in every single game vs Zerg. It is a complete coin flip and boring but at least the game is over quickly. Suggestion: 1. Increase Swarm Host cost. 2. Increase Raven supply to 4 to discourage mass Ravens. Maybe just play bio and you know, enjoy the game? It's the flagship matchup for the game... bio vs muta ling bane is freaking awesome. Guys like avilo/Nathanias, who just want to camp for a very long time, sit in their base and not do anything and wait untill they have the ultimate OP army to move out, should not be rewarded. The slow and boring playstyle is terrible for Starcraft.. It's really sad that all of this whine by campers actually was given an ounce of legitmitacy under the notion that somehow mech has to be viable. Fuck Mech. Mech has made for shitty passive camp games since the beginning of Sc2 and it will never like be BW mech. L2P. P.S : Top terrans are winning games with mech on the ladder. | ||
|
xyzz
567 Posts
On January 04 2017 19:32 Comedy wrote: Maybe just play bio and you know, enjoy the game? It's the flagship matchup for the game... bio vs muta ling bane is freaking awesome. Guys like avilo/Nathanias, who just want to camp for a very long time, sit in their base and not do anything and wait untill they have the ultimate OP army to move out, should not be rewarded. The slow and boring playstyle is terrible for Starcraft.. It's really sad that all of this whine by campers actually was given an ounce of legitmitacy under the notion that somehow mech has to be viable. Fuck Mech. Mech has made for shitty passive camp games since the beginning of Sc2 and it will never like be BW mech. L2P. P.S : Top terrans are winning games with mech on the ladder. Perfectly put. I hope mech never becomes viable on the top level. Mech is anathema to interesting and exciting play, just like you said. Avilo in particular is the king of turtle. An anti-Starcraft player, if you will. This entire post is a whinefest where he tries to get the counters to his boring tank/missileturret/planetary lines nerfed. Carriers beat mech? Oh, they have to be nerfed. Swarm Hosts beat mech? Oh, they have to be nerfed. For fun times, watch Avilo play Zerg. He plays it exactly like he plays mech. He's never proactive, never attacks, never does anything interesting, and instead tries to turtle 30 minutes and sometimes it works against dummies. With mech, that style actually works too often. | ||
|
straycat
230 Posts
On January 04 2017 19:32 Comedy wrote: Guys like avilo/Nathanias, who just want to camp for a very long time, sit in their base and not do anything and wait untill they have the ultimate OP army to move out, should not be rewarded. The slow and boring playstyle is terrible for Starcraft.. I think Nathanias's bc play is kinda cool, tho.I wouldn't say it's "doing nothing". | ||
|
hiroshOne
Poland425 Posts
On January 04 2017 18:37 avilo wrote: The problem is the vocal majority of SJW-type people in the SC2 community that decided to label me simply as a "balance whiner" without actually ever reading my posts or listening to the arguments on why something like the swarmhost is ridiculously bad for SC2 gameplay. You earned this yourself. U whined about everything that other races have to counter your style. It's obvious that when u whine so much as yourself, sometimes you will get things right as it was with 3 racks reapers. I didn't ever hear you whining about Liberators when playing vs Zerg or Protoss. U always whined about them on your stream when other Terran was wrecking you with that unit. So even when denying of you being biased, you are being biased. That's hillarious. Also, your proposals of nerfing thins are never constructive. Nerf Swamrhosts, nerf hydras, nerf ravagers, nerf vipers, nerf broodlords...I wondeer what's that leaving to Zerg to counter your cancer style? Speedlings? When u whine about something at least prepare balanced change that fixes thing, not breaking them other way. | ||
|
reneg
United States859 Posts
On January 04 2017 20:52 hiroshOne wrote: You earned this yourself. U whined about everything that other races have to counter your style. It's obvious that when u whine so much as yourself, sometimes you will get things right as it was with 3 racks reapers. I didn't ever hear you whining about Liberators when playing vs Zerg or Protoss. U always whined about them on your stream when other Terran was wrecking you with that unit. So even when denying of you being biased, you are being biased. That's hillarious. Also, your proposals of nerfing thins are never constructive. Nerf Swamrhosts, nerf hydras, nerf ravagers, nerf vipers, nerf broodlords...I wondeer what's that leaving to Zerg to counter your cancer style? Speedlings? When u whine about something at least prepare balanced change that fixes thing, not breaking them other way. I really don't enjoy ganging up on someone like avilo, but this is pretty true. There isn't anything in the OP that gives any constructive thought, just "SH needs to be changed." And while avilo has been 'proven right' because blizz has gone on to edit some things, they've gone on to edit a LOT of things, and I feel he's partially been 'proven right' just by complaining about everything under the sun. While things like the SH might need looking at, I feel like the community can't be blamed for taking a skeptical stance. | ||
|
JackONeill
861 Posts
To understand it you have to look at how mech versus zerg has worked during WOL : - early game is about terran somewhat containing zerg economy with hellions and high tech harass (banshees mainly), while trying to secure a third - mid game is about zerg using its T2 technology and economy to assault the terran's third and try to stretch its defenses, until there's too much tanks to do so - finally, the T3 timing is pivotal : the terran may push out with a big army and kill the zerg off before he can unlock its T3 tech, or try to respond to said T3 tech. Overall, zerg T3 invalidates tanks by taking the fight to the air, while terran starts to mass its ultimate late game sky comp, both to defend the zerg's tech, but also to eventually win the game. In HOTS we saw what the combinaison of a very strong sky terran (OP ravens) and a strong anti-mech caster (viper) did to the matchup. Terran was forced into turtle because moving out against a zerg that had vipers was suicide, but turtling was also the right move for terran because the final skyterran comp was unbeatable (tanks/BCs/mass raven/vikings). What LOTV did was to increase this dynamic by giving the viper a zoning spell against vikings, therefore making any attempt to move out even more suicidal once vipers were out. However, the nerf to skyterran made mech kinda terrible, because being forced into turtle when your end game army is bad is plain awefull. The 3.8 patch was made to shake the way mech could be played. Cyclones can now be used to play a much more mobile and agressive mech style, that stretches out the early stages of the game through the mid game. That's a good thing, which gives mech more room to be agressive and perform timings. The main issue that mech vs zerg faces now, however, is related to the SH, T3 timing and skyterran. It actually ressembles the issue we've had with HOTS. If you buff the "ultimate skyterran army", not only does it promotes turtling from the mech side, but it also forces zerg to have means to prevent terran from reaching skyterran, and to have strong counters to it. Both options were chosen by blizzard, but they actually force the terran into turtling even harder : - the SH is supposed to slow down terran developpement by weakening turtle play : however, the SH is solely "countered" by the very skyterran late game army (ravens mainly) that it's supposed to prevent. So the unit supposed to prevent turtling is actually forcing the terran into it. - and to fight skyterran, because T3 zerg is worthless (broodlord and ultras are horrible against mech now, and the zerg's T3 AA is terrible), zerg is forced into overreliance on viper. A very abusive spellcaster that also forces the terran into turtling because moving out with a ground mech army versus vipers is complete and utter suicide, even with vikings. So the unit supposed to counter big air deathballs forces the terran into turtling once again, because only a terran air deathball is good against a huge amount of vipers. However, because the BC is so incredibly abusive, and that the raven can be produced continuously so early on, if zerg didn't have the viper, zerg would get shreked each time terran goes mech. But this incredibly dominant role that the viper fills is so needed to solve the incapacity of zerg T3 units to fight late game air deathballs, that it effectively prevent mech from being anything but a turtle style, while being quite bad against air deathballs. The true issue is that the response from zerg to terran turtling, is forcing terran to turtle more, and that agressive mech styles straight up die to SH into vipers/hydras. Mainly because late game T3 zerg sucks so much against late game sky deathballs. We're back to the viper vs raven dynamic. The "free damage, never fight" dynamic. Free energy based damage (raven) and free cooldown-based damage (BC yamato/jump), versus free energy based damage (viper abducts) and free free-units based damage (SH). The simple answer would be to change the SH and the viper for them to have much more healthy purposes : - make the SH a T3 AA unit that has long range and AoE damage, to deal with late game sky armies. - remove the parasitic bomb since SH would fill this role, and make abduct unable to target ground massive, for thors to be able to cover ground based mech armies. - buff the BL back to 11 range so that thors/hellbats don't counter it singlehandedly If you give zergs answers to late game air deathballs, turtling straight into them would be a bad choice from mech, because zerg's superior economy would allow them to burst-produce counters to it and kill them off. Meanwhile, thors being able to cover ground mech from viper abducts would allow ground mech to be much more viable, instead of being forced into turtle once SH and then vipers are out. | ||
|
ihatevideogames
570 Posts
On January 04 2017 19:01 straycat wrote: SH cost could be upped a bit I guess (maybe 100/125?). As for them being OP though... yeah, they are very good agindt a terran that masses tanks. Hellbats cyclones tend to make short work of locusts. And I fear the day a terran goes on a scouting party with a bunch of cyclones to intercept the SHa. Oh, the horror! The swarmhosts got found out by a group of cyclones? What are they gonna do? They're gonna....awkwardly walk away while the cyclones struggle to kill even one of them because the unit is useless vs anything that moves. The only terran unit that can actually catch and kill swarmhosts are speed banshees and those are pretty horrible vs zerg. | ||
|
SlammerSC2
77 Posts
| ||
|
avilo
United States4100 Posts
| ||
|
PinoKotsBeer
Netherlands1385 Posts
| ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16647 Posts
On January 04 2017 19:32 Comedy wrote: Maybe just play bio and you know, enjoy the game? It's the flagship matchup for the game... bio vs muta ling bane is freaking awesome. Guys like avilo/Nathanias, who just want to camp for a very long time, sit in their base and not do anything and wait untill they have the ultimate OP army to move out, should not be rewarded. The slow and boring playstyle is terrible for Starcraft.. It's really sad that all of this whine by campers actually was given an ounce of legitmitacy under the notion that somehow mech has to be viable. Fuck Mech. Mech has made for shitty passive camp games since the beginning of Sc2 and it will never like be BW mech. L2P. P.S : Top terrans are winning games with mech on the ladder. i "subscribe to"//"agree with" this perspective. thx 4 posting. i m 2 lazy 2 type it "camping" User was warned for this post | ||
Destructicon
4713 Posts
On January 04 2017 12:56 Solar424 wrote: Plenty of Terrans like Innovation and Gumiho have been making mech work, just not your "turtle for 30 minutes and mass Ravens" style. They focus on more mobile units like Hellions, Cyclones, and Banshees and end the game in around 10 minutes. That isn't really mech though. Mech, at least the proper mech you saw in BW, was all about space control, carefully balancing the number of units needed to defend certain areas while applying the pressure to your enemy as you built up your force. What you describe is just a higher HP version of bio that happens to come from the factory, the play style is nearly identical, which is a failure in game design since the whole point of mech was to promote a different approach to the game, not copy paste one over. Blizzard have never been able to strike a proper balance with mech,since the cornerstone of the style is the siege tank. With SC2's current mechanics the siege tank is either too overpowered or too underpowered, there has never been a middle ground. The previous iteration was too under powered, requiring a great mass of tanks to be efficient at zone control, which encouraged turtly and boring play styles. The current iteration, with the upgraded damage might actually be good in the early game but broken at the higher levels. In addition the economic model of LotV and the play-style of mech are almost completely mutually exclusive. For mech to reach a somewhat safe level it needs to turtle for a period of time, in LotV however, due to the mineral mechanics they introduced, you are encouraged to aggressively expand, lest you starve. Since mech just cannot rapidly expand safely against Protoss or Zerg using siege tank builds it needs to rely on hellions, cyclones and banshees. Once those units become the cornerstone of the strategy its no longer mech, its no longer a game of patience. What Blizzard need to do, again, is look for a redesign of the siege tank, something that makes them less polarizing, more effective early game and less effective late game. They also need to change the economic model, again, because quite frankly their last attempt failed. Yes it speed up the game, but it also hit a lot of strategies hard, especially those that rely on more build-up, they should have encouraged players to expand by making workers more efficient the more spread out across bases they are, not force you to expand because your resources are running out. Unfortunately, I'm not very optimistic we'll see any of these changes. | ||
|
JimmyJRaynor
Canada16647 Posts
On January 07 2017 11:49 Destructicon wrote: For mech to reach a somewhat safe level it needs to turtle for a period of time, in LotV however, due to the mineral mechanics they introduced, you are encouraged to aggressively expand, lest you starve. Since mech just cannot rapidly expand safely against Protoss or Zerg using siege tank builds it needs to rely on hellions, cyclones and banshees. Once those units become the cornerstone of the strategy its no longer mech, its no longer a game of patience. i prefer this fast-and-fluid game progress as opposed to HotS and WoL... it feels like other RTS games i've played where resources run out quickly. On January 07 2017 11:49 Destructicon wrote: They also need to change the economic model, again, because quite frankly their last attempt failed. Yes it speed up the game, but it also hit a lot of strategies hard, especially those that rely on more build-up, they should have encouraged players to expand by making workers more efficient the more spread out across bases they are, not force you to expand because your resources are running out. Unfortunately, I'm not very optimistic we'll see any of these changes. i like the economy model. i want them to keep it. it discourages camping and it discourages investing 4873897498374 in static defense because there are not a tonne of resources at any given location to justify spending big money on static D. i read some place they'll approach with an open mind map designs with different #s of geysers and mineral deposits... i don't know if that is still happening or if they moth-balled it. | ||
|
ypslala
Burma545 Posts
swarm hosts, are a harras unit... they have a cooldown and are NOT cheap .. .... banshees for example are good vs swarmhosts......... afaik you do not want to build a starport.... no need to change the game.. change your play style... | ||
|
MilkDud
Canada73 Posts
| ||
|
WeddingEpisode
United States356 Posts
It's either RTS or it's something else; and right now it's playing like an Arcade game, except for Terran who plays two games while on ladder: SimCityManager (in an overly crowded space) as well as a shabby-semblence-of-a-stressful-wrist-breaking RTS called SC2. I think that there are players who like RTS and others who don't care and are enjoying winning at something which is easy (Z and P). Differently Tiered Units should not be boxable. This multi-million dollar game is complete except for a few (very surprisingly) short-sighted mechanical flaws. Just make those changes and the game will take off again. | ||
|
Solar424
United States4001 Posts
On January 07 2017 13:35 MilkDud wrote: WHAAT?? HAHAHA this HAS to be a joke post. Swarmhosts SUCK! Look at who posted the thread and all will be explained  | ||
|
iRope
United States24 Posts
| ||
| ||
